Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sandman

New Member
PeterM said:
Another option could be a bigger enlarged version of HMNZS Canterbury.
Click to expand...
Canterbury is a pretty sub-standard design. Unless the RAN has intentions of running a ferry service across the Irish sea, A Canterbury derivative would be a dud choice.

PeterM said:
I wonder if instead of a single sealift ship, the RAN might be better off with two of the smaller Canterbury MRVs. That would enable them to be teamed with an LHD, ensuring the RAN has one LHD and one MRV are available at all times.
Click to expand...
Manning issues rule that out.

Besides it is not really what the 3rd ship is envisaged for.

The 3rd will be more of a folloew up logistical support vessel. LHD to take the initial loads (say in a pacific peacekeeping op type scenario). And then a short period later or whatever the sealifter comes in with more stuff. Probably enough time to get the ***** out of a dry dock or whatever.

It is not intended to be working "in tandem" with an LHD so to speak.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
sandman said:
Canterbury is a pretty sub-standard design. Unless the RAN has intentions of running a ferry service across the Irish sea, A Canterbury derivative would be a dud choice.
Click to expand...
we won't be getting a ship like the Canterbury - it just doesn't suit the requirements and CONOPS.
 
O

Ozymandias

Banned Member
Hi all,

I am an engineer with a defence contractor. I want to get some quick advice from RAN (or ex-RAN) personnel, pending a proper focus group of end users (which takes months to organise).

Concerning pedestals for 12.7 mm Machine guns on RAN ships, I am interested in any issues that have come up during their use. If you are a RAN sailor with that kind of experience, could you please tell me the following:

1. The model of the pedestal in question, and the class of ship it was on.
2. Any problems you had using the pedestal. Did some important screw always keep falling out? You couldn't adjust the height where you wanted it? Was it hard to attach the machine gun to the pedestal? Or anything else you really hated (or liked, for that matter).

Since everyone is anonymous here, I will take all comments with a grain of salt. I am not interested in the machine gun, or firing arcs, or anything the least bit classified, so don't post it (had to be said).

Ozymandias
 
Last edited:
R

rossfrb_1

Member
I'm figuring that if the Romeos get the gig - one presumes they will be equipped with the MK 50 torpedo.
Thus will RAN operate two different types of light torpedo? I'm not sure how much of a logistical nightmare that would be if at all.
There are certainly sunk costs in the MU90 so I can't see the RAN ditching those in favour of having the MK 50 as sole light torpedo.
Then there is the issue of the shipside 'tethering' system. It's my understanding that ATM, MRH 90 (in it's european default anyway) and MH-60R operate two different systems. I have no idea which RAN was planning on using for its MRHs.
It will be interesting to see how RAN sorts this out.

rb
 
Todjaeger

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
rossfrb_1 said:
I'm figuring that if the Romeos get the gig - one presumes they will be equipped with the MK 50 torpedo.
Thus will RAN operate two different types of light torpedo? I'm not sure how much of a logistical nightmare that would be if at all.
There are certainly sunk costs in the MU90 so I can't see the RAN ditching those in favour of having the MK 50 as sole light torpedo.
Then there is the issue of the shipside 'tethering' system. It's my understanding that ATM, MRH 90 (in it's european default anyway) and MH-60R operate two different systems. I have no idea which RAN was planning on using for its MRHs.
It will be interesting to see how RAN sorts this out.

rb
Click to expand...
The tethering system might well be a non-issue, at least if the 'Romeo' gets chosen. Since the RAN already operates the S-70B, I suspect the RAN already has a compatible tethering system in use aboard the frigates.

The question then becomes if the tethering system already in use on the frigates has every been tested and/or modified (or just plain replaced) to allow the MRH-90 to make use of it. Additional, is it/was it ever expected that the MRH-90 would land on or take off from one of the frigates? My impression has been that the MRH-90 was pred$ominantly expected to be in use by Army, with perhaps a half-dozen flying in RAN service but painted in Army colours. These RAN MRH-90's were to be operated from the Canberra-class LHDs as the medium lift helicopter. Given the size of the LHD and flight deck, a tethering system was not expected to be needed.

I admit, I could be mistaken on that last bit, but was there an expectation that the LHDs would have a tethering system?

-Cheers
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
rossfrb_1 said:
I'm figuring that if the Romeos get the gig - one presumes they will be equipped with the MK 50 torpedo.
Thus will RAN operate two different types of light torpedo? I'm not sure how much of a logistical nightmare that would be if at all.
There are certainly sunk costs in the MU90 so I can't see the RAN ditching those in favour of having the MK 50 as sole light torpedo.
Then there is the issue of the shipside 'tethering' system. It's my understanding that ATM, MRH 90 (in it's european default anyway) and MH-60R operate two different systems. I have no idea which RAN was planning on using for its MRHs.
It will be interesting to see how RAN sorts this out.

rb
Click to expand...
They are seemingly okay with operating 2x torpedo types, operating Mk46 and MU-90 now, admittedly due to technical difficulties with the MU-90, but they've decided to persist with two types now so I guess they'll continue, if MH-60R is chosen.

