Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[oldsig127]

While I wouldn't be surprised if the OPVs eventually give way to more combat capable corvettes or fast frigates in don't think the initial dozen will be any more than flexible OPVs. That said the designs being considered do have multi purpose decks under the flight deck with space for ISO containers and facilities for trailing equipment from this deck over stern, think ROVs, possibly towed arrays or even VDS for littoral ASW and MCM. What would be clever is designing the OPVs to interface with USN LCS modules.

Nothing here to contradict my understanding of the project, so maybe I should have just left the boring bits out and just asked the question...

Does the "Axe" type bow militate against the installation of hull mounted sonar which is usually mounted in a fairing/dome in that area?

oldsig

 

[Volkodav]

Nothing here to contradict my understanding of the project, so maybe I should have just left the boring bits out and just asked the question...

Does the "Axe" type bow militate against the installation of hull mounted sonar which is usually mounted in a fairing/dome in that area?

oldsig

Maybe but a sonar can probably be installed further back on the hull. The FFGs for example have a hull mounted unit rather than bow dome.

 

[ASSAIL]

Nothing here to contradict my understanding of the project, so maybe I should have just left the boring bits out and just asked the question...

Does the "Axe" type bow militate against the installation of hull mounted sonar which is usually mounted in a fairing/dome in that area?

oldsig

The first bow mounted sonar in the RAN came with sonar SQS 26 in the CFAs. All previous sonars were mounted in hull outfits which were lowered when the sonar was in use and raised flush with the hull at other times.

WRT OPVs, the only fear I have is that the type chosen will not include a hanger. That would be a grave error and limit future capabilities. In this case the Lurssen 80 is unsuitable IMHO.

 

[alexsa]

Nothing here to contradict my understanding of the project, so maybe I should have just left the boring bits out and just asked the question...

Does the "Axe" type bow militate against the installation of hull mounted sonar which is usually mounted in a fairing/dome in that area?

oldsig

Quite likely ..... noting for the Axe bow

the sections in the fore ship have no flair (almost vertical sides), [i,e no bow flare] a vertical stem, the fore ship is very slender, there is a significantly increased sheer and a downwards sloping centerline at the bow. These modifications were aimed at reducing the wave exciting forces and the hydrodynamic lift in particular in the forward end of the ship whilst maintaining sufficient reserve buoyancy. For heave and pitch the resulting system could best be described as a “soft spring” system.

see http://www.marin.nl/upload_mm/2/9/c...006_Comparison_performance_3_patrol_boats.pdf​

​

​

​

By attaching a large bulbous object on the forefoot it is very likely compromise this design feature.... any sonar would need to be further after is likely to have a bit of a blind spot forward (for shallow targets only) due to the forefoot.

You would be better off with an active and passive towed array in a container based system.

The deep and slender forefoot is designed to add buoyancy without and reduce resistance. The vessel will move more easily vertically forward with much less slamming. It is slamming that normally cause the crew to pull back on the power.

The down side ..... you are going to get a lot more spray.​

 

[StingrayOZ]

Nothing here to contradict my understanding of the project, so maybe I should have just left the boring bits out and just asked the question...

Does the "Axe" type bow militate against the installation of hull mounted sonar which is usually mounted in a fairing/dome in that area?

oldsig

I would have thought a towed array would have been the go with the OPV's as its a bit more flexible and easily deployed from them. Perhaps a hull mounted sonar could be scavenged off something that is being decommissioned. I don't see sea axe as a deal breaker.

OPV85/90 seems a bit too combat (a bit like the spanish BAM), which I imagine would make more expensive and less flexible. The crewing demands seem possibly also higher than what Australia would be looking at for a fleet of 12. However, if Australia really was thinking long term, a fairly regular drum beat build of patrol boats makes loads of sense as these are the type of ships that after 10-15 years you could sell off to Indonesia, Malaysia or elsewhere in the region who can then reconfigure for what they need. NZ and others might be interested in new builds.

 

[alexsa]

I would have thought a towed array would have been the go with the OPV's as its a bit more flexible and easily deployed from them. Perhaps a hull mounted sonar could be scavenged off something that is being decommissioned. I don't see sea axe as a deal breaker.

OPV85/90 seems a bit too combat (a bit like the spanish BAM), which I imagine would make more expensive and less flexible. The crewing demands seem possibly also higher than what Australia would be looking at for a fleet of 12. However, if Australia really was thinking long term, a fairly regular drum beat build of patrol boats makes loads of sense as these are the type of ships that after 10-15 years you could sell off to Indonesia, Malaysia or elsewhere in the region who can then reconfigure for what they need. NZ and others might be interested in new builds.

I don't think they are that far apart

Crewing is similar to the Damen 2400 class (60 v 67) noting the OPV85 can take extra. This does not mean the ship needs this many to operate but it can carry the additional personnel.

