Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[StingrayOZ]

Your last quote confuses me, reference NGFS being not exactly common? Correct me if I'm wrong but if we look at the last thirty odd years with regard to Destroyer / Frigate main gun armament usage in 'real' combat scenarios the NGFS role has been dominant, from the Falklands through GWI & GWII. When was the last time the primary gun on any post WWII vessel went toe to toe with an enemy fleet (not counting some abandoned dug smuggling vessel or pirate skiff) or shot down a fixed or rotary wing aircraft?

Just for the record...

BBC ON THIS DAY | 24 | 1982: Battle for the Falklands
" could actually see the missile heading straight for us at about two miles. We hit it and destroyed it with a 4.5 shell." However I have heard it was the A4 that was shot down an not the missile but that is unreferenced.

Another from wikipedia
"English: Spent shells from a naval gunfire support mission by HMS Cardiff (D108) on the night of 5 June, 1982, as part of the Falklands War. Photograph was taken the morning after on 6 June, also the top of her charred Sea Dart launcher can be seen bottom right. She fired 277 rounds that night[1] and also shot down a friendly helicopter."

How many times has the RAN NGFS in the last 50 years? Its not exactly common, I stand by that statement. Im not saying its unimportant or ineffective or its not going to occur in the future.
The AWD for example will be 5". ANZAC II will most likely still be 5". Tomahawk, UAV's, Tigers etc are going to lower the need of NGSF (but in no way eliminate it). Conversely, 6" could end up better guns with combined development, lower ammo costs, shared costs, greater burst rounds, greater penetration, more sophsicated guidance, longer range etc.

I like the fact that naval guns are getting larger again, it does make perfect sense to go to 155mm. I hope it happens for the RAN and they should plan to do so as much as possible.

 

[riksavage]

Just for the record...

BBC ON THIS DAY | 24 | 1982: Battle for the Falklands
" could actually see the missile heading straight for us at about two miles. We hit it and destroyed it with a 4.5 shell." However I have heard it was the A4 that was shot down an not the missile but that is unreferenced.

Another from wikipedia
"English: Spent shells from a naval gunfire support mission by HMS Cardiff (D108) on the night of 5 June, 1982, as part of the Falklands War. Photograph was taken the morning after on 6 June, also the top of her charred Sea Dart launcher can be seen bottom right. She fired 277 rounds that night[1] and also shot down a friendly helicopter."

How many times has the RAN NGFS in the last 50 years? Its not exactly common, I stand by that statement. Im not saying its unimportant or ineffective or its not going to occur in the future.
The AWD for example will be 5". ANZAC II will most likely still be 5". Tomahawk, UAV's, Tigers etc are going to lower the need of NGSF (but in no way eliminate it). Conversely, 6" could end up better guns with combined development, lower ammo costs, shared costs, greater burst rounds, greater penetration, more sophsicated guidance, longer range etc.

I like the fact that naval guns are getting larger again, it does make perfect sense to go to 155mm. I hope it happens for the RAN and they should plan to do so as much as possible.

Think of the potential, particularly in a asymmetrical environment where you may have a high concentration of civi's. A fire-scout UAV rotary wing platform stationed on the Frigate/Destroyer fitted with a laser designator, combine that with a 6" (155mm) maritime application firing guided Excalibur rounds. Pinpoint targeting without the need to overfly the area in a manned aircraft (Tiger), which has a limited number of hydra or v-expensive hellfire's. The vessel could stand-offshore and fire 100 plus rounds without exposing a manned helo to MANPADS or small-arms fire thus risking another 'BlackHawk Down' incident. Ideal for a Somalia type scenario where you intend targeting pirate staging areas or skiff building yards in built-up locations.

Today's tri-service FOO's are generally trained to bring down both CAS and NGFS. The latter represents the cheapest option, a 155mm guided munition will cost a fraction of a Hellfire/Maverick/Brimstone. A 155mm marinised gun could fire 14 guided rounds per minute, a helo would need to return to the mother ship at least once (assuming it carries eight missiles) to reload to achieve a similar rate of fire.