I suspect that if MH-60R is chosen, it will be because ADF wants a relatively risk free acquisition and thus the extant integrated weapon would be chosen. Better two weapon types in-service than no weapon types whilst interminable integration activities drag on...

Plus the Mk 50 will be integrated onto the P-8A as well, boosting that weapons chances...
 
P

PeterM

Active Member
Here is an article on the MH-60R vs NFH from ADM earlier this year
(from ADM: Sea Power 2010: Let the competition begin | ADM Apr 2010)

perhaps it provides a little information that some may find useful (at least to a layman like myself)

Sea Power 2010: Let the competition begin | ADM Apr 2010

01 Apr 2010
Seconds out of the ring and may the best platform win - the victor in the $1.5 billion contract to provide at least 24 naval combat helicopters to the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) is to be decided by open competition.

Julian Kerr | Sydney

The announcement on 25 February by Defence Minister John Faulkner pits the Lockheed Martin/Sikorsky MH-60R against the NATO Frigate Helicopter (NFH) manufactured by NH Industries and represented in Australia by Australian Aerospace, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Eurocopter, itself part of the NHI consortium.

Faulkner said the competitive process would commence "in the next few months" with the government making a final decision in 2011.

First deliveries will be required from 2014 - coinciding approximately with the delivery of the first of the RAN's three air warfare destroyers (AWDs) and the first of its two Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) amphibious ships.

The decision to proceed with a competitive tender will not have met with unanimous approval.

Service chiefs and Defence's Capability Development Group are understood to have favoured an early sole-source acquisition of the MH-60R through the US Foreign Military Sales program, while the Defence Materiel Organisation - and ultimately the National Security Committee of Cabinet - preferred the competitive option.

"Any decision government makes in 2011 will take into account all relevant considerations including capability, cost, interoperability with other ADF capabilities, Australian industry opportunities, risk and value for money," Faulkner commented.

Marketing matters
Faulkner's announcement followed, although it was not necessarily influenced by, an extraordinary marketing campaign by Australian Aerospace, instigated at a time when it appeared the MH-60R's star was definitely in the ascendency.

The campaign included high profile lobbying and the airfreighting to Australia aboard an Antonov-124 of a full-size mockup (a prototype stripped down and made exhibition-friendly) and an NFH (destined for the Italian Navy but with an Agusta Westland crew) which undertook a series of familiarisation flights for senior defence personnel, politicians and media during and following the Pacific 2010 maritime exposition.

It was during one of these flights that Dr Jens Goennemann, CEO of Australian Aerospace and a world-standard skydiver, unobtrusively removed his suit jacket, donned a parachute and a pair of goggles, and departed via the side door.

Both competitors have supplied cost and availability details for 27 aircraft, but financial constraints are expected to cut the number purchased to 24.

This would still meet the RAN's requirement for eight or more helicopters to be concurrently embarked on ships at sea.

In fact, Goennemann has upped the ante by suggesting in data supplied to the DMO last year that the RAN's requirements could be fulfilled by just 18 NFH when combined with the six MRH90 utility helicopters that are already on order to replace the RAN's five Sea Kings.

An alternative proposal was to supply 21 NFH and reduce Australian Aerospace's existing contract for 46 MRH - 40 to replace the army's Blackhawks and the six destined for the RAN - by six.

"These very modern composite airframe helicopters don't corrode, and maintenance cycles are faster and fewer," Goennemann told a media briefing.

Such issues will doubtless play their role in what is shaping up to be a complex tender process, with each contender featuring unique strengths.

Romeo specs
The MH-60R (also known as the Romeo) combines Sikorsky's H-60 air vehicle with mission systems developed and tested over 12 years, integrated by Lockheed Martin and described by the company as the most advanced and capable of any airborne platform worldwide.

The systems include a multimode radar with the ability to automatically detect and alert the three-strong crew to periscopes in sea clutter, low frequency dipping sonar, a forward-looking infrared laser designator, electronic support measures, cockpit avionics and integrated self-defence, and the Link 16 tactical datalink now entering RAN service.

A high level of systems automation builds the battle picture, prioritises threats and enables the pilot, co-pilot and sensor operator to share workload across three functionally-equivalent work stations.