I think most would not realize how many the Cape Class can accommodate with the additional 'spartan' accommodation aft.

The Daman OPV1800 and OPV2400 all have ops facilities and large helo facilities

The big one for me is the OPV85 has the space for additional systems in the design and the stern knotch for boat launching.

 

[rjtjrt]

I don't think they are that far apart

Crewing is similar to the Damen 2400 class (60 v 67) noting the OPV85 can take extra. This does not mean the ship needs this many to operate but it can carry the additional personnel.

I think most would not realize how many the Cape Class can accommodate with the additional 'spartan' accommodation aft.

The Daman OPV1800 and OPV2400 all have ops facilities and large helo facilities

The big one for me is the OPV85 has the space for additional systems in the design and the stern knotch for boat launching.

I thought 80m max was specified due to length constraints is Darwin. I don't know how absolute the 80m limit is, assuming my memory is correct.

 

[ASSAIL]

I thought 80m max was specified due to length constraints is Darwin. I don't know how absolute the 80m limit is, assuming my memory is correct.

I don't think Darwin's docking/berthing facilities have anything to do with the "about 75 to 80 mtr spec in the DWP. The current synchrolift at Coonawarra (500 ton) is way too small and the commercial lift at Pearl Marine is too short at 35 mtrs although it has a limit of 2,500 Tonnes. The OPVs would not be able to distribute their weight across the load parabola, it being limited to zero overhang on the landward side.

I read that all major maintenance will be performed in Cairns.......for now

 

[hauritz]

I would have thought a towed array would have been the go with the OPV's as its a bit more flexible and easily deployed from them. Perhaps a hull mounted sonar could be scavenged off something that is being decommissioned. I don't see sea axe as a deal breaker.

OPV85/90 seems a bit too combat (a bit like the spanish BAM), which I imagine would make more expensive and less flexible. The crewing demands seem possibly also higher than what Australia would be looking at for a fleet of 12. However, if Australia really was thinking long term, a fairly regular drum beat build of patrol boats makes loads of sense as these are the type of ships that after 10-15 years you could sell off to Indonesia, Malaysia or elsewhere in the region who can then reconfigure for what they need. NZ and others might be interested in new builds.

The original idea was to replace the mcv and survey fleet as well.

The whitepaper is unclear as to how that will be done, but I wouldn't be surprised if we saw an additional batch of OPVs purchased in the 2030s.

Assuming a hull life of around 20 years this should enable an ongoing build program.

 

[Mercator]

I would have thought a towed array would have been the go with the OPV's as its a bit more flexible and easily deployed from them. Perhaps a hull mounted sonar could be scavenged off something that is being decommissioned. I don't see sea axe as a deal breaker.

Why does an OPV need to get involved in this at all? With the advent of UUVs quite capable of doing these things (like trailing an array), why have a noisy sound source like an OPV attached to it? Probably all an OPV needs is a short torpedo warning array, and that’s a pretty high-end scenario at play there. At best, an OPV might have a part in deploying these UUVs, but even then shore facilities and craft of opportunity are probably just as well placed to do so.

In advanced, high threat areas, it won’t be an OPV deploying UUVs – that’s the place of real warships capable of surviving the threats. OPVs should be back in home waters doing all the local security functions that will be in high demand in any security emergency. After all, the enemy are just as capable of deploying UUVs from their own craft of opportunity. Every dodgy fishing boat within range of our coastline will need inspecting. Perhaps even some of the larger commercial vessels on the usual transits to our ports. That’s the full-time job of an OPV in even the lowest threat level scenarios. There will be more work than they can handle, I expect. They can’t be off chasing every POSSUB a tail generates. They’d never get anything else done. If the ASW threat is that serious and widespread, the better response is serious and dedicated ASW search and prosecution assets (air, surface, sub, seabed sensors & UUVs). An OPV is a terrible compromise on those priorities and a distraction from its true purpose, IMHO.

BTW, I think the 80 m requirement comes out of limitations in berthing/manoeuvring in Cairns. Can’t remember where I read that, but that’s my understanding.

 

[ngatimozart]

An Italian Navy ASW FREMM class frigate, the Carabiniere, will be visiting Australia in January and February for a promotional visit and ASW exercises with the RAN.

Guido Crosetto, the head of Italian aerospace and defense industry group*AIAD, said Fincantieri had the advantage over its competitors. “Of the*rival vessels, one is still an idea the other is a project,” he said. “The Australian Navy prefers the Italian offering,” he added.

The last part is IMHO somewhat arrogant.

Edit: BTW the photo at the head of the article is not a FREMM.

 

[hauritz]

An Italian Navy ASW FREMM class frigate, the Carabiniere, will be visiting Australia in January and February for a promotional visit and ASW exercises with the RAN.

