Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[alexsa]

If the Janes report is accurate, yes they will be very capable, could almost call them DDG's not FFG's!!

I'd assume that ESSM would still part of the weapons fit too?

I would expect so. It always appeared that ESSM and SM6 was in the mix noting the white paper but the confirmation that SM2 Block IIIA is something else. It suggests the future frigate (FFG .... or next iteration DDG if you like) will be able to carry out extended range engagements based on its own systems using this missile.

12 ships capable of area defence would be quite a boost.

On to daydreaming ..... a batch of OPV sized ships focused on ASW with a basic anti air self defence capability would be a nice little addition to this as well.

 

[ngatimozart]

On to daydreaming ..... a batch of OPV sized ships focused on ASW with a basic anti air self defence capability would be a nice little addition to this as well.

Are you thinking of something along the lines of corvettes? Maybe around the 3000 tonne mark?

 

[Volkodav]

Maybe a DDL?

This is pretty much what the RAN has always desired, half the surface combat fleet being open ocean "multi role cruisers" and half being littoral / regional "multi role sloops". Even leading into WWII the aim was to modernise the destroyer force by building eight (we only completed three) tribal Class Destroyers that actually started life a Light / Scout cruiser design to support our cruisers, while continuing to acquire multi role Sloops that were capable of ASW, mine warfare, convoy escort, NGS and general patrol duties, the war built "Corvettes were basically a mass production alternative to the fully naval Sloop designs.

We can only hope that some government not only listens to the requirements put forward by the experts as to how best to conduct the missions the government has determined they need to do, but that at some point a succeeding government will not scrap or otherwise hobble the project.

 

[John Newman]

I would expect so. It always appeared that ESSM and SM6 was in the mix noting the white paper but the confirmation that SM2 Block IIIA is something else. It suggests the future frigate (FFG .... or next iteration DDG if you like) will be able to carry out extended range engagements based on its own systems using this missile.

12 ships capable of area defence would be quite a boost.

On to daydreaming ..... a batch of OPV sized ships focused on ASW with a basic anti air self defence capability would be a nice little addition to this as well.

Again, if the Janes report is accurate, it will be pretty impressive that the RAN will end up with 12 large ships capable of area defence (SM-2 and/or SM-6).

Sort of makes the missing out on the 4th AWD not so much of an issue.


One thing I do find a bit 'odd' in the Janes report is that it is talking about SM-2 Block IIIA for the Future Frigates, from what I understand and have read, the stock of Block IIIA's are being upgraded to Block IIIB standard (see link below):

Where to now for naval missiles?

Apart from the reported purchase of additional new Block IIIB's, the stock of IIIA's are reported as being upgraded to IIIB standard.

Obviously there will still be a requirement for IIIA's until the last of the FFG's retire, but with 'first' of the Future Frigates not entering service until late 2020 or early 2030, you would reasonably expect that all the IIIA's will be gone or converted to IIIB's, maybe we will even be 'beyond' that.

Not trying to 'nit pick', but there has been some question marks over Janes reporting at times, wait and see!!!


As to daydreaming, yeah well .......

If I was day dreaming, along the lines you were, I'd go more for a Corvette size ship for that role, something like the larger Damen 'Sigma' 105m Corvette/Frigate designs.

Here's a link to the Indonesian version:

Frigate ship with anti-air, anti-surface, anti-submarine capabilities

And here's a link to the Moroccan version:

105 m Sigma Frigate with reduced radar cross section

Anyway, fun to day dream on a nice sunny Sydney Sunday afternoon!!!

PS, But not going to hold my breath either!

 

[Volkodav]

Then there is the 81m Transfield Corvette that the RAN was meant to get instead of the ACPB insults, as seen in the Navy magazine back in 1996.

http://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/The-Navy-Vol_58_Part2-1996.pdf

Considering the Armidales are now having to be replaced at about half their planned life by proper OPVs, having already cost significantly more than planned to maintain and suffering from lower availability and serious structural issues, you have to wonder if the corvettes may have not just been the more capable option but potentially the cheaper one too. Factor in that had Williamstown built a dozen of these following the ANZACs we would have had no shipbuilding black hole prior to the AWD build (no new ships ordered under Howard between 1996 and December 2003 when the Armidales were ordered, and realistically 2007 when the AF100 was ordered) hence likely not the delays or cost increases that resulted from the rundown of our hard earned shipbuilding capability. The cost over runs in AWD would have paid for the corvettes alone.