Any landing against a contested beach will rely on NGFS more than anything else, for clearing mines and other obstacles for one, never mind enemy positions. You reference to Cardiff above firing 277 rounds in a single night adds to my argument. Short of bringing your light guns up on deck of you LHD there is no other means at your disposal offering the same level and quantity of destructive power as NGFS over extended periods.

 

[Sea Toby]

The Mk 45 Mod 4 prototype incorporates strengthened structural components, a lengthened gun barrel, and newly redesigned housing, breechblock, slide, and recoil components to accommodate increased chamber pressure and greater recoil impulse required to fire the EX171 Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) up to 63 nautical miles.

"It will be able to fire munitions with nearly twice the energy of previous Mk 45's, which currently have a maximum range of about 13 miles."

What's so bad about these numbers? Isn't 63 miles enough?

 

[riksavage]

The Mk 45 Mod 4 prototype incorporates strengthened structural components, a lengthened gun barrel, and newly redesigned housing, breechblock, slide, and recoil components to accommodate increased chamber pressure and greater recoil impulse required to fire the EX171 Extended Range Guided Munition (ERGM) up to 63 nautical miles.

"It will be able to fire munitions with nearly twice the energy of previous Mk 45's, which currently have a maximum range of about 13 miles."

What's so bad about these numbers? Isn't 63 miles enough?

63 nautical miles is quite a jump, literally over the visual horizon. I seriously doubt even on a dead calm sea in perfect light conditions you would be able to see the fall of shot, even with a good set of bino's?

 

[ThePuss]

63 nautical miles is quite a jump, literally over the visual horizon. I seriously doubt even on a dead calm sea in perfect light conditions you would be able to see the fall of shot, even with a good set of bino's?

Too bad it was cancelled, because the technology was not mature enough. It had an unfortunate habit of landing outside of the range.

Fortunately

The difference is primarily a longer barrel, (and a different shroud for the gun, but the later ANZAC's have that anyway) which provides near double the effective range compared to the older Mk 45 guns - 40k's for Mod 4 compared to about 23k's for Mod 2's.

So no need for navy 155mm, period. Anything further inland should be the realm of the army's 155mm for tactical support or by the Air Force for strategic strike.

 

[icelord]

The section I run onboard maintains and operates the MK 45 gun as well as all the other weapons bigger than a 50 cal. Anything smaller than that is a pop gun and is bellow us. .

quick, someone go wake the greenies, they just laid out fresh breadrolls and heated the water for brews...

 

[ThePuss]

quick, someone go wake the greenies, they just laid out fresh breadrolls and heated the water for brews...

Gunbuster mate, GUNBUSTER!. We are the section in the branch that actually works for a living:.

Mind you I do love a kip and fresh bread rollsnfloorl:

 

[Todjaeger]

63 nautical miles is quite a jump, literally over the visual horizon. I seriously doubt even on a dead calm sea in perfect light conditions you would be able to see the fall of shot, even with a good set of bino's?

As a practical matter, whether the seas were calm or not would not make a difference. Assuming the observation point from the firing ship were 15 m above sea level, the target would need to be over 1km above sea level in order to be above the horizon. Anything lower would be blocked visually by the curvature of the earth.

-Cheers

 

[StevoJH]

How many times has the RAN NGFS in the last 50 years? Its not exactly common, I stand by that statement. Im not saying its unimportant or ineffective or its not going to occur in the future.
The AWD for example will be 5". ANZAC II will most likely still be 5". Tomahawk, UAV's, Tigers etc are going to lower the need of NGSF (but in no way eliminate it). Conversely, 6" could end up better guns with combined development, lower ammo costs, shared costs, greater burst rounds, greater penetration, more sophsicated guidance, longer range etc.