In US Navy service, the MH-60R's armament comprises eight Hellfire missiles with a range of up to eight kilometres; two Mk54 lightweight torpedoes (Australia selected the Eurotorp MU90 Mk 11 torpedo in preference to the Mk54 in an open competition in 1999 although it is currently only integrated on RAN ships); or a missile/torpedo mix.

Structural and mechanical provision is made for a 7.62mm or .50 calibre machine gun.

Captain Joseph Bauknecht, deputy commander of the US Pacific Fleet's helicopter maritime strike wing, told ADM that the MH-60R carried only the relatively short-range Hellfire missile for anti-surface warfare "because a US Navy strike group has other assets, including strike aircraft, better suited to conduct that mission."

The USN intends procuring 300 MH-60R, of which the 50th fully missionised MH-60R was delivered by Lockheed Martin at the end of January.

Importantly, the type completed its first operational deployment with the USN in July 2009.

This saw a squadron of the new generation helicopters achieve a 95 per cent sortie completion rate during a six-month embarkation on the nuclear aircraft carrier USS Stennis and its escorts.

By contrast, the first production variant of the NFH was only handed over to the Royal Netherlands Navy last December in what was described as an "initial meaningful operational configuration."

France will receive its first deliveries in the first half of this year, followed by Italy and Norway later in the year.

Pros and cons
While the twin-engined NH90 NFH has similar external dimensions to the MH-60R, its cabin is 60 per cent larger in floor area and 36 per cent larger by volume, and features twin sliding doors and a rear ramp compared to a single sliding door.

Configured for combat, the aircraft can still embark a six-strong boarding party in addition to its three-strong crew without the sonar being removed.

Reconfiguring the cabin from the combat to the support role, in which the NFH can accommodate 14 passengers or up to 12 stretchers, can be undertaken by four personnel in about two hours.

In its anti-surface warfare role the helicopter is equipped with two Marte Mk2S stand-off anti-ship missiles with a range of 30 kilometres - similar to the reach of the Penguin missiles acquired by the RAN for the ill-fated Super Seasprites.

Standard armament in the antisubmarine role consists of two MU90 torpedoes, although the aircraft can also carry one missile and one torpedo simultaneously.

Sensors include an active dipping sonar, sonobuoys, 360 degree surveillance radar, and a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) system mounted in the nose.

The avionics package includes the communication and navigation suites which also equip the MRH90, and a comprehensive self-protection suite.

According to Australian Aerospace, the NH90 NFH will be fully compliant with existing US, coalition and Australian information environments.

Acquisition of the NFH, which features 80 per cent commonality with the MRH90, would largely complete the rationalisation of the ADF's rotary wing fleet proposed under Project AIR 9000, increasing operational flexibility and removing the need for multiple training and logistics systems.

However, until the aircraft becomes fully operational it remains a relatively unknown quantity and therefore a short-term risk to a program which, after the Super Seasprite debacle, is understandably risk averse.

While Lockheed Martin/Sikorsky have ruled out local assembly for the MH-60R as adding another level of risk to on-time and on-budget delivery, Australian Aerospace would assemble the NFH at its Brisbane facility.

This is currently completing production of the ADF's 22 Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters and is heavily engaged in MRH90 assembly.

Presumably it has not gone unnoticed in official circles that the Brisbane facility employs more than 700 staff, it's located in the home state of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and there is a federal election later this year.

Australian content
Lockheed Martin/Sikorsky are proposing a multi-faceted Australian industry package that would include MH-60R through-life support, the opportunity for local companies to participate in a range of project areas relating to MH-60R upgrades - so long as the companies were competitive - and a variety of integration activities.

The consortium has offered to partner with the Commonwealth in considering the remanufacture in southeast Queensland for sale internationally of the ADF's Seahawks and 34 S-70A-9 Black Hawks, all of which have relatively low hours.

Sikorsky also hopes to interest the government in partnering the establishment of a world-standard rotor blade facility which could reduce support costs through the in-country repair and overhaul of main blades.

Leonard Wengler, Vice President Navy Programs of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, told ADM there was sufficient flexibility in MH-60R production schedules to allow delivery of one or two aircraft to Australia as early as the fourth quarter of 2011.

This would possibly allow the RAN to have an Initial Operating Capability (IOC) in late 2012, ahead of the 2014 timeline identified by Minister Faulkner.

Subsequent deliveries would depend on contractual arrangements and the USN, but capacity was not an issue since up to 48 aircraft could be produced annually and the USN's requirement was generally for 35 or less.

Australian Aerospace told ADM that as had occurred with the Tiger and MRH90, the first units would be assembled in Europe with follow on aircraft made in Brisbane.

Although two production slots could be made available in Europe in 2012, the overall rate of delivery would be determined by the customer and was still to be advised "but we can guarantee that the Brisbane assembly line will be able to meet the Commonwealth's requirements for 2014."
Click to expand...
 
