Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Todjaeger]

In short No. ANL was just that, a shipping line and still subject to full commercial certification and regulation. Run as a bussiness with the remaining vessels (being scrapped) owned by finance.

Alexsa, do you have any insight into the origins and/or end disposition of the Royal Australian Fleet Auxiliary?

Or perhaps some vessel names which were part of the Auxiliary, or books which I could track down?

Sorry if I seem a bit frusterated by this, but I am. I have come across enough official references so that I am confident the Royal Australian Fleet Auxiliary or perhaps Australian Fleet Auxiliary existed as a formal organization, but I have been unable to locate information about it, or even get clues which I can use to search for more information.

Given that I normally can research things reasonably well...

Anyway, I have also been thinking (always a dangerous thing for me to do) about the OCV and an idea occurred to me.

If the OCV ends up being a ~2,000 - 2,500 ton vessel and included deck space/weight for modular and/or ISO containers, would the OCV be able to carry sufficient material in the containers to act a mini-replenishment vessel? What I have in mind is if there was some sort of event (Timor Leste, the Solomons, PNG, Fiji, etc) where a major RAN vessel was deployed and might need to be re-supplied periodically. I specifically am not speaking of a deployed RAN task force or multiple vessel deployment.

Something where perhaps more AvGas is needed for the embarked helicopter, or perhaps the helicopter needs parts or requires overhaul and needs to be replaced, fresh food for the crew and/or additional fuel for the major vessel, etc.

What I do not know is just how much space and weight is required aboard a vessel for that sort of mission to be considered 'viable' and also what sort safety considerations come into play as well.

-Cheers

 

[ASSAIL]

Grey paint

I like the Aussie "Green Gray" too, Realy handy when you have a few too many in Pearl and you tell the Taxi Driver to "thake me tooz the greeeeen shup"2

Folks, we are still waiting for someone "in the know" to explain why CHOULES is not painted in oz "storm grey/green".
Are we giving her back after the LHD's commission?:

 

[icelord]

Folks, we are still waiting for someone "in the know" to explain why CHOULES is not painted in oz "storm grey/green".
Are we giving her back after the LHD's commission?:

sure its not "thales grey" which is the grey/green they painted the FFGs with during the downgrade program. most likely they will wait till a major docking to repaint, why spend the money now when you can wait a little longer, at the price contractors ask, they may do what the RN do and send to singapore

 

[ThePuss]

sure its not "thales grey" which is the grey/green they painted the FFGs with during the downgrade program. most likely they will wait till a major docking to repaint, why spend the money now when you can wait a little longer, at the price contractors ask, they may do what the RN do and send to singapore

No she is definetly RN Grey and she got painted in the dock before she came over.

Maybe it was because the dockyard was not familiar using two part paint (Which our Grey is) unlike the one part RN paint?????.......Clutching at straws for the reasoning here! :idea2

 

[alexsa]

Alexsa, do you have any insight into the origins and/or end disposition of the Royal Australian Fleet Auxiliary?

Or perhaps some vessel names which were part of the Auxiliary, or books which I could track down?

Sorry if I seem a bit frusterated by this, but I am. I have come across enough official references so that I am confident the Royal Australian Fleet Auxiliary or perhaps Australian Fleet Auxiliary existed as a formal organization, but I have been unable to locate information about it, or even get clues which I can use to search for more information.

Given that I normally can research things reasonably well...

Anyway, I have also been thinking (always a dangerous thing for me to do) about the OCV and an idea occurred to me.

If the OCV ends up being a ~2,000 - 2,500 ton vessel and included deck space/weight for modular and/or ISO containers, would the OCV be able to carry sufficient material in the containers to act a mini-replenishment vessel? What I have in mind is if there was some sort of event (Timor Leste, the Solomons, PNG, Fiji, etc) where a major RAN vessel was deployed and might need to be re-supplied periodically. I specifically am not speaking of a deployed RAN task force or multiple vessel deployment.

Something where perhaps more AvGas is needed for the embarked helicopter, or perhaps the helicopter needs parts or requires overhaul and needs to be replaced, fresh food for the crew and/or additional fuel for the major vessel, etc.

What I do not know is just how much space and weight is required aboard a vessel for that sort of mission to be considered 'viable' and also what sort safety considerations come into play as well.

-Cheers

Good day

All I can say is that there is nothing in the navigation act 1912 that give formal recognistion to an Australian Fleet Auxillary. It does not mean the term could not have been used during war for ship taken on charter or agreement for support functions. Others were taken up and commissioned becoming 'warships.

Have a look here

About The Ships | The Australian Merchant Navy

The same was true in WW!

http://www.awm.gov.au/research/infosheets/pdf/ww1_troop.pdf

Unless commissioned or requisitioned the vessel retained their merchant navy crew. Requistioned ships oftne had military crews but may not be commissioned and perhaps it is these that are referred to as Auxillaries.

