Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[vonnoobie]

Collingwood could be a very popular name with the AFL connection

Great, Would be the one ship that is either loved or hated cause with Collingwood you either love the (me) or hate them (every one else). Can already see some smart a** naming it the HMAS Centrelink or HMAS Doll bludger lol So yeah much as I love my footy team lets no name the ship after them.

 

[Redlands18]

The former HMAS Brisbane was decommissioned in 2001. It took 17 years before we saw a new Brisbane. To me it would almost seem a mark of respect not to reuse a name too quickly. It somewhat cheapens a ship's legacy to just immediately think of recycling a ship's name.

I would stick with the naming conventions of the Hunter class.

Yet its rare for there to be no HMAS Sydney, 1928-35, 1941-48, 1973-83 and 2015-2020 being the only periods when we didn’t have a Sydney and the only time since 1935 when the names Sydney and Hobart were both missing is 2015-17 and even then there was a Sydney waiting disposal and a Hobart and a new Sydney under construction.
What we don’t know is, have the names been chosen but not released or have they not been chosen yet and that may mean someone else makes the final decision and they may decide not to follow the Region theme.
Lets not forget that there was no real opportunity to name a new Brisbane other then the Armidale class and I don’t think we should be using the capital city names for Patrol Boats.

 

[hairyman]

Maybe Melbourne is been saved for our next aircraft carrier!

 

[Redlands18]

Maybe Melbourne is been saved for our next aircraft carrier!

The next RAN Carrier is most likely to be called HMAS Buckleys

 

[seaspear]

Would it be too much of a breach of the previous convention to name the Attack class submarines after Australian cities

 

[hauritz]

As far as ships named after capital cities are concerned

HMAS Adelaide I 1922 - 1946
HMAS Adelaide II 1980 - 2008
HMAS Adelaide III 2015 -

HMAS Brisbane I 1915 - 1935
HMAS Brisbane II 1966 - 2001
HMAS Brisbane III 2018 -

HMAS Canberra I 1927- 1942
HMAS Canberra II 1981-2005
HMAS Canberra III 2014 -

HMAS Darwin 1984 - 2017

HMAS Hobart I 1938 - 1947
HMAS Hobart II 1965 - 2000
HMAS Hobart III 2017 -

HMAS Melbourne I 1913 - 1928
HMAS Melbourne II 1955 - 1982
HMAS Melbourne III 1992 - 2019

HMAS Perth I 1939 - 1942
HMAS Perth II 1965 - 1999
HMAS Perth III 2006 -

HMAS Sydney I 1912 - 1928
HMAS Sydney II 1935 - 1941
HMAS Sydney III 1948 - 1973
HMAS Sydney IV 1983 - 2015
HMAS Sydney V 2020 -

Melbourne will be the only state capital not to have a ship named after it as of next year. It is hard to say whether or not you would break the navy naming conventions of the Hunter class just to satisfy the Mebournians. If they don't we might not see another Melbourne until the 2040s.

 

[Redlands18]

As far as ships named after capital cities are concerned

HMAS Adelaide I 1922 - 1946
HMAS Adelaide II 1980 - 2008
HMAS Adelaide III 2015 -

HMAS Brisbane I 1915 - 1935
HMAS Brisbane II 1966 - 2001
HMAS Brisbane III 2018 -

HMAS Canberra I 1927- 1942
HMAS Canberra II 1981-2005
HMAS Canberra III 2014 -

HMAS Darwin 1984 - 2017

HMAS Hobart I 1938 - 1947
HMAS Hobart II 1965 - 2000
HMAS Hobart III 2017 -

HMAS Melbourne I 1913 - 1928
HMAS Melbourne II 1955 - 1982
HMAS Melbourne III 1992 - 2019

HMAS Perth I 1939 - 1942
HMAS Perth II 1965 - 1999
HMAS Perth III 2006 -

HMAS Sydney I 1912 - 1928
HMAS Sydney II 1935 - 1941
HMAS Sydney III 1948 - 1973
HMAS Sydney IV 1983 - 2015
HMAS Sydney V 2020 -

Melbourne will be the only state capital not to have a ship named after it as of next year. It is hard to say whether or not you would break the navy naming conventions of the Hunter class just to satisfy the Mebournians. If they don't we might not see another Melbourne until the 2040s.

