StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Why would it need a Phalanx to fight pirates and enforce our EEZ on Illegal Fishermen?
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
After the Cole incident, the software for depressed firing on Phalanx was changed, as were the ROE and exclusion zones around vessels in sensitive locs and likely contact scenarios
a Phalanx is going to make short work of any numpty holding an RPG in the current USN ROEs
I'm sure any 2,000 tonne SEA 1180 contender would have space and weight for a Phalanx in addition to the 25mm Typhoon. It might also have space and weight for a medium calibre gun, VLS cells, air search radar, EW suite, CIC, etc. But with the indicative budget these things will not come standard. What will be standard is Typhoon system, flight deck, mission deck and the kind of comms and sensor suite of a ACPB+. The Navy should already have standoff MCM modules which are a sperate project and hopefully some kind of Naval UAV in addition to the Seahawks. All of this makes for a much better patrol and maritime interdiction capability than currently provided by ACPBs. Wether the MCM capability is better will have a lot to do with the standoff MCM systems (Spartan, etc) proving themselves.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #6,364
already in the process for Stokers
This is part of an earlier major shakeup in the engineering world, and so far many of the guys on my ship are not looking forward to it, whether thats from poor explanation of their roles or the fear of increase in workload for maintainers.
For all the talk, there ARE stacks of engineering department sailors around, its finding them and pulling them out from their shore billets. i love that the navy has more people ashore then in the fleet, and its not just a break from sea, some are just in a cushy place and dont want to leave. we could fill the fleet with people, its just ripping them out of their current place thats the difficult part.
As for PWOs, its now being forced on all seaman officers(maritime Warfare officers in new jargon) to do PWO course ahead of Int Nav and Long N. If an officer hasnt chosen a career path before achieving their Bridge Warfare Certificate they will be sent on course even before the previous standard 2 year consolodation of their BWC. We will see more flooding the fleet over the next few years, but the way it locks them into the role, and stops some really good PWOs from looking at other options in their careers will not help. Case in point, an outstanding PWO applied for Command of patrol boat but was told he was too qualified in PWO role and would not be selected, which is a shame cause i wanted on his boat!
Theres already enough POM officers in the RAN giving us hell about cricket results as it is, without reinforcements.
Many come out here on a exchange posting and end up just staying and making the switch, as RAN accepts their experience and achievments. Thats why you see some officers with funny coloured Gongs walking around...
Last edited:
I wouldn't be fitting equipment as standard. I would be at least putting it in as growth potential with support (if not actual systems) to be fitted at a refit, or better fitting out with wiring etc to accept equipment from a pool when needed. I don't see 20 OCV's as running around as little frigates. But depending on the mission systems could be fitted as required.
* Survey, mine hunting, local EEZ = Nothing except the typhoon. The default fit out.
* Anti Piracy (with RPG threat), dealing with asymmetric threats(terrorists etc) = Phalanx + typhoon perhaps a mini typhoon or a few 50 cal at the rear?
*Conflict style EEZ enforcement, sanctions etc, Iran type agitator nearby, amphibious insertion or extraction, replacing a frigate that has been damaged etc, regional war threat = Phalanx + typhoon + ESSM + Harpoon
Merely having the ability to land and launch UAV’s and helos would be a very useful upgrade. Even when operating locally doing its everyday job it’s doing now. Search and rescue, customs, fishing, piracy, sanctions etc are all greatly enabled by air assets.
But looking at the ACPB’s, some of the short comings (no real space to take on refugees or arrested persons). 20 persons is too small even if they could use it. I would thing ideally the ability to take on 100 persons (overload but not in the same room maybe 5+ rooms) would be a better capability. We are seeing boats travelling with 50-100 persons and OCV should be able to surge to take that number until it can unload to a nearby location (eg Christmas island). There should be ability to feed, water and handle waste from that number for a short period (ie a few days). It would also make the OCV useful for policing operations around the pacific where it could act as a micro seabase, detention, evacuation, aid etc. Particularly useful around island nations which are made up of several islands split apart by distance.
* Survey, mine hunting, local EEZ = Nothing except the typhoon. The default fit out.
* Anti Piracy (with RPG threat), dealing with asymmetric threats(terrorists etc) = Phalanx + typhoon perhaps a mini typhoon or a few 50 cal at the rear?
*Conflict style EEZ enforcement, sanctions etc, Iran type agitator nearby, amphibious insertion or extraction, replacing a frigate that has been damaged etc, regional war threat = Phalanx + typhoon + ESSM + Harpoon
Merely having the ability to land and launch UAV’s and helos would be a very useful upgrade. Even when operating locally doing its everyday job it’s doing now. Search and rescue, customs, fishing, piracy, sanctions etc are all greatly enabled by air assets.