P

PeterM

Active Member
from Australia Requests MH-60R Multimission Helicopters - Naval Technology

Australia Requests MH-60R Multimission Helicopters
14 July 2010

Australia has requested a total of 24 MH-60R Seahawk Multimission helicopters and associated equipment from the US under a potential $2.1bn foreign military sales programme.

The proposed sale includes 60 T-700 GE 401Cs, communication equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, training and logistics support services.

Australia wants the military equipment to enhance the navy's anti-submarine and surface warfare capability and provide an improved search and rescue, and anti-ship surveillance capability.

The defence equipment will also be used for future contingency operations including humanitarian assistance, disaster relief and stability operations in the Asia-Pacific region.

The prime contractors, which will supply the helicopters and equipment, include Sikorsky Aircraft, Lockheed Martin, General Electric and Raytheon.
Click to expand...
 
StevoJH

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
An FMS Notification was sent in, but that just means the Sikorsky have tendered for the contract, it doesnt mean that they have won it yet.

They are competing against the NFH-90
 
W

weasel1962

New Member
Re:

StevoJH said:
An FMS Notification was sent in, but that just means the Sikorsky have tendered for the contract, it doesnt mean that they have won it yet.

They are competing against the NFH-90
Click to expand...
Those are 2 very excellent choices. There will be commonality benefits whichever helo is chosen. The -R seahawks are the latest iteration to enter USN service with hellfire 2 capability (that the tiger has). The NH-90s represent the best the europeans can offer and appears to have slightly better performance.

EADS N.V. - NH-90

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/paris/MH-60RS-PAS09.pdf

Both variants will probably have good search radar, dipping sonar, sonobuoy, mad, flir, esm capabilities.

I think it will be a tight race.
 
A

agc33e

Banned Member
weasel1962 said:
Those are 2 very excellent choices. There will be commonality benefits whichever helo is chosen. The -R seahawks are the latest iteration to enter USN service with hellfire 2 capability (that the tiger has). The NH-90s represent the best the europeans can offer and appears to have slightly better performance.

EADS N.V. - NH-90

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/paris/MH-60RS-PAS09.pdf

Both variants will probably have good search radar, dipping sonar, sonobuoy, mad, flir, esm capabilities.

I think it will be a tight race.
Click to expand...
Well i dont think they have many doubts on these helos, just looking number of missiles, torpedos, missions systems at full working ie fully operative problems with nh90..but looking at the price proposed like 2100 millions of dollar for 24 helos, like 100 mill dollar per helo...mmm
 
A

agc33e

Banned Member
Just to complete some previous comments from myself, referring to the possibility to put the 64 cells vls in the anzacs ii, as someone said they are sm2´s with antishipping capability, what range i dont know but if you can put like 20 of those in an anzac ii, the most dangerous ship of the ran is not going to be the awd but the anzacs ii, because what fleet can cope a simultaneous attack of 40 sm2´s (2 anzacs) ? In one anzac you are having the a simultaneous capacity just given by waves of 20 jets! Its much cheaper than a carrier or raaf refuelled.

Cheers.
 
P

PeterM

Active Member
StevoJH said:
An FMS Notification was sent in, but that just means the Sikorsky have tendered for the contract, it doesnt mean that they have won it yet.

They are competing against the NFH-90
Click to expand...
That is what I expected, but really didn't know much. I posted it here to get clarification.

does anyone know the per unit cost of a MH-60R or a NFH?
 
B

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
agc33e said:
Well i dont think they have many doubts on these helos, just looking number of missiles, torpedos, missions systems at full working ie fully operative problems with nh90..but looking at the price proposed like 2100 millions of dollar for 24 helos, like 100 mill dollar per helo...mmm
Click to expand...
Calculating costs in such a way doesn't really tell the whole story. The 2.1 billion dollars isn't just for the helicopters, there's a whole host of other services that are included and are vital in integrating a given platform into the military making the purchase.

Another example would be the RAAF Super Hornet buy, it was around 6.6 billion dollars if I recall but in addition to the aircraft included through life support, weapons, and things of that nature.
 
aussienscale

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Bonza said:
Calculating costs in such a way doesn't really tell the whole story. The 2.1 billion dollars isn't just for the helicopters, there's a whole host of other services that are included and are vital in integrating a given platform into the military making the purchase.

Another example would be the RAAF Super Hornet buy, it was around 6.6 billion dollars if I recall but in addition to the aircraft included through life support, weapons, and things of that nature.
Click to expand...
You are right Bonza, our way of pricing defence buy's seems to confuse people from other countries who tend to quote only unit price, whereas we do include all the other "bit's and pieces" such as though life costs, maint, training and spares etc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top