Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Joe Black

Active Member
Understand, but I thought Harpoon Blk II as well as Kongsberg JSM have land attack capabilities, thus I am thinking they might suffice rather than Tomahawks. JSM can also be air launched and ship launched, which could make a perfect sense for ADF to acquire for the tri- services. Of course, if money could be found, won't argue about having TLAM either.

On the note about all these news report on Soryu, it is not official, I won't be holding my breath that we are going totally offshore built. I still hope that we do end up getting a few built offshore and have the tech transfer and license build the rest, kinda like a 50/50 split.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Understand, but I thought Harpoon Blk II as well as Kongsberg JSM have land attack capabilities, thus I am thinking they might suffice rather than Tomahawks. JSM can also be air launched and ship launched, which could make a perfect sense for ADF to acquire for the tri- services. Of course, if money could be found, won't argue about having TLAM either.
Yes but the JSM or Harpoon doesn't have the range or the warhead capability of the TLAM so they are completely different birds.
 
Last edited:

t68

Well-Known Member
Its beyond normal chat levels.

watch the ABC tonight for the Govts view on Defence Proc and Oz industry
You seem to be in the know in regards to submarines GF, do those numbers stack up to scrutiny for a home build up to $80 Billion AUD does that seem right?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
You seem to be in the know in regards to submarines GF, do those numbers stack up to scrutiny for a home build up to $80 Billion AUD does that seem right?
Its really far too early to speculate on anything at the moment.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
...
Basically we did it right once and then having seen this to be an efficient, competitive and cost effective way to acquire ships for the RAN decided never to do it again, reinvented the wheel and stuffed it up. It would actually have been quite easy to follow the ANZAC build out of Williamstown immediately with a class of air defence frigates or AWDs instead of upgrading the FFGs and subsequently the ANZACs.

The German Type 123 Brandenburg class frigates for example were contemporaries (slightly earlier build actually) of the ANZACs. They were similar enough to, but larger and more modern than the MEKO 200 design to have fit seamlessly into Williamstown. Being larger than the ANZACs they could have quite easily been upgraded into air defence ships using a variation of the USN NTU upgrade combat system developed for their non AEGIS cruisers and destroyers and also used by South Korea in their KDX II destroyers. This would have provided a perfectly good enough solution with more hulls equipped with near AEGIS level of capability....

Ah what could have been.
Gawd, yes!
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Its really far too early to speculate on anything at the moment.
What I want to know is how do the government think they are going to be able to afford to buy all this stuff from overseas when tax receipts crash and welfare payments go through the roof due to half the people currently employed in high paying manufacturing jobs being made redundant over the next several years?

All the carry on about debt and deficits completely misses the point that increasing unemployment is a double whammy, it reduces tax receipts, particularly when it is net tax payers loosing their jobs, and then they end up on welfare whether they find a new lower paying job or nothing at all. Very very few people from manufacturing are ever able to find suitable work that pays anywhere near what they were on previously.

Also with automotive gone and now ship / sub building under pressure, who does the government think is going to train all the trades and give that first job and critical mass to all the engineering graduates the economy needs? It used to be government departments that trained the lions share but this hasn't been the case for a couple of decades with manufacturing taking on the load, now with those industries dying where are Australians going to be trained?

I think we are led by morons, maybe its time for their mates in small business to pick up the load and contribute to training people and increase wages to improve tax receipts.
 

Trackmaster

Member
What I want to know is how do the government think they are going to be able to afford to buy all this stuff from overseas when tax receipts crash and welfare payments go through the roof due to half the people currently employed in high paying manufacturing jobs being made redundant over the next several years?

All the carry on about debt and deficits completely misses the point that increasing unemployment is a double whammy, it reduces tax receipts, particularly when it is net tax payers loosing their jobs, and then they end up on welfare whether they find a new lower paying job or nothing at all. Very very few people from manufacturing are ever able to find suitable work that pays anywhere near what they were on previously.

Also with automotive gone and now ship / sub building under pressure, who does the government think is going to train all the trades and give that first job and critical mass to all the engineering graduates the economy needs? It used to be government departments that trained the lions share but this hasn't been the case for a couple of decades with manufacturing taking on the load, now with those industries dying where are Australians going to be trained?