As for the OCV and containers. A ISO container tank of avgas will come in at about 25 tonnes or more. You need a large crane for this and considerable support structure in the ship for the crane to be mounted. That would be a large weight penalty and impediment for a limited cargo volume as well as adding quite a bit of top weight. In addiiton you could really only discharge alongside unless you have barges.

I don't recommend it when you can charter a small general cargo vessel and carry a hell of a lot more.

Sime really for a mini support ship unless the materials you are carrying are smaller loads that can be tranfered by jack stay.

 

[alexsa]

No she is definetly RN Grey and she got painted in the dock before she came over.

Maybe it was because the dockyard was not familiar using two part paint (Which our Grey is) unlike the one part RN paint?????.......Clutching at straws for the reasoning here! :idea2

I doubt is is the paint type as the abative anti foul is a two pack.

 

[Anixtu]

Maybe it was because the dockyard was not familiar using two part paint (Which our Grey is) unlike the one part RN paint?????.......Clutching at straws for the reasoning here! :idea2

My guess:

"We've got enough RFA spec. grey in the shed to paint four Bays, you can have her painted in the existing colour for $xyz or you can have her repainted to RAN spec. for $3xyz."

 

[ThePuss]

My guess:

"We've got enough RFA spec. grey in the shed to paint four Bays, you can have her painted in the existing colour for $xyz or you can have her repainted to RAN spec. for $3xyz."

That is most probably the reason

 

[StoresBasher]

My guess:

"We've got enough RFA spec. grey in the shed to paint four Bays, you can have her painted in the existing colour for $xyz or you can have her repainted to RAN spec. for $3xyz."

She came out of her refit with the colour scheme, and was that shade we we arrived in September in Falmouth.

I would say the bottom line is money and the cost of a RAN coat of paint wouldn't be cheap.

We practiced most of the day today for tomorrow's commissioning ceremony, hopefully it will all go well and we don't get any rain.

 

[icelord]

Avgas specifically or any fuel/flammable would also throw up a lot of DC challenges. All ships have ways of dealing with internal fuel leaks, fires etc. putting a large fuel bomb on say a cargo deck would not exactly go down well. Ships have to plan for all issues, and a ISOcontainer of Avgas would be too much of a risk for the small benefit of having a MFU on scene, if a OPV could be deployed to swap out for a 2 day on station without a major unit needed to support it, then that would be more strategic thinking.
The only thing a OPV could not do compared to frigates is fight a war, patrols and SAR would be its most important role in any pacific island hotspot.
I understand what you are asking, in the case of say stores of food if it can carry a fridge container then it could resupply, most likely via Vertrep over a heavy jackstay.

 

[ASSAIL]

That is most probably the reason

Still doesn't make sense! Paint is tinted to order to an international colour code when purchased so the comparative cost is same. I could understand the cost argument if they didn't paint her in refit!
A&P still have a further two Bay refits so having excess RN grey is no problem.

 

[alexsa]

Still doesn't make sense! Paint is tinted to order to an international colour code when purchased so the comparative cost is same. I could understand the cost argument if they didn't paint her in refit!
A&P still have a further two Bay refits so having excess RN grey is no problem.

If it is not in stock it would mean producing it as a special job lot and that will cost. Do not underestimate the cost of painting a ship, even a small discount per litre will result in significant savings.

 

[Tee_Centre_10]

I've seen references to the RAFA as well, specifically with HMAS Supply (previously RFA Tide Austral) and was meaning to look into it at some point in the future. Sorry in advance for the wall of text that follows.

I noticed that it wasn't just used in conjunction with a planned RFA-like service post war that never happened as there are references to it going back to WW1 and WW2 (just as you showed), including a UK War Cabinet weekly report into the "Naval, Military and Air Situation" dated 19 July 1940 that noted that the Italian passenger/cargo ship Remo was "seized at Fremantle when Italy declared war, [and] has now been commissioned as a Royal Australian Fleet Auxiliary for the voyage from Fremantle to Melbourne". Renamed Reynella, she was run by the Australian Government until 1949 when she was sold back to her previous Italian owners (Lloyd Triestino) after running her on to a reef in New Guinea waters in 1947. Note it was "sold back", and not "handed back" as a requisitioned ship would be. She was claimed as a war prize in 1940 and as such she was owned.

From all the examples I've seen it used on it involved vessels owned/run by the Australian Government, so it would seem it was not just a matter of ships being chartered but controlled outright and commissioned into service by the Australian Government for government or RAN service exclusively. So I would assume that government owned ships on civil duties (such as ANL vessels that were not going to "Vietnam, Republic of" for instance) would not be RAFA.
I can't say (because I haven't seen it said explicitly) under what terms the vessels were crewed, but it would have to be assumed that it was at least similar to the UK RFA where the crew assume certain risks that a merchant crew may not.

