Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[alexsa]

I have done a graphic of RAN warships as they could be in 2022. It doesn't include patrol boats, supply vessels etc. They are laid out to scale. It prints OK at A4 and A3, not sure if the quality is there for larger.

First are LHD & Hobart's should all be operational by then, next are the Anzacs, which should be in vigorous middle age; having all been upgraded by then. Next are the Collins, also expected to serve through the decade.

Next I have 'made up' a couple of ships. The first nuship is the OCV, it's based on the Austal MRV. It's 100m long trimaran with large flight deck, hangar and cargo deck. In additon to OPV role, these would fill a variety of small warship roles including MCM & ASW by using modules. Oz ship building has been busy building these at almost 2 per year to give a decent sized fleet of a dozen by 2022. I thought something based on Austal was most likely choice, however in view of recent events, perhaps I should of picked a Damen OPV instead.

The next nuship is the future frigate which probably won't be operational until 2029+, however by 2022 they should have made the decision. I selected the RN type 26, with 'Australianised' combat systems. There are a few good frigates to choose from, the Danish Iver Huitfeldt-class frigate, the sleek FREMM variants or even a Meko 600. These ships are very similar.

Last are the Adelaide's, in remembrance, as they should just about be pensioned off by then.

The first thing it highlighted to me was just how big the LHD are. Second thing was how important the OCV are going to be. Without them the hull numbers look a bit threadbare, and certainly lopsided with a shortage of smaller hulls to perform the various small warship roles.

So why do we want an OCV based on the HSC Code? LCS is a great concept for the USN where it is one element in a broader ORBAT but why buy a hulll limited by mass and operating conditions?

As a hint we have had this discussion before.

PS: your graphic of the AWD appears to be the evolved (cut down) AB from Gibbs and Cox

 

[ADMk2]

So I was right then...bought 46.

I still can't see a full airwing being assigned to either ship unless they're actually exercising with Army at the time. While amphibious operations will be pretty new to them, they still have to practice all that old fashioned running up and down hills or flying over them that they've been doing since before even *I* was doing it. And most of that won't need a ship.

Shane

Being over-budget is still paying them... We just didn't pay them directly for the 47th airframe...

We caught them out milking us on support costs etc so we negotiated a "free" airframe as reparation.

 

[protoplasm]

details not really out there yet so it is a case of sit and wait for a formal announcement.

Is this the leak before the announcement:

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Doesn't mention how many though, and has a focus on saving jobs at Williamstown, rather than the increase in capability

 

[Volkodav]

From todays Australian, looks like the blindingly obvious has finally happened although I note they are still saying Patrol boats and not OPVs and to build another class without open ocean or aviation capability would be IMO another waste of money. Also note that it is now the previous governments fault that the wrong design was ordered by their predecessors, how far back do they want to go because up until 1996 it was intended to replace the Fremantles with corvettes, no mention of that I notice.

Time’s up for navy asylum fleet

CAMERON STEWART |
The Australian |
March 24, 2014 12:00AM

THE navy has lost patience with its faulty $3.5 billion patrol boat fleet and wants to fast-track a new generation of patrol boats with stronger hulls that will not crack up under the strain of border protection duties.

The navy’s 14 Armidale-class patrol boats are riddled with defects after being forced to intercept about 50,000 asylum-seekers during the Rudd/Gillard era, a task they were not designed to do.

The Australian understands that the navy will argue against any attempt to extend the life of its current fleet of aluminium-alloy-hulled vessels beyond their life expectancy of 2019. Instead it will ask Defence Minister David Johnston to fast-track the construction of new steel-hulled patrol boats in a move that could see the Armidales retired early and save more than 1000 jobs under threat in the nation’s struggling naval shipyards.

Navy chief Vice Admiral Ray Griggs this month expressed frustration about the re-emergence of structural cracking in the patrol boats, which caused almost half of the patrol boat fleet to be confined to port early this month.

The problem meant that the navy could not provide the required seven patrol boats to Operation Sovereign Borders.