The last part is IMHO somewhat arrogant.

Edit: BTW the photo at the head of the article is not a FREMM.

The RAN prefers the Italian FREMM to the French FREMM ... but I still think it is the least likely option for the future frigate. Unless of course BAE and Navantia botch things up.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Why does an OPV need to get involved in this at all? With the advent of UUVs quite capable of doing these things (like trailing an array), why have a noisy sound source like an OPV attached to it? Probably all an OPV needs is a short torpedo warning array, and that’s a pretty high-end scenario at play there. At best, an OPV might have a part in deploying these UUVs, but even then shore facilities and craft of opportunity are probably just as well placed to do so.

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/15/on...cate-tasks-dynamically-adjust-mission-evolves

especially with the leaps and bounds being made with AI and smarter algorithms

 

[htbrst]

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/15/on...cate-tasks-dynamically-adjust-mission-evolves

especially with the leaps and bounds being made with AI and smarter algorithms

Yip, though the politics of "salvaging" UUV's could provide an interesting dynamic in future tensions vs a manned vessel which at least has citizens aboard. It will be interesting to see what happens with below UUV, and even more interesting as the UUV's and USV's get bigger/more capable/more expensive

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/16/breaking-chinese-seize-u-s-navy-unmanned-vehicle

A U.S. Navy unmanned buoyancy glider was taken by Chinese forces in international waters earlier this week, two defense officials confirmed to USNI News on Friday.

The glider was operating with U.S. Military Sealift Command ship USNS Bowditch (T-AGS-62) about 50 miles off of Subic Bay in the Philippines when a People’s Liberation Army Navy ship took the glider both defense officials said.

“A Chinese naval ship that had been shadowing the Bowditch put a small boat into the water. That small boat came up alongside and the Chinese crew took one of the drones,” CNN reported on Friday...

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yip, though the politics of "salvaging" UUV's could provide an interesting dynamic in future tensions vs a manned vessel which at least has citizens aboard. It will be interesting to see what happens with below UUV, and even more interesting as the UUV's and USV's get bigger/more capable/more expensive

https://news.usni.org/2016/12/16/breaking-chinese-seize-u-s-navy-unmanned-vehicle

that seizure is more about symbolism than anything - the UUV is commercial and probably worth up to $250k, so can be bought through any number of companies advertising in Ocean News etc...

but, I'd bet my left bippy that they are analysing the data to see what data sets were of interest to the USN

 

[StingrayOZ]

I would imagine a some of the mine and survey work might be adapted to new patrol boats over time. The Rudd whitepaper laid out a pretty interesting idea to amalgamate all the roles into a commonish hull.

Given the general non-improvement in the region and the talk of Australia taking a leading role in the north, having space and power for systems is probably very worthwhile even if the ships are never fitted with them.

While UUV and other dismounted systems are going to be very useful, at the end of the day people on board will still be important for many missions.

 

[Volkodav]

I would imagine a some of the mine and survey work might be adapted to new patrol boats over time. The Rudd whitepaper laid out a pretty interesting idea to amalgamate all the roles into a commonish hull.

Given the general non-improvement in the region and the talk of Australia taking a leading role in the north, having space and power for systems is probably very worthwhile even if the ships are never fitted with them.

While UUV and other dismounted systems are going to be very useful, at the end of the day people on board will still be important for many missions.

The trouble with the Rudd era plans is they died in 2010 when Julia took the reins. Labors left wing, even when boosted into power by the right wing power brokers, has little interest in defence.

 

[alexsa]

The Italians are coming

Given down select is looming the rush to establish a presence is on. Fincantieri are now in the game:

Fincantieri stakes its claim for Sea 5000

As with other bidders they are using ex RAN staff to support their bit but Rear Admiral Mark Purcell (ex WEEO) as former head of the Capability, Acquisition and Sustainment Group (CASG) is an interesting pick noting he only recently left the service (Feb 2016) as far as I can tell.

 

[ASSAIL]

Given down select is looming the rush to establish a presence is on. Fincantieri are now in the game:

Fincantieri stakes its claim for Sea 5000

As with other bidders they are using ex RAN staff to support their bit but Rear Admiral Mark Purcell (ex WEEO) as former head of the Capability, Acquisition and Sustainment Group (CASG) is an interesting pick noting he only recently left the service (Feb 2016) as far as I can tell.

There's been a history of RAN Admirals influencing procurement choices and then being rewarded with positions with the winning bidders on retirement. These have rarely turned out well. (Remember the Dorman gensets in the Fremantles)
Let's hope this is not one of those.

 

[weegee]

Forgacs

Seems like Forgacs (Civmec) are going all in to get a piece of the shipbuilding pie. I wonder how Austal will take this? I would say this definitely puts the OPV work up for grabs in WA.

Today we unveiled plans for mega world-class shipbuilding facility -