But looking at the ACPB’s, some of the short comings (no real space to take on refugees or arrested persons). 20 persons is too small even if they could use it. I would thing ideally the ability to take on 100 persons (overload but not in the same room maybe 5+ rooms) would be a better capability. We are seeing boats travelling with 50-100 persons and OCV should be able to surge to take that number until it can unload to a nearby location (eg Christmas island). There should be ability to feed, water and handle waste from that number for a short period (ie a few days). It would also make the OCV useful for policing operations around the pacific where it could act as a micro seabase, detention, evacuation, aid etc. Particularly useful around island nations which are made up of several islands split apart by distance.
Yep except the MCM role is different to that of traditional minehunters. Since the actual prowling around minefields stuff will be done by unmanned boats, subs and helos the SEA 1180 boat doesn't need to be stealthy to mines. Because of this requirement minehunters tend to be under armed and reliant on stealth and other units to protect them from enemy action. The SEA 1180 boat when in a MCM configuration can carry the high end of self defence capability that it will be fitted with. Air search radar, EW suite, CIWS, maybe some kind of air defence missile (ESSM and required combat systems may be too big). Since it will be likely providing MCM to a task force it will need the weapons.
LOL That is the current thought pattern but, still very much pie in the sky. Due to bandwidth problems of getting the data live through air there is always the delay in getting that data back for analysis and, there is no real solution to my knowledge on the horizon.
Using subs to launch a UUV is great but no real ways of getting it and the data back.
Using helos to spot mines is great when the water is shallow and the vis is great, not so good when it isn't.
Using a USV has the same issues as an AUV IRT data transfer although not quite as bad.
So while the "MCM" configured OCV may be able to be part of a task group. That task group will be spending a lot of time waiting for an AUV that may or may not come back, there are plenty of very simple ways to stop that UUV/AUV from coming back. That and concerns of accuracy and the normal AUV requirement to get GPS fixes regularly to maintain accuracy opens itself up to plenty of opportunity to do stop it in its tracks.
The USV/UUV solution is still just that, miles away from any sort of reliability or consistency and the cost of those systems is ever increasing. Although there are some parts of those systems being used in various shapes or forms they are still not the golden bullet which a lot of people are putting all their faith in.
Even top of the line large AUV's like HUGIN in MCM guise only have a approx 12 hr mission time, (plenty of data though) other large/medium AUV's like REMUS 600 have proven themselves to be very unreliable at best and their imagery is crap. The only good small AUV's are on a very short list the R100 is great, the BF9 ............... well the jury is out with mixed feelings around the place.
Unless you are a believer in the propaganda that we will always know where the mines are then good luck to you....................... if i am not mistaken aren't the NATO forces still looking for a few mines laid of Tripoli?? And they knew almost immediately where they were laid.
Not quite Navy, but close...
Austal has won the Customs Cape Class contract...
At a ceremony held on board Austal’s next generation 102 metre trimaran this morning, Austal was awarded a contract for the design, construction and through-life support of eight new patrol boats for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
This contract is Austal’s second significant contract with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, having designed and constructed Customs’ current fleet of eight Bay Class vessels, which have been in operation for over 10 years.
Austal will build the fleet of Cape Class Patrol Boats at its shipyard in Henderson, Western Australia. Construction of the first vessel is expected to commence in February 2012, with all eight due to be delivered between March 2013 and August 2015.
The In-Service Support contract extends for a minimum period of eight years and encompasses a full range of intermediate and depot level maintenance activities. Further options can be exercised by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service for In-Service Support for the life of the Cape Class Patrol Boat Fleet.
The eight 57.8m Cape Class Patrol Boats will play a significant role in protecting Australia’s borders from multiple maritime threats, and have been designed to have greater range, endurance and flexibility, as well as enhanced capability to operate in more severe sea conditions than the current Customs’ fleet.
Austal Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Bellamy, commented that Austal is proud to have been selected to work with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service once again, and that the contract is strategically important for the Western Australian company.
“The Cape Class contract cements Austal’s position as the sole provider of Australia’s Border Protection Command patrol vessels, and as a leading supplier of Australia’s front line border security and surveillance capabilities. It also provides us with the opportunity to continue to work with our long standing partner, DMS Maritime, to provide in-service support for the new Cape Class fleet.”
“This contract is significant for Austal in that it is a key first step in the repositioning of our Henderson facilities as a defence focused operation, and reaffirms our position as an emerging global defence prime contractor.”