I think we are led by morons, maybe its time for their mates in small business to pick up the load and contribute to training people and increase wages to improve tax receipts.
Shouldn't the focus be on what is best for the RAN?
Best equipment...best time scale....best for the taxpayers?
And the opposition leader talking to the bruvvers in Adelaide today was embarrassing. Jingoistic rubbish.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Shouldn't the focus be on what is best for the RAN?
Best equipment...best time scale....best for the taxpayers?
And the opposition leader talking to the bruvvers in Adelaide today was embarrassing. Jingoistic rubbish.
I watched his press conference after that crap and it was embarrassing how little he knew about shipbuilding. It was the most political partisan BS which added nothing and all he could repeat was that the govt said one thing before the election and have lied. One press question suggested that the AWDs were 2 years late and way over budget so what did he think? It elicited a 3 word reply, jobs jobs jobs.
So much for considered acquisitions. I was depressed about how little he even knew or cared other than "everything will be built in Australia. Poor old David Feney had to help him out and must have been appalled at his incompetence.
 

Joe Black

Active Member
I think it is important to have a shipbuilding industry but not at all cost. It has been discussed in details the problems we face in Australia, not necessary just a problem with the unions, but also management team lacking in managing complex projects and the lack of skilled workers, etc.

I think it is time the Abbott govt look at the problem holistically. We need to sort out all these issues and get Australian building stuff using a sustainable model and within reasonable cost. Unfortunately, it is hard for a 3 year term govt to take a really long term view at things.

I do hope some of the boats will be license built at home, but only when the ASC and the union are committed to building them within project schedule and cost. A 50/50 split between Jap and local build will give ASC/Union the chance to prove their capabilities.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Shouldn't the focus be on what is best for the RAN?
Best equipment...best time scale....best for the taxpayers?
And the opposition leader talking to the bruvvers in Adelaide today was embarrassing. Jingoistic rubbish.
What the hell is a bruvvers?
 

phreeky

Active Member
Shouldn't the focus be on what is best for the RAN?
At a high level, far from it - the functions of the RAN are a means to an end.

From a practical level, a stronger economy allows more resources to be directed to the RAN and therefore allows it to service Australia's requirements better.

If it's to work in that way however, then it's imperative that such project options are evaluated using true costs. The $x versus $y doesn't work unless it includes a way of quantifying things like:
- Capability differences between the options
- Economic impacts (and therefore ADF purchasing power) in the future due to workforce/welfare requirements, skill carry-over to other industries, etc
- Economic impacts in the future due to political and trade changes (i.e. relationship with China)
- I'm sure somebody smarter than me can think of more

Can you imagine trying to quantify that sort of stuff? Impacts to the economy can make $80b over a number of years look like a drop in the ocean. Consider that we've had governments that throw billions at schemes just to employ people and achieve no direct outcome at the end, and there'd be a lot of economists that would say it was a good decision.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
the rest of the interviews from govt were on Lateline

that muppet shorten was stoking up an anti-japanese response just for theatre

what a moron.

its his party which contributed to some of this, so for him to become a revivalist on that truck was ridiculous
 

phreeky

Active Member
the rest of the interviews from govt were on Lateline

that muppet shorten was stoking up an anti-japanese response just for theatre

what a moron.
Both sides of politics are an embarrassment when in opposition - it's all about winning votes. I can't say I'm a Shorten fan, but thankfully both sides also act a whole lot less like morons (somewhat!) once they're in power and actually have to make decisions and consider the implications - and it's this reasoning that the "broken promises" crap always comes up when they realise they've made dumb promises.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I watched his press conference after that crap and it was embarrassing how little he knew about shipbuilding. It was the most political partisan BS which added nothing and all he could repeat was that the govt said one thing before the election and have lied. One press question suggested that the AWDs were 2 years late and way over budget so what did he think? It elicited a 3 word reply, jobs jobs jobs.
So much for considered acquisitions. I was depressed about how little he even knew or cared other than "everything will be built in Australia. Poor old David Feney had to help him out and must have been appalled at his incompetence.
The sad thing is the previous government stretched the schedule to save money in the short term ( though increasing costs overall they were just pushed to the next year) through not having to hire and train the additional planned work force required for concurrent construction and outfit of the three ships as originally planned. Some areas were running with about a third and others with half or two thirds of the planned man power, the work was getting done but it was taking longer and creating bottle necks. This was back when they slashed defence and everything else in their failed attempt to achieve a surplus. Add to the fact BAE stuffed the keel blocks of ship one, forcing a reallocation of work and requiring ASC to strip and rework them after delivery in addition to their planned work load, I am actually surprised the project isn't in worse shape.