Navy wants its new patrol boats to have steel hulls, rather than the aluminium-alloy hulls of the Armidale class, to make the boats more resilient to rough seas and poor weather. Defence is expected to make this recommendation to Senator Johnston within months. The influx of asylum-seekers between 2008 and last year forced the patrol boat fleet to operate around the clock in large seas and poor weather to rescue and intercept asylum-seeker boats which, by the middle of last year, were arriving at a rate of a dozen a week.

But the overworking of the boats was compounded by design faults and poor maintenance, leading to arguments between the boat’s builder, Perth-based Austal and the maintenance contractor DMS Marine.

The last straw for the navy was the discovery last month of large new structural cracks near the boats’ engine rooms, making them unseaworthy in rough seas. The same type of cracks were discovered in three patrol boats in August 2012, but no design solution was ever delivered to the navy to prevent the re-emergence of the cracking.

The cracks were subsequently found in all 14 patrol boats although some were more serious than others.

As a result, even those patrol boats currently on border protection duty around Christmas Island are not allowed to operate in seas more than 2.5m high, less than half their design capability.

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said this month: “Maintenance issues such as this are not unexpected when operating a significant number of maritime assets in a wide range of demanding environments. However, the situation has been exacerbated as a result of the previous government’s failure to protect our borders, which saw our navy and Customs and Border Protection run a non-stop water taxi service to Christmas Island for five years.”

The Armidale-class boats, built between 2004 and 2007, were constructed to civilian rather than military specifications, using aluminium rather than steel, making them suitable for routine border protection duties, but not the relentless high seas usage they have had since 2008.

Austal is currently building eight aluminium 58m Cape-class patrol boats for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.

Any decision to bring forward the construction of replacement patrol boats for the navy would put pressure on an already squeezed Defence budget, but could provide relief for the naval shipbuilding industry which is struggling to stay alive as projects start to wind down.

The Williamstown naval dockyard in Melbourne, owned by BAE Systems, is facing the loss of up to 1100 jobs by early next year unless it can secure new work.

 

[Volkodav]

Is this the leak before the announcement:

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Doesn't mention how many though, and has a focus on saving jobs at Williamstown, rather than the increase in capability

Beat me too it

 

[alexsa]

Is this the leak before the announcement:

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Doesn't mention how many though, and has a focus on saving jobs at Williamstown, rather than the increase in capability

Different projects and different roles. Things may become clearer but as there has been no announcement by the Government or DMS the Janes article is all we have.

The Damen OPV would certainly be a good platform for what the RAN do

 

[ASSAIL]

ADMk2 sparked this query in another thread.
Has the RAN ever requested, considered, planned AEW for the LHD TG's? or has the RAAF mafia convinced all that Wedgetails will always be available wherever these ships roam?
Conversely, are we resigned to dependence on the USN for any operation bigger than E.Timor?

 

[oldsig127]

Y

ADMk2 sparked this query in another thread.
Has the RAN ever requested, considered, planned AEW for the LHD TG's? or has the RAAF mafia convinced all that Wedgetails will always be available wherever these ships roam?
Conversely, are we resigned to dependence on the USN for any operation bigger than E.Timor?

What do the US Navy LHDs use for AEW?

OS127

 

[ASSAIL]

Y

What do the US Navy LHDs use for AEW?

OS127

The USN amphib TG's are usually operating as part of a larger TF with organic AEW.

The RAN "could" be operating independently where we would not enjoy 24/7 coverage from the RAAF.
I'm not suggesting that this is a high priority but I simply ask if it has been considered.

 

[King Wally]

No. Bunkerage and magazine arrangements are "wrong". A UAV / UCAV system and an AEW&C helo-based capability (in support of SM-6) are definite possibilities however.

Still, wrong thread for that sort of talk. RAN thread is more appropriate to continue this.

The long term future of the LHD platform and future use of UAV/UCAV's is something that has interested me to be honest. Any chance someone could expand on this idea? Perhaps paint a picture for me?