The Hunters are replacing the Anzacs.
Anzac
Warramunga
Arunta
Parramatta
Stuart
Toowoomba
Ballarat
Perth
The only thing they have in common are they are all names that were previously used. The Anzac was used as being the lead ship of a joint RAN/RNZN class as well as its historical significance, Arunta and Warramunga are named after Indigenous Tribes, Parramatta and Stuart named after River class Frigates and the last 3 after Cities.
Melbourne will probably be either be a Hunter class, as lead ship of the Hobart class replacement or possibly a possible future large Amphib.

 

[hauritz]

The Hunters are replacing the Anzacs.
Anzac
Warramunga
Arunta
Parramatta
Stuart
Toowoomba
Ballarat
Perth
The only thing they have in common are they are all names that were previously used. The Anzac was used as being the lead ship of a joint RAN/RNZN class as well as its historical significance, Arunta and Warramunga are named after Indigenous Tribes, Parramatta and Stuart named after River class Frigates and the last 3 after Cities.
Melbourne will probably be either be a Hunter class, as lead ship of the Hobart class replacement or possibly a possible future large Amphib.

The ANZAC class name was selected to recognise NZ's involvement in the project. I don't think it was intended as the theme for the names of the frigates. If it weren't for NZ's deteriorating relations with the US back in the 80s and their subsequent desire to improve relations with Australia there might not have even been an ANZAC project. I sometimes wonder if Australia would have been better off without NZ involvement. NZ was given input into the selection of the final design and from what I gather they were pushing for even smaller cheaper, corvette sized vessels.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Would it be too much of a breach of the previous convention to name the Attack class submarines after Australian cities

Subs are lower profile units by their very nature. Capital cities tend to make more sense with significant surface units. Of course the US names its subs after its cities. However, with the attack naming system you have quite a good format for 12 subs and suitable names.

Maybe Melbourne is been saved for our next aircraft carrier!

Melbourne being used on an amphib isn't impossible. Choules will need to be replaced at some point. There is evidence the government is considering a AOR/LPD type ship in the near future.

We are at the point where the RAN could consider a 3rd LHD now the first 2 are a proven quantity and FOC. In addition land400 and other loose ends are much better known now. Other higher risk projects are also underway and competed. The future frigates look to be very capable.

• Defence Connect
• Defence Connect
• Should Australia follow Japan and take the F-35 to sea? | The Strategist
• The F-35B and Australia’s Canberra-class: Still a Chance?
• We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

Bringing in a 3rd of an existing type is entirely possible. Doesn't mean its likely. IMO I wouldn't be surprised if the name is rested and earmarked for a large surface/sea-lift/amphibious/aviation ship. I am skeptical of it being used for F-35B's. More likely as an amphibious ship, perhaps specifically supporting Land 4503 (Tiger replacement), ASW (with some additional MH60-R), Chinooks (lift?).

Biggest issues against it are crewing and local construction content.

 

[ngatimozart]

The ANZAC class name was selected to recognise NZ's involvement in the project. I don't think it was intended as the theme for the names of the frigates. If it weren't for NZ's deteriorating relations with the US back in the 80s and their subsequent desire to improve relations with Australia there might not have even been an ANZAC project. I sometimes wonder if Australia would have been better off without NZ involvement. NZ was given input into the selection of the final design and from what I gather they were pushing for even smaller cheaper, corvette sized vessels.

You got something to back that up with?

 

[ngatimozart]

Subs are lower profile units by their very nature. Capital cities tend to make more sense with significant surface units. Of course the US names its subs after its cities. However, with the attack naming system you have quite a good format for 12 subs and suitable names.



Melbourne being used on an amphib isn't impossible. Choules will need to be replaced at some point. There is evidence the government is considering a AOR/LPD type ship in the near future.