 

[Volkodav]

Actually thinking on my previous post the shipbuilding black hole was significantly longer as the ANZACs and Collins were both contracted in the late 80s under Hawke, the replacement project for the DDGs and first four FFGs was deferred under Keating and the FFG upgrade for Melbourne and Newcastle was expanded to all six to fill the gap until a new generation of designs underdevelopment became available. So rather than an eight and eleven year gap it was actually a fifteen-sixteen year gap to the Armidales and a eighteen to nineteen year gap to the AWDs and LHDs WTF? Completely blows the current governments argument about labor not ordering a single ship in six years away, they need to add a decade to reach the record of the "prime minister of defence"

It had been pretty much assumed that Transfields proposal replacing the FFGs Mk-13 with a Mk-41 VLS for SM-2 and ESSM and significant combat systems would get up but ADI won instead (rumour has it to make the entity more valuable for sale). The project for a new naval helicopter had kicked off to provide a missile armed helicopter for the Corvettes and ANZACs instead of buying additional Seahawks as had been initially planned and consideration was being given to acquiring the four recently upgraded (NTU) Kidd Class Destroyer from the USN and only upgrading four instead of six FFGS. There would actually be more local upgrade work locally as it was assumed the Kidds would be progressively further upgraded with Mk-41 and new features to reduce crew size, i.e. electrics replacing pneumatics and hydraulics where possible.

So the new ships that needed to be ordered in the mid and late 90s were not ordered until a decade later, the planned eight tier 1 (DDGS/FFGs), eight tier 2 (PFs/FFGH) and 10-12 tier 3 (corvettes/OPC) became four upgraded FFGs, eight only now being upgraded FFGHs and 14 (now 13) coke cans. The new AOR that needed to be ordered in the early 2000s became a converted tanker that was never fit for purpose, the replacement for Success that needed to be ordered in the mid to late 2000s has only just been ordered a decade later. Of the ships ordered only the LHDs are actually in service and fit for purpose, the DDGs are late and over budget, while the coke cans need to be remediated so they will maybe last long enough to be replaced early.

I know everyone has there political filters, most are inherited but some are evolved from experience, mine come from what happened to shipbuilding specifically but also the automotive industry, manufacturing, science and innovation from the mid 90s onwards. I have always been a technologist/technocrat by nature as such my political filters are coloured by the deliberate policies that saw Australia, despite the immense amount of talent and experience here, turned around and forced back down the road of relying on primary industries, resources and services, or as I refer to it, classic dumb_uckery. Anti technology, anti industry, anti innovation policies resulting from short sighted, selfishness, and greed, have done a better job of de-industrialising Australia than the Greens ever could have done, but without the sole advantage of the Greens policies of actually reducing pollution and environmental destruction which has increased.

 

[alexsa]

Are you thinking of something along the lines of corvettes? Maybe around the 3000 tonne mark?

Nothing so sexy as I know we don't have the cash for that. More of a better version of the Lurssen, Fassmer or Damen (say the OPV 85 or 90) with an ASW capability (tail and UAS ..... maybe tubes) and SeaRAM.

The Lurssen OPV90 claims to take a MK 56 VLS but then you need a more capable combat system and sensor suite to support it. SeaRAM solves some of those problems (noting the ship would still need an air search capability).

As Volk notes we were looking at a little "Corvette" at one stage (pity we missed that boat) but some how I doubt the powers at be will go that way.

We still need a pretty basic OPV for policing duties and we don't need to over guild that lily but a second tier ASW capable vessel would have real merit and commonality with the OPV would help ...........

Just to reiterate ....... I am not in any way convinced we will see this sort of capability unless the South China Sea situation goes sour or some other emergency occurs.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Just to reiterate ....... I am not in any way convinced we will see this sort of capability unless the South China Sea situation goes sour or some other emergency occurs.

well, the vinson has just started ops in the SCS...

 

[StingrayOZ]

Nothing so sexy as I know we don't have the cash for that. More of a better version of the Lurssen, Fassmer or Damen (say the OPV 85 or 90) with an ASW capability (tail and UAS ..... maybe tubes) and SeaRAM.

The Lurssen OPV90 claims to take a MK 56 VLS but then you need a more capable combat system and sensor suite to support it. SeaRAM solves some of those problems (noting the ship would still need an air search capability).

As Volk notes we were looking at a little "Corvette" at one stage (pity we missed that boat) but some how I doubt the powers at be will go that way.

We still need a pretty basic OPV for policing duties and we don't need to over guild that lily but a second tier ASW capable vessel would have real merit and commonality with the OPV would help ...........

