Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.
t68 said:
Talk about hitting the nail on the head, defence should be non-political and just get the job done to our best interests
Click to expand...

The sad thing is what I wrote could just as easily have applied to the Gillard government, Sydney base ideologues and WA mafia screwing over the rest of the country, by:
a) Ignoring the needs or the nation as a whole
b) Concentrating on what they thought would get them the most votes in Sydney's west, and
c) Looking after the parochial wants of a particular state.

The attitude that subs need to be built in SA because of jobs is bad enough, pushing to kill off a strategic capability so part of it (Full Cycle Dockings) can be set up in another state is insanity.
 
ASSAIL said:
Volk, what are the general consequences of Navantia SA being brought into the management/supervisory structure on the AWD project?
On first hearing it my thoughts were nothing but positive, something which should have occurred from day 1
Click to expand...

They have some brilliant people, some were even head hunted early in the project ( apparently, like hires from BAE/Tenix, TKMS, Thales and NG etc. and secondments from BIW, and LM, they instantly became incompetent on joining ASC). I wasn't overly impressed with some from Spain, things they knew that they didn't pass on in the hope we wouldn't notice but apologetic when we did ( I actually read this as their management told them not to tell us to save face).

I am suspicious of the motives of many of these companies as they (Navantia, Raytheon, BAE) were as much, if not more, to blame for the projects delays and issues as ASC. In fact, Raytheon was actually behind a lot of the management problems and infighting on the project, especially after government cost cutting hamstrung government owned ASC and government controlled DMO, they used the reorganizations to seize control of as many functions as possible and make them fit their concept of doing things. Navantia, whichever way you look at it, are responsible for the design and virtually every problem, delay or rework associated with it.

Probably should add that it doesn't surprise me that Raytheon is blowing wind up Cormanns and Johnstons backsides, as they along with BAE were backgrounding Johnston, deliberately undermining ASC. They were both positioning for a bigger slice of a shrinking pie and playing into the rhetoric of "ASC can't build a canoe", as well as diverting as much well deserved blame from themselves. Stupid really as the political agenda wasn't to reassign work in Australia but to move it off shore.
 
Last edited:
ASSAIL said:
The future submarine project: one step, two step

I've just read the linked article by Mark Thompson and Andrew Davies which discusses how we should deal with the SEA 1000 CEP results.
Even though they condemn the lack of utility in the process, the conclusion they reach makes sense to me, which is words to the effect that - we must decide whether we want a strategic partner or an industrial partner in the submarine process. If the answer is strategic, then cut to the core, stop faffing around and get on with finessing the Japanese submission and build it.

If there was a like button for ASPI articles I would have used it.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link
A very well worded overview of SEA 1000 by Thompson and Davies.
I wonder which path we will take for a strategic and/or industrial partner?
Big decisions
Regards S
 
Does anyone know where I could find any kind of RAN memorabilia from the 1970s or 1980s? My parents met in the Navy in the late 70s, and have a huge amount of nostalgia for that era. I'm trying to find things related to it that I can give them as surprise gifts. Had a look on eBay and Etsy but not much to see.
 
Sculder said:
Does anyone know where I could find any kind of RAN memorabilia from the 1970s or 1980s? My parents met in the Navy in the late 70s, and have a huge amount of nostalgia for that era. I'm trying to find things related to it that I can give them as surprise gifts. Had a look on eBay and Etsy but not much to see.
Click to expand...

Would suggest you find out where they served ? Bases, ships etc. Most bases and ships has associations, websites and facebook pages that you can search for and make contact with

Cheers
 
Sculder said:
Does anyone know where I could find any kind of RAN memorabilia from the 1970s or 1980s? My parents met in the Navy in the late 70s, and have a huge amount of nostalgia for that era. I'm trying to find things related to it that I can give them as surprise gifts. Had a look on eBay and Etsy but not much to see.
Click to expand...
Try this Facebook page , it's Aussie based. Also try the local RSL who may be able to put you in touch with some ex RAN types who might be able to help.
 
'The characteristic is secrecy': Behind the scenes on Japan's state-of-the-art submarine - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

It's a friendly fluff piece on the Japanese option. Not much in the way of information, but it looks like someone is stepping up the marketing!

I also think it's interesting they specifically address maintenance-
"Investment is required on the Australian side and workers have to be created who have the skills," Mr Yamauchi said.

"If not, then it's going to be difficult to build."

Mr Yamauchi warned unless capacity is built up, budget blow-outs and maintenance issues could plague Australia's next generation of submarines.
Click to expand...

Given the bad rep the Collins got, I guess it's in everyone's interests to make sure proper investment on keeping the things running this time. :)
 
Last time with the Collins, we had the conservative parties rubbishing the Collins from the word go as they were an ALP decision to build them. This time that wont happen, as it is a coalition decision to build them. (although if we get 12 credit must go to Rudd from all those years ago).
 
vonnoobie said:
Looks like the RAN will be getting some CCPB's as stop gaps

Shipbuilder Austal gets $63m contract | SBS News

Though if I'm reading this correctly the NAB (National Australia Bank) is the one buying them?

Either things are getting that bad the RAN has no choice but to go with the CCPB or they aren't as bad a boat as some have claimed them to be.
Click to expand...


There's been plenty of discussion here about the arrangement with Border Force.
In order to allow full remediation of the ACPB fleet through extended refits and to replace the hull lost when Bundeburg was destroyed, the RAN has borrowed 2 Capes from Customs. These will return to them when the navy receives the two new hulls from Austral. The refits are substantial and will take a number of years, these are a quick fix gap filler in order to maintain capacity and as they are leased they can be returned when no longer needed. They may well remain in use until SEA1180 eventuates given the long term structural defects with the ACPBs but the flexible arrangement seems smart policy.
 