 

[ADMk2]

The long term future of the LHD platform and future use of UAV/UCAV's is something that has interested me to be honest. Any chance someone could expand on this idea? Perhaps paint a picture for me?

I envisage they will be starting out small. A trial of Scan Eagle or similar in the maritime environment. ADF has an excellent understanding of UAV operations in the land environment but it is still a new concept for RAN (and many other navies) at sea.

From there it will grow exponentially I believe. I tend to think that UAV / UCAV capability from the LHD will probably take a similar form to USN efforts with Fire Scout rather than a fixed wing capability in terms of CTOL capability purely for deck and below deck management issues.

I'm not certain RAN will be keen to mix CTOL UAV ops and large scale, helo based Ops on the same vessel, whereas a Fire Scout type capability (doesn't necessarily have to be that particular platform, but definitely rotary wing) would appear to me to fit neatly into the way the LHD's will eventually do business.

 

[ADMk2]

ADMk2 sparked this query in another thread.
Has the RAN ever requested, considered, planned AEW for the LHD TG's? or has the RAAF mafia convinced all that Wedgetails will always be available wherever these ships roam?
Conversely, are we resigned to dependence on the USN for any operation bigger than E.Timor?

I imagine they've considered it and systems such as the Lockheed Martin Vigilance pod on face value would seem to be an ideal solution to allow for permanent AEW coverage for a taskforce.

Bolting a pair of these onto an MRH-90, MH-60R or perhaps even a UAV based system would hugely improve the defensive capability available to a naval taskforce that doesn't have Wedgetail or other AEW&C / AWACS support.

Working hand in hand with the expanded "bubble" SM-6 will bring, would seem to be exactly what RAN needs to mitigate a lack of organic air, if contemplating independent operations...

Lockheed Martin Offers Bolt-on Multi-Mission Sensor System | Aviation International News

 

[colay]

I envisage they will be starting out small. A trial of Scan Eagle or similar in the maritime environment. ADF has an excellent understanding of UAV operations in the land environment but it is still a new concept for RAN (and many other navies) at sea.

From there it will grow exponentially I believe. I tend to think that UAV / UCAV capability from the LHD will probably take a similar form to USN efforts with Fire Scout rather than a fixed wing capability in terms of CTOL capability purely for deck and below deck management issues.

I'm not certain RAN will be keen to mix CTOL UAV ops and large scale, helo based Ops on the same vessel, whereas a Fire Scout type capability (doesn't necessarily have to be that particular platform, but definitely rotary wing) would appear to me to fit neatly into the way the LHD's will eventually do business.

The folks at DARPA are thinking out of the box with Project TERN. If they can design it to work on LCS, one can envision multiple TERNS roosting on a spacious LHD.

The ultimate goal for a TERN objective system air vehicle is to enable persistent ISR capabilities with payloads of 600 pounds while operating up to 900 nautical miles from a host vessel. The TERN objective system is intended to operate from multiple ship types, including Littoral Combat Ship 2 (LCS-2) class ships, and in elevated sea states.


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/aerovironment-awarded-2-3-million-141000175.html

 

[justsomeaussie]

Next I have 'made up' a couple of ships. The first nuship is the OCV, it's based on the Austal MRV. It's 100m long trimaran with large flight deck, hangar and cargo deck. In additon to OPV role, these would fill a variety of small warship roles including MCM & ASW by using modules. Oz ship building has been busy building these at almost 2 per year to give a decent sized fleet of a dozen by 2022. I thought something based on Austal was most likely choice, however in view of recent events, perhaps I should of picked a Damen OPV instead.
.

Nice models. Re your Stingray OCV, you don't need the CEAFAR mast so high as there is nothing inside it, the entire radar is contained 1 foot behind the radar face. The reason the ANZACs have it so high is for the down angle required to detect supersonic sea skimming missiles. This is a much lessor requirement on an OCV and the LCS already sits high on the water. It's adding a lot of topweight with little advantages beyond increasing the radar horizon a bit.