Just to reiterate ....... I am not in any way convinced we will see this sort of capability unless the South China Sea situation goes sour or some other emergency occurs.

A scaled down Auspar, mk56 might be of interest to the region. It might be useful to keep the door open to that possibility. Maybe even drop the mk56 and just have a 76mm and maybe a phalanx. Space, weight and power would be worthy IMO. I think this is a case where fitted for but not with is a useful compromise.

While many in SEA operate corvettes or OPV's, having something that is the same as the RAN offers a lot of possibilities. Also if Australia was ever to gift them away earlier than their full lives, cheap efficent ships with 76mm and 20 or 30mm would be extremely attractive to nations trying to bolster their naval and patrol capabilities.

 

[Volkodav]

Nothing so sexy as I know we don't have the cash for that. More of a better version of the Lurssen, Fassmer or Damen (say the OPV 85 or 90) with an ASW capability (tail and UAS ..... maybe tubes) and SeaRAM.

The Lurssen OPV90 claims to take a MK 56 VLS but then you need a more capable combat system and sensor suite to support it. SeaRAM solves some of those problems (noting the ship would still need an air search capability).

As Volk notes we were looking at a little "Corvette" at one stage (pity we missed that boat) but some how I doubt the powers at be will go that way.

We still need a pretty basic OPV for policing duties and we don't need to over guild that lily but a second tier ASW capable vessel would have real merit and commonality with the OPV would help ...........

Just to reiterate ....... I am not in any way convinced we will see this sort of capability unless the South China Sea situation goes sour or some other emergency occurs.

I should make it clear that the OPV is seen by government as a big patrol boat and not one cent will be spent on any capability over and above what is required for constabulary duties. Basically no additional capability will be requested or paid for in the first batch/batches, we just need to hope if the selected design has additional capabilities that the government won't elect to delete them.

 

[alexsa]

well, the vinson has just started ops in the SCS...

Yep, and it is this pressure that may result in a capable corvette/light escort Frigate to widen the ASW footprint. The OPC concept had a lot of what would be desired and a vessel with a spec of 22 to 24 knots, RAM or ESSM, an active tail (and tubes), helo capability and a medium calibre gun (and an auto cannon or two) would do the job.

SSMs would be nice but lets not hope for too much ......... don't want to be too optimistic.

As a side note ..... if we have too many more helo capable ships we will need more helo'. A medium helo would be nice but we tried that before and it went bad. Additional UAV would be nice as well ...... but again I must temper my optimism.

 

[Volkodav]

Once you start adding those systems to an OPV you have to wonder if it would be more cost effective to just go for a corvette or light frigate built to naval standards. The German K130/131 is a good example as is the Turkish Milgem, both are nice well rounded designs, in particular the enhanced K130 being developed for Israel which can operate a medium helicopter if required.

Then again, had the OPC proceeded we would need to be looking for an OPV at the moment, nor aspiring to an overseas designed light combatant, as we would have something as good of better in service and not in need of replacement for another decade or more.

Looking at it holistically eight ANZACs followed by ten to twelve OPCs, that in turn could have been followed by eight to ten evolved OCVs with multi mission decks to replace the hydrographic and MCM fleets and Williamstown would have been busy until it was time to start on the ANZAC replacements in the early 2020s.

What would ASC do in this time? Build four DDGs, preferably evolved Flight IIA or Flight III Burkes or even DDG1000s, two LHDs, two AORs and two LPDs, as well as a second batch of Collins Class while developing the indigenous replacement for the first batch. This would make sense as Techport has much more space to grow than Williamstown and would be easier to build much bigger ships at, irrespective of where the blocks come from. Williamstown could continue building and delivering ships of up to about 8000t without too much hassle and blocks for much larger ships being assembled in Adelaide, Newcastle too could do block work for Adelaide and Melbourne and maybe even consolidate some superblocks or even entire ships on a needs / competitive basis. WA, like Garden Island Sydney, Cairns and Darwin would live off sustainment work.

Had the OPC been ordered I don't know if Transfield would have split into Transfield (now Broad Spectrum) and Tenix, or that Tenix would have sold out to BAE. ADI would likely still have been sold to Thales but they did fix the FFGUP and are now doing a great job sustaining them so probably not a bad thing. The big difference would be Transfield/Tenix and their ongoing workflow preventing the issues that occurred predominantly due to the rundown of their workforce as fabrication work on the last ANZAC wound up and then was totally stuffed by the new broom that went through with BAE. ASC would have still had a steep learning curve on the new DDGs but had the been building the USN derived ships the RAN really wanted and needed, under the guidance of BIW, with blocks being supplied by a still competent Transfield, things should have gone much smoother.

