Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Aussie Digger]

It wouldn't make sense for the Tiger to carry a grand piano either for obvious reasons. Given that the ARH may be operated off the new LHD's to support amphibious ops can you elaborate on why the Pinguin would not make sense?

Because we won't have any by the time the LHD's are in-service. The new RAN maritime helo is likely to have a dedicate anti-surface capability and these can be operated off the LHD's as well...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

There is no point carrying a Penguin or Harpoon on a Tiger because it lacks the kind of long range sensor (radar) needed to find targets in these weapons range potential.

The new FNACS helicopter that will replace all RAN helicopters next decade will have two anti-surface warfare (ASuW) configurations (plus ASW and maritime logistics) and be able to swap between them rapidly. One ASuW configuration will be optimised for close engagement and the other standoff egagement. The close configuration will probably include weapons like the 12.7mm M3M machinegun, 2.75" (70mm) rockets and the Hellfire missile. The standoff configuration will have some sort of long range guided missile. But unlike the 1980s and 1990s driven requirements that lead to helicopters carrying Penguins where the likely target was a Soviet destroyer this missile will probably have man in the loop capability and multimode sensors. I would expect something like the IMI Delilah or the Raytheon PAMS (NLOS-LS).

 

[the road runner]

Points taken Aussie Digger and Abraham Gubler,thanx.

The RAN has no modern anti shipping missile,for naval helicopters, in its invertory? Is this an issue for the RAN?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Points taken Aussie Digger and Abraham Gubler,thanx.

The RAN has no modern anti shipping missile,for naval helicopters, in its invertory? Is this an issue for the RAN?

They have no old ones either. All RAN frigates can carry Harpoons after the ANZAC upgrade. So the helicopter can provide targeting data for the ship launcher Harpoon. The main fire power problem for the Seahawks is going after swarm boats. There is a M3M refit program underway but really something with a bit more clout and standoff like laser guided missiles (DAGRS and Hellfire) would be much safer. Especially considering some of those swarm boats out there are carrying VSHORADS and guns of 12.7mm, 14.5mm, 20mm and 23mm calibre.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The order for the 4th AWD is a long way off. Given that they could do a few things to extend the build period (Frigate hulls, etc) while the AWD are being built it may not be the best thing to build the 4th AWD as the 4 ship. If the frigates use the same hulls it may be worthwhile to build several frigates and then build a AWD with later and improve electronics or build more frigates (depending on how capable they are).

This would also help offset block obsolence somewhat depending on the actual build order.

The helo situation seems to be a bit of a mess. NH-90's in a few varients and perhaps additional naval Tigers (?) might be the go.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The Navy actually has a plan to provide a future aviation capability. Its called Future Naval Aviation Combat System (FNACS) and half of it is currently approved in the Defence Capability Plan as Air 9000 Phase 8. This will acquire a new single type of naval helicopter to replace the entire current fleet (Seahawks, MRH90 MSH, Super Seasprite gap and squirrels and AW109s). This helicopter will be modular and be able to be quickly reconfigured between maritime support (logistics), ASW, ASuW Close and ASuW Standoff. Likely bidders for this competition are the NH 90 NFH and MH-60R though as the specification is developed in detail it could even see a bigger helicopters required like the CH-148 Cyclone. The second part of FNACS is a naval UAV.

There is no requirement for a naval attack helicopter as there are no such helicopters and after the Super Seasprite Naval Aviation is committed to never acquiring anything other than an off the shelf helicopters – the FNACS helo must be off the shelf. Also what is the point? Even naval helicopter ASuW Close missions do not full match the customisation of the attack helicopter. Army will become quite customed to flying Tigers from the LHDs and if a littoral gunship is needed they can fill the role in concert with the sensors of the naval helicopter and UAV.

 

[Navor86]

There is no point carrying a Penguin or Harpoon on a Tiger because it lacks the kind of long range sensor (radar) needed to find targets in these weapons range potential.

The new FNACS helicopter that will replace all RAN helicopters next decade will have two anti-surface warfare (ASuW) configurations (plus ASW and maritime logistics) and be able to swap between them rapidly. One ASuW configuration will be optimised for close engagement and the other standoff egagement. The close configuration will probably include weapons like the 12.7mm M3M machinegun, 2.75" (70mm) rockets and the Hellfire missile. The standoff configuration will have some sort of long range guided missile. But unlike the 1980s and 1990s driven requirements that lead to helicopters carrying Penguins where the likely target was a Soviet destroyer this missile will probably have man in the loop capability and multimode sensors. I would expect something like the IMI Delilah or the Raytheon PAMS (NLOS-LS).