What is happening to shipbuilding in this country at the moment is the equivalent to bashing and robbing the victim of a hit run car accident. The mistakes were political (both sides being guilty) but none of those responsible are admitting fault let alone trying to fix the mess they created, its all just, along with the blame, been put back onto the people trying to do their job.

If in any doubt of this just read every ANAO audit of every defence project started in the last 20 years. The vast majority , no matter the service, the industry, the type of equipment, or the nationality of the supplier have been behind schedule and over budget. The common thread has been poor political decision making and planning by political advisers and politicians who lack the experience and background required to make a decision, choosing to ignore the advice provided by relevant experts. This leaves those working on the project with an uphill battle to meet unbelievably optimistic schedules, inadequate budget and facilities and grossly underestimated risk. Too many decisions made on off the cuff, against the advice of professionals from defence and industry, setting the project up for failure. Helicopters, torpedoes, air defence command systems, patrol boats (aluminium FFS, how stupid!). Some projects are so poorly thought out they lead to precisely nowhere even when the way forward is glaringly obvious to most with any working knowledge what so ever, ANZAC WIP, replacement tanker (HMAS Sirius). Some are even simple MOTS buys that never get sorted dur to indecision and poorly written requirements, SPGs, AGLs for example. Then there is the unnecessary poor conceived upgrades that end up costing as much as a new replacement, M-113, FFG UP, Success double hulling. The sad truth is, AWD and Collins has nothing on these other projects in terms of the magnitude of the stuff up, its just that they are big projects in the public eye so head will role to protect the guilty. Think yes minister.

It seems the more layers of compliance and governance the government puts on defence procurement to prevent stuff ups the more likely the government them selves will circumvent their own procedure to do what they want and damn the consequences. the thing is by the time the magnitude of the stuff up is realised those responsible have moved onto other things and will blame whoever is on the project when the news breaks. I fear the new frigates and subs thought bubbles will be as big a disaster as the projects that preceded them.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Shouldn't the focus be on what is best for the RAN?
Best equipment...best time scale....best for the taxpayers?
And the opposition leader talking to the bruvvers in Adelaide today was embarrassing. Jingoistic rubbish.
If the whole of SA and Victoria are on welfare because there are no jobs and the big (in particular the multinational) miners no longer have to pay a super profits tax, just as they are about to hit full production and maximum profits, more and more companies are sending jobs off shore and minimising tax, just who is actually going to pay tax so the government can afford to buy gear overseas? Buying ships and subs overseas is very short sited, it will save money upfront but will cause structural and financial issue for the economy that will last for decades and cost far more to reverse in future when a new government decided to restart local shipbuilding.

It will happen, it always does. Hawke didn't order a single ship to be built in Australia for years then in the 90s ordered local construction of two FFGs, eight ANZACs, and six submarines with options for two more subs and plans for a replacement for the DDGs and FFGs as well as a class of corvettes to replace the patrol boats. They rebuilt the shipbuilding from almost nothing to the point that ships were being delivered to specification, ahead of schedule and below budget. If the corvettes, air defence frigates and extra subs had been ordered this reborn, competitive industry would have had a continuous flow of work to sustain it indefinitely.

In 1996 Howard was elected and as with Hawke before him did not order a single new ship for eight years. Projects were cancelled, work forces dispersed, the industry, so expensively and successfully built up in the 90s withered and died. Then in 2004 Howard started rebuilding the industry again as it was seen as a strategic necessity, new patrol boats were the first cab off the rank, then the AWD and LHDs. The industry had shrunk so much that the LHD hulls had to be fabricated in Spain instead of locally and for some bizarre reason rather than building the AWDs in Williamstown that had done so well on the ANZACs a new yard was built in Adelaide and a new work force assembled and trained. Then the government changed again.

In comes Rudd in 2007, promises the world, 12 new subs, 20 new OCVs, six LCH replacements, new AORs and hints of a fourth AWD but not one ship ordered before he is knifed by Gillard. For years later (years I dearly want to forget) the ASC has been reviewed and reorganised half to death, the defence budget has been slashed, spending on the AWD has been slashed with many people made redundant and the project slowed to save money and still not one new ship ordered, two terms and six years and not one ship. Then the government changed.

New government, new broom and unfortunately the way things are going it looks like the industry will be killed off all together as it is now industries fault, not governments. No new orders, perhaps none for the life of this government but then again that's what everyone though of Howard and he ended up building a new shipyard and ordering the largest and most powerful ships the RAN has evr had from local yards.