ASSAIL said:
There's been plenty of discussion here about the arrangement with Border Force.
In order to allow full remediation of the ACPB fleet through extended refits and to replace the hull lost when Bundeburg was destroyed, the RAN has borrowed 2 Capes from Customs. These will return to them when the navy receives the two new hulls from Austral. The refits are substantial and will take a number of years, these are a quick fix gap filler in order to maintain capacity and as they are leased they can be returned when no longer needed. They may well remain in use until SEA1180 eventuates given the long term structural defects with the ACPBs but the flexible arrangement seems smart policy.
Click to expand...

Thanks mate, saved me saying it. The new builds will essntially be copies of the CCPB but I suspect some of the equipment will be different (Comms for instance) and the some Border Force specific arrangements may be omitted. The interesting part wil be what happens to them after the three years is up (if they are not retained).

As indicated in the article these are not owned by the government (in a legal sense) and will be 'trading' ships once the charter is up. It is obvious that these can only be used by an enforcement agency as they could not rely on the exclusion under the MLC2006 as non-government ships.
 
ASSAIL said:
There's been plenty of discussion here about the arrangement with Border Force.
In order to allow full remediation of the ACPB fleet through extended refits and to replace the hull lost when Bundeburg was destroyed, the RAN has borrowed 2 Capes from Customs. These will return to them when the navy receives the two new hulls from Austral. The refits are substantial and will take a number of years, these are a quick fix gap filler in order to maintain capacity and as they are leased they can be returned when no longer needed. They may well remain in use until SEA1180 eventuates given the long term structural defects with the ACPBs but the flexible arrangement seems smart policy.
Click to expand...

To clarify

Will this be an eventual total of 10 Capes built, of which the RAN will borrow 2 Capes now and recieve two new builds later. As I read it Border force will receive all ten Capes in the late teens making their customs marine unit both a stepup in numbers and ship size over the older Bay class fleet. I wonder if these numbers may increase further. OPV contract and build time line ? BY whom and which State? Austal's future and WA political pull; also the ebb and flow in demand in policing our maritime border.
Maybe Border force may become / evolve into a form of coast guard with the RAN progressively moving away from inshore constabulatory duties.
I am also curious as to why the two Capes are being used by the RAN now and not border force.

Regards S
 
Last edited:
Just some quick number crunching would suggest that the RAN will run out of Armidale patrol boats long before they have any significant number of OPVs in service.

The first steel cut in 2018 might see the first of the OPVs enter service in the early 2020s
 
hauritz said:
Just some quick number crunching would suggest that the RAN will run out of Armidale patrol boats long before they have any significant number of OPVs in service.

The first steel cut in 2018 might see the first of the OPVs enter service in the early 2020s
Click to expand...

It's all about manning. Border force are restricted because they run under AMSA manning rules and the step up in size and power to Capes has left them short of fully qualifies staff although they have some special dispensation whereby when they travel offshore they must stick to certain corridors.
To overcome this temporary shortfall whilst qualifications are gained they have done two things; first they have loaned the RAN 2 Capes and secondly, they have recommissioned/kept in commission 2 Bays for use in Torres Str.

On the other hand, Navy has more crews than boats available.

Problem solved.
 
The Capes are better boats than the Armidales, also being newer they will be in much better condition. From what have seen they will be easier to maintain, also, courtesy of thicker framing, they should be more durable and require less expensive and time consuming hull work.

However, while an improvement not all issues have been addressed, stern tubes for example, and they will still be more expensive and difficult to maintain than a comparable steel or composite hulled design. They will also have the same conceptional limitations as the Armidales through their lack of aviation, or even drone facilities, let alone any sort of multi-mission deck or any ability to operate as anything other than an inshore PB.
 
Volkodav said:
The Capes are better boats than the Armidales, also being newer they will be in much better condition. From what have seen they will be easier to maintain, also, courtesy of thicker framing, they should be more durable and require less expensive and time consuming hull work.

However, while an improvement not all issues have been addressed, stern tubes for example, and they will still be more expensive and difficult to maintain than a comparable steel or composite hulled design. They will also have the same conceptional limitations as the Armidales through their lack of aviation, or even drone facilities, let alone any sort of multi-mission deck or any ability to operate as anything other than an inshore PB.
Click to expand...

Thanks everyone for your response

Yes the Maths suggest there may be a shortfall in hull numbers for constabulatory duties if the OPV's are slow to come into service. Will be interesting if futher numbers of Capes are ordered.
Assail thanks for the clarity on the staffing side. It was a guess only on my be half that
border force may not have the crews.Will be interested if the personel side of border force maritime unit is increased in the future. Is there a problem getting crew or is the challenge just that it takes time to train people to fullfill the required positions to fully crew the increase number of Cape class boats.
Volk you may want to help on stern tubes?
Just a question re aviation on ships / boats.What would be the smallest vessel by size / weight you could comfortably land a Nh-90 sized helicopter (not interested in a smaller helicopter). Just a lilly pad not worried about hanger / refuel / maint? Is a 50to 60m, 700t sized vessel just too small.
Just wondering if a inshore vessel with a helicopter platform is practical or just not realistic.
Regards S
 
SouthernSky said:
No worries. Will check in tomorrow for a look. :)
Click to expand...

Put a call out to people I know involved with trials while she was out on her jolly - unfort no-one got back to me.

crapping me right off as I'm normally super careful before posting and have proof of life ready just in case I get a challenge

I've come up short this time :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top