For how many Helos is this Requirement?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

For how many Helos is this Requirement?

That's the one or two billion dollar question. The FNACS paper signed off by the Chief of Navy avoided a direct number because it depends a lot on the actual capabilities of the particular helicopter. But the rule of thumb presented by the then Commander of NAFEG was three helicopters for every shipbboard flight at sea which means 32-36 total helicopters.

 

[PeterM]

I am under the impression that the F-100(AWD) hull,minus AEGIS and other equipment, will be the next frigate hulls for for Australia.(i have no link,but read it in DT magazine)

rossfrb_1, the NH90 will probabley be chosen as our next RAN helicopter(see AIR 6000) but NATO navies will be the first to recieve the NH 90 naval helicopter.

I would like to see the Tiger ARH intergrated with an ASM like Penguine/Harpoon(but dont know if these ASM could be intergrated with the Tiger:unknown)I wonder could this be done????? I am thinking the Harpoon will be to heavy and large but Penguine may fit???

The F-100 hull would make some sense, particularly as we would already have the production facilities and experience already established, providing considerab;e cost savings and exconomies of scale. It could potentially keep the production line rolling allowing for the option of building a 4th AWD at some point in the future.

The F-100 Hull is quite alot bigger than the Anzac is that needed? This would make it similar in size to the German F125 frigate at 5,500t
Or would it likely be a slightly smaller hull (perhaps closer to 4,000t than the AWD's 5,800t)

What kind of senor and weapon fit to people think would be considered for the Anzac replacement?

 

[PeterM]

The Navy actually has a plan to provide a future aviation capability. Its called Future Naval Aviation Combat System (FNACS) and half of it is currently approved in the Defence Capability Plan as Air 9000 Phase 8. This will acquire a new single type of naval helicopter to replace the entire current fleet (Seahawks, MRH90 MSH, Super Seasprite gap and squirrels and AW109s). This helicopter will be modular and be able to be quickly reconfigured between maritime support (logistics), ASW, ASuW Close and ASuW Standoff. Likely bidders for this competition are the NH 90 NFH and MH-60R though as the specification is developed in detail it could even see a bigger helicopters required like the CH-148 Cyclone. The second part of FNACS is a naval UAV.

There is no requirement for a naval attack helicopter as there are no such helicopters and after the Super Seasprite Naval Aviation is committed to never acquiring anything other than an off the shelf helicopters – the FNACS helo must be off the shelf. Also what is the point? Even naval helicopter ASuW Close missions do not full match the customisation of the attack helicopter. Army will become quite customed to flying Tigers from the LHDs and if a littoral gunship is needed they can fill the role in concert with the sensors of the naval helicopter and UAV.

Is there a requirement for a small number (perhaps 6) of larger helicopters such as Merlin to add substantial capability options over the NFH/NH-90 (or similar) and perhaps fulfill the kind of roles previously in the past by Sea Kings?

Italy and Portugal for example operate Merlins in conjunction with NFH/NH-90.

 

[PeterM]

But the rule of thumb presented by the then Commander of NAFEG was three helicopters for every shipbboard flight at sea which means 32-36 total helicopters.

Does this total include the air complements of the two Canberra class LHDs?

 

[Sea Toby]

The two LHDs will consist mostly of army troop carrying helicopters, not naval. I wouldn't expect more than one or two naval helicopters aboard the LHDs, whereas the destroyers and frigates carry one naval helicopter.

While its nice to have a few extra helicopters than their are ships, its not like every ship is deployed anyway. A third of the fleet is in harbor undergoing maintenance at any given time during peacetime.

With a fleet of 3 destroyers, and 8 frigates, along with 2 replenishment ships, and 2 amphibious assault ships, thats 15 ships, with a few extras for training. I would think 20 should be enough. If you include the 4 remaining Adelaide frigates, 25 should be enough.

On the other hand, if the admiral wants a few more to operate on land as well beyond training, such as for search and rescue missions, another 5-10 helicopters should be more than enough...30-35 naval helicopters.....

 

[splat]

The F-100 hull would make some sense, particularly as we would already have the production facilities and experience already established, providing considerab;e cost savings and exconomies of scale. It could potentially keep the production line rolling allowing for the option of building a 4th AWD at some point in the future.