 

[hairyman]

Can anyone else see a place in the RAN for a couple of Hyuga class Helicopter Destroyers? The Japanese ones carry 6 anti sub helicopters and one or two utility helicopters, and are armed with 16 VLS, 4 for ESSM and 12 for ASROC, 2 Phalanx, 2 RAM, and machine guns. I imagine if we obtained a couple we would have more than 4 VLS for ESSM. and we would want some Harpoon or similar.

 

[Volkodav]

Can anyone else see a place in the RAN for a couple of Hyuga class Helicopter Destroyers? The Japanese ones carry 6 anti sub helicopters and one or two utility helicopters, and are armed with 16 VLS, 4 for ESSM and 12 for ASROC, 2 Phalanx, 2 RAM, and machine guns. I imagine if we obtained a couple we would have more than 4 VLS for ESSM. and we would want some Harpoon or similar.

Oh stuff it, YES!

Whoops, it think I may have just been triggered!

 

[oldsig127]

Can anyone else see a place in the RAN for a couple of Hyuga class Helicopter Destroyers? The Japanese ones carry 6 anti sub helicopters and one or two utility helicopters, and are armed with 16 VLS, 4 for ESSM and 12 for ASROC, 2 Phalanx, 2 RAM, and machine guns. I imagine if we obtained a couple we would have more than 4 VLS for ESSM. and we would want some Harpoon or similar.

Most likely the spot currently planned to be filled by some of the new frigates, or perhaps of the submarines. The national pocket is not overflowing with money for every cool looking vessel that comes along - we'll be lucky enough if a change of government or a recession doesn't push out or partially curtail the stuff we have actually justified on the basis of strategic need and CONOPS

oldsig

 

[Milne Bay]

For crying out aloud - what have you blokes been drinking tonight.
This is dreamland and fantasy.
The OPV's will be nothing more than that with minimum armament.
The budget going forward for the RAN is already "huge" in the context of what is planned and what is to be already built.
The nation is currently and for the forseeable future in financial straits, with the need to reduce spending being seen by both sides of politics as essential to economic survival.
Aged pensions have already been cut and there are more cuts on the way in welfare.
If this government is re-elected, or if a labour government is elected in its place, there will be real pressure to wind back or defer spending on defence. If the plans that have been announced for defence in all arms of the service survive the next two government terms, I will be very surprised.
MB

 

[Volkodav]

Most likely the spot currently planned to be filled by some of the new frigates, or perhaps of the submarines. The national pocket is not overflowing with money for every cool looking vessel that comes along - we'll be lucky enough if a change of government or a recession doesn't push out or partially curtail the stuff we have actually justified on the basis of strategic need and CONOPS

oldsig

I've been arguing for about a decade now that so, that based on a fleet of twelve or more majors and twelve or so minor warfare vessels that three of the majors should be helicopter carriers. This is even is it requires a cut in numbers at the upper end and a beefing up of capability at the lower end.

Three DDGs, three DDH and six FFG would be great but three DDG, three DDH and three or four high end FFG would still be great and perfectly good enough so long as some, not all of the OPVs, i.e. four to six, are upgraded with systems surplus from the FFGs and ANZACs, 8 cell Mk41 with ESSM, combat system elements, perhaps scaled CEAFAR radar and a 76mm gun.

Agree money is tight so cuts will have to be made elsewhere to fund the build, sustainment and crewing requirements but IMO the trade off would be worth it and sustainable. The thing is when the government had more money than they know what to do with it they blew it on unsustainable tax cuts and middle class welfare that had the predictable effect of driving up the cost of living through the simple economic truth of supply and demand. There was enough money to build six Aussified Segong the Great Class DDGs locally as well as kick of an expansion of the submarine fleet but instead the ADF was cut to the bone pre 9/11 and still saw a lot of cuts and shrunken / lost capability before things turned around just prior to the GFC.

Now people can't afford to live without the handouts (though those of us who were never eligible had to survive the increased cost of living they caused without the benefit from them) so no government has the balls to claw it back from the actual beneficiaries to just hammer those who can hurt them the least come election day. This is happening now there is a clear and present danger to our security, an expansionist Russia, an expansionist China and a raft of incompetent, selfish, populists rising to power in western democracies.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The problem with a full corvette or frigate is operational costs kill you. For limited capability.

Look at Brunei and its BAE 95m OPV which were really light frigates.No one really wanted them.Not even Brunei.