What is incredibly odd (given how widespread its usage from the RAN site to the AWM and the NLA archive) is that there isn't more information on the issue. But perhaps there is no information because it didn't actually exist, or perhaps it has been incorrectly capitalised RAFA when there was no such thing? I reference this 1930 "The Advertiser" article reporting the sale of two colliers surplus to defence requirements (no more coal ships). It refers to "the Royal Australian Fleet auxiliary steamer Biloela and the coal storage vessel Mombah". Note that the sale is by the Defence Department (also note that the Minister is considering scrapping the submarines Oxley and Otway. I'm tut-tutting internally).
It may not be an organisation as such but a designation acronym, like HMAS or HMAT. Or is the "RAF" part simply a generic euphemism used at the time for "a group of vessels run by or owned by the government for Defence purposes" just as RAN vessels might be referred to as the Fleet or the Navy in newspapers?

This 1919 SMH article says "RAF auxiliary", but this 1926 article from the SMH refers to the all-capitalised RAFA. And just to round out the NLA links, this is a very interesting article in the context of this discussion because it is about a 1940 wrongful dismissal court case where a dismissed crew member was suing of the captain of the RAFA Wongala (previously Wyatt Earp) for wages and compensation while on her one and only voyage as a RAFA. The captain's defence is that because the Wongala is a member of "His Majesty's fleet", Commonwealth awards do not apply and the Crown can dismiss servants without notice, and besides as master of such a vessel he was an agent of the Crown so the dismissed seaman should be suing them and not him! Unfortunately, the hearing was adjourned but it can be seen that RAFA ships may be civilian manned from captain on down but they are government owned (in this instance there were "a number of naval ratings" on board, so even a mixed crew under a civil captain or were they just cargo?).

I think we can make certain assumptions: RAFA ships are government requisitioned/owned (probably even directly Defence requisitioned/owned) but civilian-manned ships that are employed for Defence purposes. I haven't seen anything to suggest long-term chartered vessels would apply.

As you can see, I went into this myself about six months ago and it annoyed me then that I couldn't pin down what the RAFA was. Just when I think it was civilians operating navy assets to support the RAN (a kind of between-the-wars DMS with small cargo vessels, colliers and lighters) they go and pull a 10,000t Reynella on me. Ships that you would think would be RAFA are not, and ships you think wouldn't be are. :mad
At first I was overjoyed to see someone bring this up because surely someone here would know!
A Google search is confused by returns that are merely a circular regurgitation of Wikipedia info (specifically the HMAS Supply entry) by automated bots.

 

[ASSAIL]

If it is not in stock it would mean producing it as a special job lot and that will cost. Do not underestimate the cost of painting a ship, even a small discount per litre will result in significant savings.

I have refitted and painted many ships over the last 30 years and as a Fleet Manager I fully understand both the mechanics and the economics of doing so. Yes it is v. expensive but the cost per litre doesn't vary with colour. Both RN and RAN grey needs to be tinted and mixed.

 

[StevoJH]

I have refitted and painted many ships over the last 30 years and as a Fleet Manager I fully understand both the mechanics and the economics of doing so. Yes it is v. expensive but the cost per litre doesn't vary with colour. Both RN and RAN grey needs to be tinted and mixed.

But it might vary based on the volume of the order.

Anyway, why are we arguing over the cost of paint?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Anyway, why are we arguing over the cost of paint?

because Defence is still expected to exercise savings irrespective of the fact that we've already saved $20bn (because it was held back so not able to be used even if we wanted to)

someone would have costed it and said we don't need it. if the ship was pink with red depth indicators they might have done so, but close enough would be good enough if it meant increasing the chances of Govt saying "let's buy it"

then add in the fact that the ships she's replacing (across a number of classes and requirements) are donald ducked, so getting her sooner is better...

 

[jack412]

It was just announced we are getting a new ship based on the Windermere
http://www.hallinmarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Windermere-Rev-11-10-web.pdf

more details should follow

 

[ASSAIL]

because Defence is still expected to exercise savings irrespective of the fact that we've already saved $20bn (because it was held back so not able to be used even if we wanted to)

someone would have costed it and said we don't need it. if the ship was pink with red depth indicators they might have done so, but close enough would be good enough if it meant increasing the chances of Govt saying "let's buy it"

then add in the fact that the ships she's replacing (across a number of classes and requirements) are donald ducked, so getting her sooner is better...

Don't want to bang on about this forever but I guess the one logical explanation could be that the hull only was painted and not the superstructure. That would be a significant savings.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It was just announced we are getting a new ship based on the Windermere
http://www.hallinmarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Windermere-Rev-11-10-web.pdf

more details should follow

this one has been "known" for about 2 months, so I'm guessing they've finally worked out who will own it and crew it....

 

[Todjaeger]

It was just announced we are getting a new ship based on the Windermere
http://www.hallinmarine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Windermere-Rev-11-10-web.pdf

more details should follow

Ugg... I hope the RAN vessel looks better than the Windermere... I had thought the 'bustle' at the aft end of Sirius was bad, but that helideck above and forward of what I assume is the bridge is IMO even worse...

-Cheers