 

[Trackmaster]

I have a question...regarding what is going on in the southern Ocean.
It appears that HMAS Success has a helicopter hangar.
Is there a helicopter embarked at the moment?
I should imagine it would be particularly useful, considering the current tasking.

 

[StoresBasher]

I have a question...regarding what is going on in the southern Ocean.
It appears that HMAS Success has a helicopter hangar.
Is there a helicopter embarked at the moment?
I should imagine it would be particularly useful, considering the current tasking.

Yes she does have a MRH90 onboard.
Would be very useful when serviceable ...

 

[alexsa]

Nice models. Re your Stingray OCV, you don't need the CEAFAR mast so high as there is nothing inside it, the entire radar is contained 1 foot behind the radar face. The reason the ANZACs have it so high is for the down angle required to detect supersonic sea skimming missiles. This is a much lessor requirement on an OCV and the LCS already sits high on the water. It's adding a lot of topweight with little advantages beyond increasing the radar horizon a bit.

Sorry ........ what. You want to reduce the radar horizon as anti ship missiles are less of a risk to a 100m long OSV (ANZAC being 114m).

I am not a fan of made up vessels as they tend to ignore some engineering realities (but I understand why people indulge), however, your suggestion that the 'down angle' is not required defies logic as a lower radar horizon means less reaction time.

 

[weegee]

From todays Australian, looks like the blindingly obvious has finally happened although I note they are still saying Patrol boats and not OPVs and to build another class without open ocean or aviation capability would be IMO another waste of money. Also note that it is now the previous governments fault that the wrong design was ordered by their predecessors, how far back do they want to go because up until 1996 it was intended to replace the Fremantles with corvettes, no mention of that I notice.

Time’s up for navy asylum fleet

CAMERON STEWART |
The Australian |
March 24, 2014 12:00AM

THE navy has lost patience with its faulty $3.5 billion patrol boat fleet and wants to fast-track a new generation of patrol boats with stronger hulls that will not crack up under the strain of border protection duties.

The navy’s 14 Armidale-class patrol boats are riddled with defects after being forced to intercept about 50,000 asylum-seekers during the Rudd/Gillard era, a task they were not designed to do.

The Australian understands that the navy will argue against any attempt to extend the life of its current fleet of aluminium-alloy-hulled vessels beyond their life expectancy of 2019. Instead it will ask Defence Minister David Johnston to fast-track the construction of new steel-hulled patrol boats in a move that could see the Armidales retired early and save more than 1000 jobs under threat in the nation’s struggling naval shipyards.

Navy chief Vice Admiral Ray Griggs this month expressed frustration about the re-emergence of structural cracking in the patrol boats, which caused almost half of the patrol boat fleet to be confined to port early this month.

The problem meant that the navy could not provide the required seven patrol boats to Operation Sovereign Borders.

Navy wants its new patrol boats to have steel hulls, rather than the aluminium-alloy hulls of the Armidale class, to make the boats more resilient to rough seas and poor weather. Defence is expected to make this recommendation to Senator Johnston within months. The influx of asylum-seekers between 2008 and last year forced the patrol boat fleet to operate around the clock in large seas and poor weather to rescue and intercept asylum-seeker boats which, by the middle of last year, were arriving at a rate of a dozen a week.

But the overworking of the boats was compounded by design faults and poor maintenance, leading to arguments between the boat’s builder, Perth-based Austal and the maintenance contractor DMS Marine.

The last straw for the navy was the discovery last month of large new structural cracks near the boats’ engine rooms, making them unseaworthy in rough seas. The same type of cracks were discovered in three patrol boats in August 2012, but no design solution was ever delivered to the navy to prevent the re-emergence of the cracking.

The cracks were subsequently found in all 14 patrol boats although some were more serious than others.

As a result, even those patrol boats currently on border protection duty around Christmas Island are not allowed to operate in seas more than 2.5m high, less than half their design capability.

