Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ASSAIL]

The bofors on the patrol boats were only mounted so they didn't have to pay port fees as they were then military ships. Or that was how the rumor went. Did they ever even fire them on the Fremantles?

The 40mm L/OTO isn't that bad. We could have stuck with 20 or 25mm typhoon mounts. The 40mm round has useful range 12500m horizontal and 8700m vertical. That gives useful reach in the mission its probably ever likely to ever need to.

The Canadians mount a 25mm on a 6000t AOPV. In comparison the 40mm has a higher rate of fire, longer range, more capable ammunition, and significantly more punch. On a OPV, its not a terrible choice.

The Bofors on both the Attack and Fremantle Class were widely fitted throughout the RAN in some form or another during the 1960’s and 70’s.
They weren’t there to prevent any payments of port dues or even to allow duty free cigs and booze to be sold, another well worn furphy.
They were trained and laid hydraulically but given the deck movement of these small ships, accuracy was a problem if fired while underway.
They have been used in a constabulary role, a shot across the bow of a Taiwanese Pair trawler is a guaranteed way to get them to stop.
My only other use of the gun of note is when we set a small island in the NW Kimberley ablaze during a practice drill.
I’m sure there are any number of PB personnel who could add colourful anecdotes about their Bofors 40/60 Mk7

 

[Stampede]

Came across this 2 year old article discussing naval gun options for CIWS. The 40 and 57 mm options with 3P are pretty capable but I still like the Millennium 35 mm with AHEAD ammo.
Euronaval 2018: Which Naval Guns and Missiles for FLOTLOG ?

Thanks for the link

Interesting that the 57mm was not put forward.
A range of options listed with 40 mm contenders well represented.

35 / 40 mm seems to tick a lot of boxes.

Will watch with interest as to what the trend is in the decade ahead.


Regards S

 

[Stampede]

The 40mm on the Arafura Class suggests to me nothing more, than that is what the successful bidder suggested in it’s tender and RAN didn’t care enough about the capability, or have the budget to consider further.

Can the weapon punch holes in a civilian ship accurately enough and be used as a basic self defence capability in an emergency? Yep. That’ll do then...

Drawing any further conclusions than this about what RAN ‘chose’ is drawing a longer bow than necessary, IMHO.

Thanks for the post

I've read some some mixed and conflicting commentary regarding the of selection of cannon for the Arafura Class.
Just my opinion, but I find it difficult to believe the RAN did not specify a calibre for the main weapon system for our new OPV's.
As to which company would provide the weapons mount, than I get that could be a Commercial decision and cost would be one of the factors.

As to punching a hole in a ship in a constabulary role:well that could be done with the existing 25 mm Bushmasters.
Speculate their was a reason for a change in calibre.
Introducing / reintroducing the 40 mm round for the ADF is a puzzle, unless it has a broader future with other platforms to follow suite.
I could of understood moving up to a 30 mm round in a upgraded Typhoon mount for the OPV's with a view that this would be a future standard calibre across existing units within the fleet.................This may not be the case.
With the Hunter Class still many years away it will be interesting what medium gun / CIWS they actually get.

So will the RAN have 25 mm / 30 mm and 40 mm guns in the years ahead.
Seems " a bit clunky!""

As is, the 40 mm Leonardo mount is an orphan unit..................Well at least for the moment

Read recently that the Leonardo 40 mm coupled with the Arafura's situation awareness system and fire control multi-sensor system, would collectivly as a package be the most capable close in defence system on any ship within the RAN.
If true, it's something to consider

Regards S

.

.

 

[John Fedup]

Thanks for the link

Interesting that the 57mm was not put forward.
A range of options listed with 40 mm contenders well represented.

35 / 40 mm seems to tick a lot of boxes.

Will watch with interest as to what the trend is in the decade ahead.