Pretty much every conflict we've been a combatant in during that time frame, so quite a few. with the latest example being supporting the RM assault on Al Faw in 2003. I used to have a nice shot of ANZAC with battle ensign being flown during the assault that I found on google. Don't have it anymore though.

 

[icelord]

Gunbuster mate, GUNBUSTER!. We are the section in the branch that actually works for a living:.

Mind you I do love a kip and fresh bread rollsnfloorl:

yeah our gunbusters preach the same thing...hell our IC Gyro "guru" manages to bust his ring harder then anyone, and is well praised for his efforts. and im on FFG, any greenie that works on any electricaly operated equipment manages to work...its the ongoing "Thales" upgrade

 

[DEFENCEMASTER05]

I've been unable to find any information on whether the Tobruk will be replaced by the RAN with a dedicated LSH. The Canberra Class LHDs are to replace the Manoora, Kanimbla and Tobruk, but would a LSH also be workable, with the trouble of the LCM8 unable to transport the Abrahms tanks, and a different landing craft to be purchased in JP2048 to cover this, would a LCH be worthwhile or the two LHD with new model LCM (the current are 4 years old....) be suitable.
Also, and ideas for a LCH class of value or have we moved away from such ships

The two Canberra Class LHD's will replace the Tobruk and either the Manoora or the Kanimbla leaving one of them to remain in service.

 

[Sea Toby]

A new computer generated video of the Canberra class LHD, thirty two seconds long.

Canberra Class - Royal Australian Navy

 

[StingrayOZ]

A new computer generated video of the Canberra class LHD, thirty two seconds long.

Canberra Class - Royal Australian Navy

Tantalisingly short. And a very simple model of the ship. Superstructure is completely bare, and the hull is solid (look at the lift when it goes down).

I would have thought the Navy might have made a bit more of a publicity thing out of the LHD. Mini episodes, publicity pictures etc.

 

[Sea Toby]

Tantalisingly short. And a very simple model of the ship. Superstructure is completely bare, and the hull is solid (look at the lift when it goes down).

I would have thought the Navy might have made a bit more of a publicity thing out of the LHD. Mini episodes, publicity pictures etc.

Yes, not quite what the RN has developed for the QE cvf, but a start....

 

[Todjaeger]

The two Canberra Class LHD's will replace the Tobruk and either the Manoora or the Kanimbla leaving one of them to remain in service.

True, but the one which remains in service is itself to be replaced in the 2018-2020 timeframe with some other vessel. Unfortunately there has not been any real, reliable word as to what time of vessel that is to be.

Vessel types put forth have run the gamut from HSV to another Canberra-class LHD, with lots of options in between.

-Cheers

 

[icelord]

True, but the one which remains in service is itself to be replaced in the 2018-2020 timeframe with some other vessel. Unfortunately there has not been any real, reliable word as to what time of vessel that is to be.

Vessel types put forth have run the gamut from HSV to another Canberra-class LHD, with lots of options in between.

-Cheers

After seeing the old girl come in this week, im pretty sure its time to put her out to stud. Tobruk has been a fine vessel for the RAN and the RAR and well used, right up until recently, but my god shes old. With the wait on the LHD Canberra not coming in till 2013-14, thats without delays, the question is will the LPAs or Tobruk last that long a wait, as they all have some very regular and major maintainence issues coming from each time they sail.

 

[Todjaeger]

After seeing the old girl come in this week, im pretty sure its time to put her out to stud. Tobruk has been a fine vessel for the RAN and the RAR and well used, right up until recently, but my god shes old. With the wait on the LHD Canberra not coming in till 2013-14, thats without delays, the question is will the LPAs or Tobruk last that long a wait, as they all have some very regular and major maintainence issues coming from each time they sail.

Not quite sure which 'old girl' you mean... Tobruk IIRC is the youngest of the lot and she should be nearing thirty. The others have a decade or more on her if I remember correctly.

It would be nice to know though, if the third amphibious (sp?) ship is to be used in concert with a Canberra-class LHD, in place of an LHD depending on type/location of operation, or to be capable of conducting a completely separate amphibious op.