We are at the point where the RAN could consider a 3rd LHD now the first 2 are a proven quantity and FOC. In addition land400 and other loose ends are much better known now. Other higher risk projects are also underway and competed. The future frigates look to be very capable.

• Defence Connect
• Defence Connect
• Should Australia follow Japan and take the F-35 to sea? | The Strategist
• The F-35B and Australia’s Canberra-class: Still a Chance?
• We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

Bringing in a 3rd of an existing type is entirely possible. Doesn't mean its likely. IMO I wouldn't be surprised if the name is rested and earmarked for a large surface/sea-lift/amphibious/aviation ship. I am skeptical of it being used for F-35B's. More likely as an amphibious ship, perhaps specifically supporting Land 4503 (Tiger replacement), ASW (with some additional MH60-R), Chinooks (lift?).

Biggest issues against it are crewing and local construction content.

@StingrayOZ Discussion of fast jets off RAN ships ist verbotten, not allowed.

 

[Volkodav]

@StingrayOZ Discussion of fast jets off RAN ships ist verbotten, not allowed.

What about with slow jets?

 

[ngatimozart]

What about with slow jets?

Them too.

 

[hairyman]

With the Poms struggling financially, maybe they will offer us the "Prince of Wales" at a good price. As long as they dont throw in Prince Andrew too!

 

[alexsa]

Maybe Melbourne is been saved for our next aircraft carrier!

Mate, I meant that as a Joke. We will need a dramatic change in policy and funding for that to happy and there is no sign of this at the moment. So no matter how keen we may be this is a dead issue for the time being.

 

[alexsa]

With the Poms struggling financially, maybe they will offer us the "Prince of Wales" at a good price. As long as they dont throw in Prince Andrew too!

For pete's sake ...... this is a common refrain that is starting to get irritating. There is no evidence the the UK is planning to dispose of the PoW. Even if Corbin gets in and wants to do it I suspect the impact on his chances of staying in power will be dramatic.

If they do sell it we are not in a position to buy and operate it in our current budget.

 

[StingrayOZ]

@StingrayOZ Discussion of fast jets off RAN ships ist verbotten, not allowed.

Enshuldigung.
Sorry, put me in the sin bin. In future I will refrain from saying how skeptical I am of F-35B's being on any RAN ships.

A 3rd LHD revolved around our amphibious need, growing our ASW capability, the importance of that in terms of partnerships with India (how many countries can put a ASW taskforce together in the Indian ocean on a whim) and Japan and the availability, workload of the two ships with engagement across the region.

I think it is becoming much more likely. I think the RAN will push for that. For many reasons the LHD's are becoming essential entities for the RAN. It is an essential part of Sea Training Deployment for every new sailor. The fact that these ships are making frequent overseas visits, large and comfortable, have a wide variety of positions, do a lot of engagement work with Army and other armed forces of other nations are making them quite desirable for sailors, particularly early in their career. They are the reason people are signing up. There are already two fully crewed ships, so raising the crew for a 3rd would be very easy. It will be easier to find the 300 crew for the LHD than the 42 for a submarine.

With a 3rd LHD, options like turning it into a ASW platform, embarking Tiger replacements, forming and landing an amphibious force with larger/heavier vehicles become possibilities. Maybe combined with a few more MH60R's additional P8 orders?

 

[ngatimozart]

Enshuldigung.
Sorry, put me in the sin bin. In future I will refrain from saying how skeptical I am of F-35B's being on any RAN ships.

My apologies, I didn't detect the scepticism evident. I shall send my scepticism and sarcasm detectors for maintenance. No need for the sin bin and you are entitled to a double helping of pudding.

 

[ASSAIL]

Great to see the selection of Warrant Officer Deb Butterworth as “Warant Officer of the Navy”, the highest ranking NCO in the RAN for those of you not familiar with our Navy.

Royal Australian Navy

 

[ASSAIL]

The AWD Alliance has released a nice video of NUSHIP Sydney’s Sea Trials. It’s a bit overly dramatic but has some nice internal shots and some of her underway at speed.
For the record.