“Having already designed and built the Royal Australian Navy’s Armidale Class Patrol Boats, today we are the prime contractor for these new Customs vessels as well as for two multi-ship US Navy programs; the Littoral Combat Ships and Joint High Speed Vessels.”
“The Cape Class contract will also aid Austal in sustaining our Henderson workforce,” concluded Mr Bellamy.
Austal - Leading the World in the Design and Construction of Customised Aluminium Commerical and Defence Vessels
Austal has won the Customs Cape Class contract...
At a ceremony held on board Austal’s next generation 102 metre trimaran this morning, Austal was awarded a contract for the design, construction and through-life support of eight new patrol boats for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
This contract is Austal’s second significant contract with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, having designed and constructed Customs’ current fleet of eight Bay Class vessels, which have been in operation for over 10 years.
Austal will build the fleet of Cape Class Patrol Boats at its shipyard in Henderson, Western Australia. Construction of the first vessel is expected to commence in February 2012, with all eight due to be delivered between March 2013 and August 2015.
The In-Service Support contract extends for a minimum period of eight years and encompasses a full range of intermediate and depot level maintenance activities. Further options can be exercised by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service for In-Service Support for the life of the Cape Class Patrol Boat Fleet.
The eight 57.8m Cape Class Patrol Boats will play a significant role in protecting Australia’s borders from multiple maritime threats, and have been designed to have greater range, endurance and flexibility, as well as enhanced capability to operate in more severe sea conditions than the current Customs’ fleet.
Austal Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Bellamy, commented that Austal is proud to have been selected to work with the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service once again, and that the contract is strategically important for the Western Australian company.
“The Cape Class contract cements Austal’s position as the sole provider of Australia’s Border Protection Command patrol vessels, and as a leading supplier of Australia’s front line border security and surveillance capabilities. It also provides us with the opportunity to continue to work with our long standing partner, DMS Maritime, to provide in-service support for the new Cape Class fleet.”
“This contract is significant for Austal in that it is a key first step in the repositioning of our Henderson facilities as a defence focused operation, and reaffirms our position as an emerging global defence prime contractor.”
“Having already designed and built the Royal Australian Navy’s Armidale Class Patrol Boats, today we are the prime contractor for these new Customs vessels as well as for two multi-ship US Navy programs; the Littoral Combat Ships and Joint High Speed Vessels.”
“The Cape Class contract will also aid Austal in sustaining our Henderson workforce,” concluded Mr Bellamy.
Austal - Leading the World in the Design and Construction of Customised Aluminium Commerical and Defence Vessels
Why two classes of ship that result in cost and complexity. Common sense dictates a single hull class. I have already had my spray about HSC so I won't rant about that
t68
Well-Known Member
The RAN future Frigate program will have a strong emphasis on ASW and limited land attack capability and most likely built on a Spanish F105 design. Currently the Hobart class destroyer will have hanger facility for 1 embarked helicopter, if we use the same hull the as the AWD for the future frigate it also will be limited to 1 helicopter plus a small UAV.
Now others on this forum and elsewhere have stated that most navies are relearning the art of ASW due to the downsizing and reorganising priority in their fleets since the demise of the USSR and the end of the cold war, a good experienced sub driver will most likely evade a single helicopter searching for them if no other assets were available in time, having read a copy of a 2007 analysis from Australian Strategic Policy Institute called “The enemy below; Anti-submarine warfare in the ADF” would require a minimum of 3 helicopters executing an event, now once the LHD are operational and will most probably have as a minimum 3 escorting frigates can which will provide the bear essentials plus extra on the LHD at the expense of other equipment.
If we were to make a hybrid ASW frigate using the F105 hull as a base line enlarging the hanger to store 4 helicopters along the lines of a Shirane class destroyer or perhaps a modified Endurance class LPD with a large aircraft elevator in place of the well deck and stern gate and up to possible 8 aircraft for maintenance and storage. Leave the other 8 Sea 5000 NGC as a GP frigate as per the DCP and 3 dedicated ASW frigates or small LPH, how would this effect the RAN force structure would it throw it out of kilter by having 8 GP frigates 3 AWD, 3 ASW frigate/LPH, 2 LHD, 1 LPD.
Submarine Arms Race in the Pacific: The Chinese Challenge to U.S. Undersea Supremacy
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Defence Capability Plan 2009 - Public Version - December 2010 Update
Shirane Class Anti-Submarine Warfare Destroyer | Military-Today.com
DEFENSE STUDIES: RSN Launches First New Landing Ship Tank
Would it make more sense for the ADF to use NH90 for the army and remanufacture the remaining Blackhawks under team Romeo brand and use them for the 24 frigates and 24 dedicated ASW ship as I proposed above?