Regards S

I wonder if there is any merit in a 57mm HVP shell similar to the technology used in the 127mm naval gun? The 57mm naval gun’s high firing rate might make such a shell useful for CIWS.
Navy Quietly Fires 20 Hyper Velocity Projectiles Through Destroyer’s Deckgun - USNI News

 

[hauritz]

But we would still be further along than where we are now. I might have also stopped WA/SA tearing each other apart over the collins support work. I can appreciate the who two boats out of sync component. We could decommissioned the first two Collins boats. The four remaining updated to the modern standard. Probably not cheaper or easier, but would have possibly helped on the time component.

Collins production supply lines are pretty cold now, many went cold when the building was occurring, and companies have tighter margins and costs compared to back in the 80's, we have also seen a lot of loss of production capability compared to the 80's when Collins project was finding local suppliers. So we are often starting pretty far back in terms of being ready for sovereign sub building capability.

Eventually the Attack program will fix all these problems. But its going to have to ride some rough seas to get to that point.

I think the opportunity to build those two extra boats has now well and truly passed. The latest I think we could have started may have been when the Rudd government white paper announced that we needed 12 submarines. Of course, they then went on and did precisely nothing about it.

Had two extra Collins been ordered at that time it would have opened up several possibilities. First it would have allowed Australia time to re-establish its submarine building capability in preparation for SEA 1000. It would also give us the opportunity to at least assess the possibility of a "Son of Collins" design. It would have allowed us to immediately start building towards a 12 boat submarine fleet. It would allow these submarines to be testbeds for technology that would be used in Sea 1000. It would have helped us avoid a capability gap. The new submarines would have helped us avoid any expensive life extensions on the fleet until the arrival of the next-gen submarines arrives.

It could have been win-win ... but instead, it is an opportunity lost.

 

[alexsa]

The bofors on the patrol boats were only mounted so they didn't have to pay port fees as they were then military ships. Or that was how the rumor went. Did they ever even fire them on the Fremantles?

The 40mm L/OTO isn't that bad. We could have stuck with 20 or 25mm typhoon mounts. The 40mm round has useful range 12500m horizontal and 8700m vertical. That gives useful reach in the mission its probably ever likely to ever need to.

The Canadians mount a 25mm on a 6000t AOPV. In comparison the 40mm has a higher rate of fire, longer range, more capable ammunition, and significantly more punch. On a OPV, its not a terrible choice.

Sorry, that is nonsense. A Warship or Naval Ship need not be armed to meet that definition. Port dues would still be required to be paid where the domestic legislation of the port State requires it.

The 40mm Bofors was a cheap and appropriate gun for what the FCPB were doing..... chasing fishing boats. The vessel were desiged with space and weight for a 76mm (there was a gunhouse below the 40mm which was used as a store and house the canteen stores as well) and .... apparently ... SSMs. The actual armament was 1x40mm (and some of the blokes were very good on this), Three 50 cal (one on top of the mortar), 1x81mm Mortar on a tripod mount with recoil arrangements and the option of trigger firing and 2xAR (7.62) on bodged up mount on the bridge wings.

They were fired .... a lot. There was a lot of ammunition available as these were being removed from any other ship that ahd them (even the 81mm mortar and 50 cal was pretty plentiful) and the boats drilled quite a bit with solid rounds (you had to in order to hit anything with an unstablized mount without expending a lot of rounds). If the vessel was solo the target was usually a ilumination round from the 81mm.

 

[swerve]

... I wonder for how long the Brits will keep fitting artisan to the Type 26's, and choose either Ceafar2 or the SPY-7(1) thing.

Not necessarily either. Plenty of options from Thales, Leonardo, SAAB, Hensoldt . . . .

 

[Hazdog]

Back to the talk of a pacific support ship.

Navy Researching New Class of Medium Amphibious Ship, New Logistics Ships - USNI News.

With the RAN potentially looking for a new ship to deploy within the pacific, would the following referenced designs and thoughts suit Australia well enough, to pair with the USN to build a joint number of ships with slightly different roles?

IMO I think that joint developments around this space would enable both Australia and the US to get extremely capable ships with the side ability for the ships to be built and/or maintained in Australia.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Sorry my quip about avoiding port fees probably should have a .