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said this month: “Maintenance issues such as this are not unexpected when operating a significant number of maritime assets in a wide range of demanding environments. However, the situation has been exacerbated as a result of the previous government’s failure to protect our borders, which saw our navy and Customs and Border Protection run a non-stop water taxi service to Christmas Island for five years.”

The Armidale-class boats, built between 2004 and 2007, were constructed to civilian rather than military specifications, using aluminium rather than steel, making them suitable for routine border protection duties, but not the relentless high seas usage they have had since 2008.

Austal is currently building eight aluminium 58m Cape-class patrol boats for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.

Any decision to bring forward the construction of replacement patrol boats for the navy would put pressure on an already squeezed Defence budget, but could provide relief for the naval shipbuilding industry which is struggling to stay alive as projects start to wind down.

The Williamstown naval dockyard in Melbourne, owned by BAE Systems, is facing the loss of up to 1100 jobs by early next year unless it can secure new work.

Hey Guys,

I was thinking about this the other day. If they do go ahead it will be awesome but some questions came to mind. Surely they would not be replacing the armidales with the Damen 2400 as listed previously. She is a BIG step up. Yes she can carry an MRH90 or a seahawk but she is a big girl.

Obviously they would not be replaced on a 1-1 basis would they? When I was on the Damen website I saw a smaller version I think it was the 1200 that can still carry a chopper but only a small one like a seasprite! So my question is when purchasing/building a dependable suitable OPV what is the design requirements this time around apart from the whole universal modular setup ? are we limited by what choppers the RAN has available for deployment? or that is a secondary element as they would not have a chopper 100% of the time anyway if at all?

 

[protoplasm]

Hey Guys,

I was thinking about this the other day. If they do go ahead it will be awesome but some questions came to mind. Surely they would not be replacing the armidales with the Damen 2400 as listed previously. She is a BIG step up. Yes she can carry an MRH90 or a seahawk but she is a big girl.

Obviously they would not be replaced on a 1-1 basis would they? When I was on the Damen website I saw a smaller version I think it was the 1200 that can still carry a chopper but only a small one like a seasprite! So my question is when purchasing/building a dependable suitable OPV what is the design requirements this time around apart from the whole universal modular setup ? are we limited by what choppers the RAN has available for deployment? or that is a secondary element as they would not have a chopper 100% of the time anyway if at all?

I'd always assumed that if you bothered having a helicopter landing pad on a ship it should be able to handle up to 10t MTOW choppers, i.e. H-60 family etc. If we are going to get some larger vessels for ocean patrol they really should be able to handle the choppers that we currently have in service.

 

[t68]

Hey Guys,

I was thinking about this the other day. If they do go ahead it will be awesome but some questions came to mind. Surely they would not be replacing the armidales with the Damen 2400 as listed previously. She is a BIG step up. Yes she can carry an MRH90 or a seahawk but she is a big girl.

Obviously they would not be replaced on a 1-1 basis would they? When I was on the Damen website I saw a smaller version I think it was the 1200 that can still carry a chopper but only a small one like a seasprite! So my question is when purchasing/building a dependable suitable OPV what is the design requirements this time around apart from the whole universal modular setup ? are we limited by what choppers the RAN has available for deployment? or that is a secondary element as they would not have a chopper 100% of the time anyway if at all?

Well so far nothing has been confirmed s far as I can tell, but going by the article the other day they are only talking one as an aviation training ship.

But as Volk said the blindly obvious has hit them smack in the middle of the head. IMHO till they actually get some vessel in the water working they still have a requirement for inshore work as well as the offshore stuff depending on the material state of the ACPB once the new vessels arrive the may just go from the current 14 down to 6 or 8 excess vessels cannibalized for parts and 8 new build off shore vessels should be more than enough for the task at hand remember these are for the offshore work and the Cape and remaining Armidales for inshore

It would be interesting to see if thes new ships could be modified for the Southern Ocean and be ice strengthened turn ADV into dive/survey support vessel if it can be done.