Shipbuilding will always come back, it is a strategic necessity, it just takes new governments a term or two to see that and start rebuilding. The irony is if they just ordered the ships the RAN needs in a sensible and sustainable manner then there is plenty of work to keep local industry thriving and improving, delivering more for less as was seen with the ANZACs. Instead we see the industry wither an die only to be rebuilt at great expense later, it is almost a twenty year cycle of death and rebirth, growing, maturing then being killed only to be born again several years later.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
There seems to be much angst over decisions yet to be made.
I understand decisions on Collins LOT/replacement, replacement ANZACs, further DDG work and patrol forces are yet to be made so until we see that and make some assessments of the capacity of industry to handle the work, a calming coffee may be in order.

My assessment of our Defence Minister is that he is a considered politician, a veteran who is unlikely to be rash and apart from some early idiotic comments about Austal/LCS when in opposition, has been taking advice from his professionals.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Shipbuilding will always come back, it is a strategic necessity, it just takes new governments a term or two to see that and start rebuilding. The irony is if they just ordered the ships the RAN needs in a sensible and sustainable manner then there is plenty of work to keep local industry thriving and improving, delivering more for less as was seen with the ANZACs. Instead we see the industry wither an die only to be rebuilt at great expense later, it is almost a twenty year cycle of death and rebirth, growing, maturing then being killed only to be born again several years later.
I'm becoming more pessimistic, given that both sides have been doing a pretty good job at killing manufacturing of all types (even highly profitable ones) its an ideological view that manufacturing is dirty, parasitic and unproductive. People in this industry would be better served by working in the "services industry". Lawyers, accountants what not. These calls have been getting stronger over the years and manufacturing is becoming harder and harder.

Creating some sort of idiocracy society. They believe that higher levels of consumerism and lower levels of production will increase the efficiency of the entire economy (essentially through magical unexplainable special economic concepts) and lead us to untold riches.

I am sure there are those in power that think by ordering submarines from Japan, we are actually creating a burden for Japans economy, lowering its efficiency.
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Volk, I hear what youre saying regarding buildlng the subs locally.
But remember, that we co designed the Collins, and built them here. That went like clock work right?
as good as Collins are now, (pretty good) they wernt when we recieved them. They were very late, and way over budget, infact they are so modified, that they already should be known as Collins 11, and the new ships as Collins 111.
If we decide to build Collins 111 in Australia , to save a couple of thousand jobs, they will be deleyed, they would need to be designed, and built, ASC would need lead time to prepare, I can easily see them not entering service till the 2030, s and costing way more than advertised. Then those jobs will need to saved again....
Why didnt labour do something when they were in power, instead of trying to work with the greens. As bad as this Govt is, they are still better than the alternative. Much better.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Volk, I hear what youre saying regarding buildlng the subs locally.
But remember, that we co designed the Collins, and built them here. That went like clock work right?
as good as Collins are now, (pretty good) they wernt when we recieved them. They were very late, and way over budget, infact they are so modified, that they already should be known as Collins 11, and the new ships as Collins 111.
If we decide to build Collins 111 in Australia , to save a couple of thousand jobs, they will be deleyed, they would need to be designed, and built, ASC would need lead time to prepare, I can easily see them not entering service till the 2030, s and costing way more than advertised. Then those jobs will need to saved again....
Why didnt labour do something when they were in power, instead of trying to work with the greens. As bad as this Govt is, they are still better than the alternative. Much better.
The Collins were built within 10% of their original budget IIRC. The problem was that there were deficiencies with so much of the design and choice of systems/system integration that its taken their entire lives to rectify and we're not there yet.
The maintenance and reliability issues remain (has been better recently) and will never go away entirely so if we decide to extend their lives through to the 2030's this drain on the budget will continue without major surgery to the back end and then it becomes a cost effective issue.
My hope is that it will be decided to can the upgrades and let them retire gracefully and replace them with ????? but soon.
The shipyard productivity problems at ASC are improving but are still well over the accepted norm of $60/tonne. They are down from $150/tonne. However I'm optimistic that the labour force can replicate the Williamstown effort with the Anzacs and therefore there would be no excuse for building skimmers offshore.
I'm not so positive about building submarines and skimmers concurrently under the same management.
A more logical and best choice solution IMHO would be to let work on the DDG's continue under whoever(BAE?) but sell off the SM construction business to Mitsubishi or Kawasaki and use their design, supervision and management using Australian workers to build Soryu 2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top