Seems like an awful long way for a 40mm round.
Should that maybe be feet?
MB

Well acording to them, its metres..
https://www.leonardocompany.com/doc...TO+Marlin+40+HQ+(mm08749).pdf?t=1551687325708

I don't imagine its accurate to those ranges. But possibly maxium projectile distances. Which is still useful, if you want to fire a warning shot, having it make the distance even if quite aways from the ship can still be effective. I don't imagine the OPV needing to engage anything more than 12km away on the surface or more than 8 km high. If your eyeballed it gives you the chance to scare something before it dips below the horizon.

40mm is apparently enough to apply scorched earth policy to an entire island. The Argentinians sunk a Chinese ship with a WW2 era Bofors 40mm in 2016. So I imagine the stabilised, radared, computer controlled OPV's of the RAN will probably make do with it.

Not necessarily either. Plenty of options from Thales, Leonardo, SAAB, Hensoldt . . . .

Yes, but two are already paid for interms of mast design. But your right, I doubt its a two horse race. But in a post Brexit world...

 

[ADMk2]

The bofors on the patrol boats were only mounted so they didn't have to pay port fees as they were then military ships. Or that was how the rumor went. Did they ever even fire them on the Fremantles?

The 40mm L/OTO isn't that bad. We could have stuck with 20 or 25mm typhoon mounts. The 40mm round has useful range 12500m horizontal and 8700m vertical. That gives useful reach in the mission its probably ever likely to ever need to.

The Canadians mount a 25mm on a 6000t AOPV. In comparison the 40mm has a higher rate of fire, longer range, more capable ammunition, and significantly more punch. On a OPV, its not a terrible choice.

We could have, however it was reported in Janes that Lürrsen chose this system for their tender and RAN obviously agreed to it. I very much doubt RAN conducted anything more than a desktop comparison at best of the relative capabilities of these types of systems. I certainly don’t believe RAN conducted the sort of comparison we saw Army do between 30mm and 35mm guns for LAND 400, for example.

Any other choice (ie: 25/30mm Typhoon) would have required integration into the combat system, which while not impossible, may have been more expensive than simply accepting the capability as offered.

 

[SteveR]

We could have, however it was reported in Janes that Lürrsen chose this system for their tender and RAN obviously agreed to it. I very much doubt RAN conducted anything more than a desktop comparison at best of the relative capabilities of these types of systems. I certainly don’t believe RAN conducted the sort of comparison we saw Army do between 30mm and 35mm guns for LAND 400, for example.

Any other choice (ie: 25/30mm Typhoon) would have required integration into the combat system, which while not impossible, may have been more expensive than simply accepting the capability as offered.

Going back to the June 2017 DTR assessment of candidates for SEA 1180:

https://defencetechnologyreview.partica.online/defence-technology-review/dtr-june-2017/flipbook/18/

It is clear that Fassmer also chose a 40mm (BAE Mk 4) solution. I suspect that the contenders had listened hard to RAN preferences, verbal and written. and deduced that RAN preferred the extra range and hitting power of 40mm. Previously on this forum I stated that the 12.5Km maximum range of the 40mm L70 type ordnance shared by Oto and BAE is about the maximum visual/optical range that the OPV can identify other vessels, so that a shot across the bow can be made at that distance.

25mm or 35mm guns cannot engage at that range and a wary/alerted target vessel may well sail off into the distance before it can be stopped.

 

[Stampede]

Sorry my quip about avoiding port fees probably should have a .


Well acording to them, its metres..
https://www.leonardocompany.com/documents/20142/5334301/BROCHURE_2016_OTO+Marlin+40+HQ+(mm08749).pdf?t=1551687325708

I don't imagine its accurate to those ranges. But possibly maxium projectile distances. Which is still useful, if you want to fire a warning shot, having it make the distance even if quite aways from the ship can still be effective. I don't imagine the OPV needing to engage anything more than 12km away on the surface or more than 8 km high. If your eyeballed it gives you the chance to scare something before it dips below the horizon.

40mm is apparently enough to apply scorched earth policy to an entire island. The Argentinians sunk a Chinese ship with a WW2 era Bofors 40mm in 2016. So I imagine the stabilised, radared, computer controlled OPV's of the RAN will probably make do with it.