The F-100 Hull is quite alot bigger than the Anzac is that needed? This would make it similar in size to the German F125 frigate at 5,500t
Or would it likely be a slightly smaller hull (perhaps closer to 4,000t than the AWD's 5,800t)

What kind of senor and weapon fit to people think would be considered for the Anzac replacement?

Yeah if hobart hulls are the way they are going for anzac replacement then id like to see them with an equall amount of vlt's,and short of aegis id like to see ceafar/ceamount or what ever comes from auspar.What the government will authorize or how much money they will,hopefully that wont lead to 'fitted for but not with".

 

[PeterM]

Yeah if hobart hulls are the way they are going for anzac replacement then id like to see them with an equall amount of vlt's,and short of aegis id like to see ceafar/ceamount or what ever comes from auspar.What the government will authorize or how much money they will,hopefully that wont lead to 'fitted for but not with".

If the Hobart hull is chosen for the Anzac repalcement, perhaps something along the general lines of the new German F125 might be a practical/economical option for fit out/configuration.

The F125s are designed for extensive long range deployment and carry a crew of 105-120 (+ can carry 50 special forces). They have 490m² aft helicopter deck, hanger space for 2 NH-90) and 4 boats. Weapons wise they will have 8 Harpoon and 2 x 21 cell RAM (the RAN would use ESSMs instead) plus a large gun fit out. They don't carry a traditional sonar (which the RAN almost certainly would).

The F125 seems to be developed from the Meko-D configuration; Anzacs are developed from the Meko 200, perhaps there is the possibility of using existing expertise/defence ties. (Construction on the F125s will start in 2011 and delivery of the first of class F125 is scheduled for 2014)

 

[StingrayOZ]

Surely the LHD is going to carry more than 1 or 2 naval helicopters?

Given that the AWD look like carrying only 1 helo each (and quite possibly the frigates may carry less once the LHD are operational and they are tasked with them). Even just for naval missions, deliveries to subs, frigates, AWD's, sea rescue, search etc. I would assume atleast 3-4 naval helicopters for each LHD. They are large ships and we are planning to operate them together in mission profiles where there would be signficant need for naval air units.

I could definately see value in either CH-148 Cyclone or Merlins operating from the LHD's. Filling the gap between army lift helicopters and navy/army NH-90's. Given the number of people allied or in our region operating the merlin (japan UK portugal etc) I think it may be the better choice (particularly if AEW is required or desireable). The italians have varients that are built for the job, in service (amphibious support, AEW, ASW and utility).

The F-100 based frigate doesn't need to carry as many cells and have aegis, but a decent number (24-32) and a decent (and aegis cueable) system like auspar would be fine as a blue water frigate. If holding off on the 4th AWD mean we can get some awesome new varient of aegis with much greater capability.

 

[the road runner]

The LHD will carry more than 2 helos,it has landing spots for 6 Helicopters.
Sea Toby are you sure the LHD will only have 2 Hellis?,i think your refering to a frigate either F-125 or anzac,or even AWD,not LHD.(just want to clarify)

Maybee it would be better to use CH-47 chooks off the LHD,instead of putting another helicopter into service(ie,Merlin 101 ,Ch-148).I hear a while back that the UK Government was keen to see if CH-47 could be used off there LHD and even see if a maranised version of the chook could be manufactured.(havent heard of anything since)

Would or could it be feasable to use a Ch-47 off the deck of a LHD and would that capability be required for Australia?(similar to the way the Mariens/US Navy used the Ch-46)

Thanx in advance

 

[PeterM]

I am not sure the LHDs will only have 1 or 2 naval helicopters. Kanimbla and Manoora have considerable aircraft capacity/capability. I imagine the LHD's air complemet would be operated in a similar fashion; does Kanimbla and Manoora operate army or naval aircraft?

Other than the LHDs, there is the additional replacement for the second 'Kanimbla' class. Presumably this would be a strategic sealift vessel of some kind. In which case a larger helicopter like the Merlin would add substanital capability enhancement over the NH-90.

Are there any recent thoughts on the possible options for this ship?

 

[ThePuss]

I think the LHDs should operate 1-2 navy NH-90's during peace time /non operational deployments. One of the major roles of these ships is air operations so a permanent embarkation would be required to keep the ship familiar and comfortable in the operation of aircraft.

During wartime / large scale training I believe the ships should operate at least 3 navy NH-90's. With these ships operating up to 24 aircraft it needs it's own SAR capability. Imagine a CH-47 Chook with 50 troops onboard having to ditch at sea and the loss of life that this may cause. Having a NH-90 on the flight deck waiting to react with life rafts that could be air droped to survivors from a low altitude and a small motorised ruber dingy a couple of aircrew men could launch straight from the ramp of the NH-90 if condition allowed so to rescue troops in difficulty would greatly reduce / hopefully stop loss of life.