I can make cases for any of them, just not sure what the ADF/RAN wants or feels it needs.

I also hope they can hold out that long, as the vessels are getting a bit long in the tooth as it were.

-Cheers

 

[ThePuss]

Not quite sure which 'old girl' you mean... Tobruk IIRC is the youngest of the lot and she should be nearing thirty. The others have a decade or more on her if I remember correctly.

It would be nice to know though, if the third amphibious (sp?) ship is to be used in concert with a Canberra-class LHD, in place of an LHD depending on type/location of operation, or to be capable of conducting a completely separate amphibious op.

I can make cases for any of them, just not sure what the ADF/RAN wants or feels it needs.

I also hope they can hold out that long, as the vessels are getting a bit long in the tooth as it were.

-Cheers

You are correct in saying that Toby is the youngest of the lot, However she has never received a major mid life refit like the two LPA's did. The decision that she was going to be paid off soon was made 15 or more years ago but then the delays on the mid life upgrades of the two LPA were greatly delayed so she stuck around with bare minimum refits as it was still assume that her days were numbered. Then East Timor happened and the rest is history. She is the worst material state of the three and will almost definitely be the first to go.

Off topic I know but I reckon Toby would make a great dive wreak. Would be very cool to go diving down to go through the open bow doors and out the stern door!:dance

 

[icelord]

Off topic I know but I reckon Toby would make a great dive wreak. Would be very cool to go diving down to go through the open bow doors and out the stern door!:dance

Give it a few more years and you may just be able to do that....off Fleet Base East!!!

Not quite sure which 'old girl' you mean... Tobruk IIRC is the youngest of the lot and she should be nearing thirty. The others have a decade or more on her if I remember correctly.

And dont worry, the other two "older" girls are not so pretty, just that the dibbys have been painting the hell out of it whilst alongside, which Tobroken never gets time to do.

 

[rossfrb_1]

difference between RAN & Army MRH-90

ADM: MRH90 overcomes Anzac hangar concerns

MRH90 overcomes Anzac hangar concerns

11 Dec 2009

With the MRH90 in Canberra recently, Australian Aerospace CEO Dr Jens Goenneman took the opportunity to relate how he saw an MRH90 operate off an Anzac class ship in Sydney, despite concerns about the size of the helicopter."I'm sitting in Sydney CBD with a view to the harbour and I observed an Anzac Frigate.
"MRH 7 or 8 landed right there on the flight deck, right in front of me.
"A little bit later, it wasn't there any more and nobody pushed it into the harbour and it didn't fly away so it must have been in the hangar."
Army later confirmed that the MRH90 was in the Anzac hangar (ADM specifically asked about scraping the paint job but apparently not), but it was tight.
The company has also seen a massive ramp-up of MRH90 production at their Brisbane facility: with five or six of the seven scheduled for delivery this year ready to go (number 6 should make it in 2009 but if not, it will make an appearance in the first month or two of 2010).
The company is determined to catch up to its original timeline, Goenneman confirmed.
Given that the Army MRH90 program has slipped by six months to October 2011 (Navy is still on time and scheduled for June 2010), production will continue as planned.
MRH90 7 and 8 (Navy choppers despite the green paint job) have completed their first flight tests on HMAS Manoora earlier in the year, with positive results and an impressive serviceability rate of 77 per cent, Goenneman highlighted.
The Tiger ARH has also hit 5,000 flying hours in Australia with 16 of 22 delivered thus far.
This includes two new Tigers and seven upgraded to Initial Operational Test & Evaluation standard this year, and the program is back on track, Goenneman said.
He also confirmed that there was nothing on the industry side of the equation that would stop the Tigers being deployed to Afghanistan at the end of next year, subject to the decision of politicians of course.


**************************




Good news I guess.
I wonder what the differences, if any, are there between army & navy versions of the helicopter? Marinised frame, floaties, etc.
Does anyone know?

rb