Yes, but two are already paid for interms of mast design. But your right, I doubt its a two horse race. But in a post Brexit world...

Talking about the 40 mm round and not the role of the OPV.
I doubt sailing a vessel within range of an incoming 40 mm round is desirable.
At 12 km's distance and faced with up to 300 RPM bursts of hostility, would you want to tale the chance even if your secure in a 7000 t warship?
1 kg of explosive of travelling at speed will do more that scratch the paint work.


Regards S.

 

[ASSAIL]

NUSHIP Sydney has achieved “Provisional Acceptance”.
The AWD Alliance has released a feel good video to celebrate the completion of the 3 ship programme.
Despite some of the self congratulatory mush it’s quite interesting and clears the way forward to the T26 production.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Well they got there in the end. TBH ASC I think did ok, the biggest issues around the project were outside of ASC control.

They really look neat and clean when they are built. They are nice looking ships.

 

[Takao]

Well they got there in the end. TBH ASC I think did ok, the biggest issues around the project were outside of ASC control.

They really look neat and clean when they are built. They are nice looking ships.

The first ships of the National Ship Building Plan were always going to be painful - they were building much more than three ships....

And yes - I think they look damn fine!

 

[Volkodav]

Brings both pride and sadness seeing Sydney handed over, must admit all the Navantia propaganda is annoying me. Navantias proposal to get the AWD program back on track was basically ASCs proposal with a Navantia letter head and the government accepted it primarily to contractually obligate Navantia to do what they were meant to be doing from day one but always fell short.

To see them getting so much of the credit for the achievement is insulting considering how big a part they were of the initial problems and how poor their performance was. The thing most people are unaware of is after the GFC hit Spain suffered a world of pain and Navantia responded by making pretty much every senior (expensive and experienced) employee redundant and promoting much younger and less experienced employees into the vacancies. The end result was a workforce in many ways less experienced and capable than the much derided one at ASC, yet they are who the government put in charge.

There were some incredibly good people at ASC who were shafted to make room for the Navantia people and Australian ship building is worse for their loss, fortunately some are coming back to the fold. A great achievement delivering the ships, a great Australian, not Spanish achievement.

 

[StobieWan]

Hopefully BAE will deliver a less bitter experience with the Type 26 build.

 

[seaspear]

With the Otto Marlin 40mm on opv,s it is claimed by its manufacturers to be capable in anti aircraft and anti missile abilities

Leonardo presents its new Marlin 40 Naval Defence System at DIMDEX 2018

For the first time ever, Leonardo is exhibiting its OTO Marlin 40, the newest member of its naval defence systems family

www.leonardocompany.com

which suggests more ability than a warning shot across the bows

 

[ngatimozart]

With the Otto Marlin 40mm on opv,s it is claimed by its manufacturers to be capable in anti aircraft and anti missile abilities

Leonardo presents its new Marlin 40 Naval Defence System at DIMDEX 2018

For the first time ever, Leonardo is exhibiting its OTO Marlin 40, the newest member of its naval defence systems family

www.leonardocompany.com

which suggests more ability than a warning shot across the bows

This is the BAE FUZE 3P (Pre-fragmented, Programmable, Proximity- fused) ammo for both 40 mm & 57 mm guns FUZE 3P Ammunition. According to BAE it can deal with anti-ship missiles, aircraft, ships and shore targets, including those with armour protection and is able to deal with threats that previously were impossible to engage, such as small, fast-manoeuvring boats and concealed targets through airburst etc. It's actually a Bofors round.

Quite impressive.

 

[Stampede]

This is the BAE FUZE 3P (Pre-fragmented, Programmable, Proximity- fused) ammo for both 40 mm & 57 mm guns FUZE 3P Ammunition. According to BAE it can deal with anti-ship missiles, aircraft, ships and shore targets, including those with armour protection and is able to deal with threats that previously were impossible to engage, such as small, fast-manoeuvring boats and concealed targets through airburst etc. It's actually a Bofors round.

Quite impressive.

If the sales pitch is true then I'd agree "quite impressive indeed.

Regards S