With the LHD's coming online 6 navy NH-90 is just not enough.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The Naval Aviation 2020 paper is the official plan adopted by the Navy for developing this capability.

Is there a requirement for a small number (perhaps 6) of larger helicopters such as Merlin to add substantial capability options over the NFH/NH-90 (or similar) and perhaps fulfill the kind of roles previously in the past by Sea Kings?

No. The Navy wants a single type of helicopter across the fleet. As I’ve said before here each helicopter will be reconfigurable between configurations. So each helicopter can fly support, ASW, ASuW, etc. The Merlin is too big for all Navy ships except the LHD and would only provide additional capability for support. I don’t think the maritime support mission needs more than the 2-2.5 tonne loads of the NH-90 or MH-60R.

With a fleet of 3 destroyers, and 8 frigates, along with 2 replenishment ships, and 2 amphibious assault ships, thats 15 ships, with a few extras for training. I would think 20 should be enough. If you include the 4 remaining Adelaide frigates, 25 should be enough.

On the other hand, if the admiral wants a few more to operate on land as well beyond training, such as for search and rescue missions, another 5-10 helicopters should be more than enough...30-35 naval helicopters.....

This force structure is way off, NA2020 provides the details in accordance with the typical maintenance and training demands of modern aircraft. The Navy will need 12 shipboard flights, each with one helicopter, on ships at any one time during normal operational levels. Each ship, including the LHDS and new AORs, will have a single flight onboard. To support these 12 flights they will need another 24 helicopters. Of these 36 helicopters nine will be undergoing maintenance at anyone time and another nine will be needed to train new crew members (this number might be reducible by simulators and certain skills being trained as part of the new helicopter aircrew training system). The remaining 18 will be the operational aircraft with 12 on ships and six ashore being used for advanced and collective training. They ashore force will also provide surge capability if needed.

Surely the LHD is going to carry more than 1 or 2 naval helicopters?

Nope they will normally only carry one naval helicopter. They might end up carrying a few naval UAVs depending on the time of system acquired. They will also carry a new naval minehunter capability of unmanned boats, submarines or both. The LHDs will be able to carry a large Army aviation force of at least six MRH-90s per hull. They could also accommodate and operate Army Tiger ARH, CH-47s and TUAVs. But it would be unlikely for each LHD to carry more than 10-12 manned aircraft while also deploying the landing force because there just won’t be room.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I think the LHDs should operate 1-2 navy NH-90's during peace time /non operational deployments. One of the major roles of these ships is air operations so a permanent embarkation would be required to keep the ship familiar and comfortable in the operation of aircraft.

They will have a large crew for the flight deck and hangar operations. The first at sea Naval Aerospace Engineer officer billets (lead by a LCDR) since HMAS Melbourne.

The Naval Aviation force will only be a single helicopter flight. But it wouldn't suprise me if there were regular detachments of Army helicopters even when troops are not aboard.

During wartime / large scale training I believe the ships should operate at least 3 navy NH-90's. With these ships operating up to 24 aircraft it needs it's own SAR capability. Imagine a CH-47 Chook with 50 troops onboard having to ditch at sea and the loss of life that this may cause. Having a NH-90 on the flight deck waiting to react with life rafts that could be air droped to survivors from a low altitude and a small motorised ruber dingy a couple of aircrew men could launch straight from the ramp of the NH-90 if condition allowed so to rescue troops in difficulty would greatly reduce / hopefully stop loss of life.

You aren't going to be seeing LHDs operating 24 aircraft a ship unless they are in a sea control configuration, ie without the landing force. You have to use the forward upper hangar for aircraft to fit a full 24 onboard (with room for flight deck and maintenance ops). This space is meant to carry the landing forces light vehicles. Also the consumable demands of 24 helicopters (especially fuel) would see the landing force's cargo space occupied by air group cargo and even the tank deck, well dock used for containers full of aviation related stuff.

With the LHD's coming online 6 navy NH-90 is just not enough.

Which is why the six MRH-90 MSHs will be replaced by the 36 new FNACS helicopters. Even if the FNACS chooses the NH-90 NFH its unlikely the Navy MRH-90s will be rebuilt so the Army will probably get them. Good thing they are already in Army's colours.