My argument isn't to fit a 76mm and a 20 or 30 mm gun but make allowance for the power and weight. So when we want to get rid of them,or if we see a strategic need to offload them, they would be useful to someone who really needs something like that. For our uses, even a 25mm is probably overkill none of our OPV or patrol boats will be swapping naval grey paint with another navy or coast guard.

Say Indonesia or Malaysia really needs more of something that is tactically useful, but not too burdensome.

The origional concept to to replace everything with an OCV. A big empty ship that could be adapted to various needs, but had a common hull. A ship that had space and weight reserved for a variety of systems, but such systems would only be fitted to a few ships.

Not quite empty of course, that room would be utilised for boarding parties, training, specials, additional civilian accomodation, multinational partnerships, command space for piracy, gym, UUV/UAV etc. But in this case the steel really is cheap and the air really is free.

I definately see for small ships UAV's are likely to fill most of the hangers on most of the ships, they will be loads cheaper to operate and less demanding to operate from the ship.

 

[Volkodav]

For crying out aloud - what have you blokes been drinking tonight.
This is dreamland and fantasy.
The OPV's will be nothing more than that with minimum armament.
The budget going forward for the RAN is already "huge" in the context of what is planned and what is to be already built.
The nation is currently and for the forseeable future in financial straits, with the need to reduce spending being seen by both sides of politics as essential to economic survival.
Aged pensions have already been cut and there are more cuts on the way in welfare.
If this government is re-elected, or if a labour government is elected in its place, there will be real pressure to wind back or defer spending on defence. If the plans that have been announced for defence in all arms of the service survive the next two government terms, I will be very surprised.
MB

Most of my posts today have actually been about the money wasted when we had it to spare and how the same mistakes are being made again now which will result in more waste and less money for actual capability. The shipbuilding blackhole is already here, the last chance to avert it would have been to build the AORs in Adelaide with block work going to Melbourne and Newcastle and the shiplift being upgraded between the delivery of Sydney and the launch of the first AOR.

Even if a fourth DDG had been ordered it still wouldn't have seen the yards through to the start of the new frigates, the AORs would still have been required and would have been ideal to keep all three major yards going. Labor entered office in late 2007, got hit with the GFC, released a DWP and likely would have started ordering ships in 2011-13 but for almost losing the election in 2010 through their own stupidity and effectively losing control of the country to the most effective opposition leader in our nations history (his performance as PM is an entirely different matter). There was still time to continue the already started program but instead they sat on their hands for over two years and then sent it off sure in an attempt to kill off ASC as part of the plan to buy all future submarines and major combatants offshore.

Now we are finally getting OPVs to replace the coke cans (that's the nick name a number of the crews give the Armidales, especially those old enough to remember the Fremantles) and the friggin WA Mafia are trying to steal the two ship batch one build from ASC, the build that hopefully will preserve enough of the hard won skills and experience, so expensively earned from the AWD build, to maybe prevent the same issues affecting the future frigate project. Now this batch one build will only affect the platform side of the skills required, what about the CS and integration side, what about the design side?

My solution, stuff WAs dreams of grandeur and defrauding the rest of the country, increase the first batch to three or four and fit them with systems recycled from the FFGs. Yes build them as light frigates or corvettes at ASC and then let Austal work their magic on the batch II OPVs, or rather chose BAE or CIVMEC so the RAN will at least have sea worthy boats. They can then also build a third batch as multi role vessels to replace the Hydro Fleet and MCMVs.

Holistically this should save money.

 

[alexsa]

For crying out aloud - what have you blokes been drinking tonight.
This is dreamland and fantasy.
The OPV's will be nothing more than that with minimum armament.
The budget going forward for the RAN is already "huge" in the context of what is planned and what is to be already built.
The nation is currently and for the forseeable future in financial straits, with the need to reduce spending being seen by both sides of politics as essential to economic survival.
Aged pensions have already been cut and there are more cuts on the way in welfare.
If this government is re-elected, or if a labour government is elected in its place, there will be real pressure to wind back or defer spending on defence. If the plans that have been announced for defence in all arms of the service survive the next two government terms, I will be very surprised.
MB

Just to be clear ...... I did say this was a non-starter in the current environment and that a major hiccup would be needed for the coin to be shelled out.

I also said that minor enhancement of the the current OPV platform would be the best we could expect ........ noting this was all aspirational (dreaming)

I cannot see more flat tops of any kind ....... noting we simple do not have the aircraft to support them and the cost a great deal more.