Now others on this forum and elsewhere have stated that most navies are relearning the art of ASW due to the downsizing and reorganising priority in their fleets since the demise of the USSR and the end of the cold war, a good experienced sub driver will most likely evade a single helicopter searching for them if no other assets were available in time, having read a copy of a 2007 analysis from Australian Strategic Policy Institute called “The enemy below; Anti-submarine warfare in the ADF” would require a minimum of 3 helicopters executing an event, now once the LHD are operational and will most probably have as a minimum 3 escorting frigates can which will provide the bear essentials plus extra on the LHD at the expense of other equipment.
If we were to make a hybrid ASW frigate using the F105 hull as a base line enlarging the hanger to store 4 helicopters along the lines of a Shirane class destroyer or perhaps a modified Endurance class LPD with a large aircraft elevator in place of the well deck and stern gate and up to possible 8 aircraft for maintenance and storage. Leave the other 8 Sea 5000 NGC as a GP frigate as per the DCP and 3 dedicated ASW frigates or small LPH, how would this effect the RAN force structure would it throw it out of kilter by having 8 GP frigates 3 AWD, 3 ASW frigate/LPH, 2 LHD, 1 LPD.
Submarine Arms Race in the Pacific: The Chinese Challenge to U.S. Undersea Supremacy
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Defence Capability Plan 2009 - Public Version - December 2010 Update
Shirane Class Anti-Submarine Warfare Destroyer | Military-Today.com
DEFENSE STUDIES: RSN Launches First New Landing Ship Tank
Would it make more sense for the ADF to use NH90 for the army and remanufacture the remaining Blackhawks under team Romeo brand and use them for the 24 frigates and 24 dedicated ASW ship as I proposed above?
Last edited:
I was thinking more along the line of different hulls filling the different roles, but sharing common systems. Make the economy of scale savings through commonality in the propulsion and ship services areas, scaling them to suit the different sized (configuration) hulls.
Its probably more a case of acquiring a family of ships from a single designer, an OPV, corvette, MCMV / subhunter and hydrographic / oceanographic vessel.
t68
Well-Known Member
This photo was taken on July 22, 2011 at Falmouth undergo refit for the RAN. Has anyone got a site of photos of her in refit?
[ame="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dyvroeth/5964320115/"]RFA Largs Bay (L3006) in Falmouth | Flickr - Photo Sharing!@@AMEPARAM@@http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6127/5964320115_5c9a24d401_m.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@5964320115@@AMEPARAM@@5c9a24d401[/ame]
On another forum their is speculation that she is to sail shortly for Australia but does not say when this is to take place, but according to this article from A&P, Largs Bay is expected to hand over in October. Talk is the route will be via Mediterranean, Suez Canal. As her voyage to Australia will be empty speculation is she may do a food and medical run into the refugee camps into Somalia and Ethiopia for the UN a worthy trial for the RAN and good exposure for the government, no official source on the aid run only speculation.
Shipbuilding Tribune - Australian Defence Minister Visits A&P Falmouth Yard to Inspect RFA Largs Bay
[ame="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dyvroeth/5964320115/"]RFA Largs Bay (L3006) in Falmouth | Flickr - Photo Sharing!@@AMEPARAM@@http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6127/5964320115_5c9a24d401_m.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@5964320115@@AMEPARAM@@5c9a24d401[/ame]
On another forum their is speculation that she is to sail shortly for Australia but does not say when this is to take place, but according to this article from A&P, Largs Bay is expected to hand over in October. Talk is the route will be via Mediterranean, Suez Canal. As her voyage to Australia will be empty speculation is she may do a food and medical run into the refugee camps into Somalia and Ethiopia for the UN a worthy trial for the RAN and good exposure for the government, no official source on the aid run only speculation.
Shipbuilding Tribune - Australian Defence Minister Visits A&P Falmouth Yard to Inspect RFA Largs Bay
IIRC the big spread they had on Largs in Navy Bews some months back spoke about a Nov delivery
t68
Well-Known Member
Well that tie’s in with the A&P release of a October hand over makes sense, will any English crew sail back to oz or all Australian crew?
Just back from England doing the BSSC (Basic Sea Safety Course) to find out via Facebook, that the ship I am going to be serving on, finally has a new name!
t68
Well-Known Member
come on, you can tell us well will keep it a secret.
my money on HMAS Jervis Bay, but would like to HMAS Gallipoli
- Status