Some questions about the RAN and RAAF

[pepsi]

Hey all, i just have some questions about the Royal Australian Navy, i was just wondering what the plan is for the seakings, will their role be replaced by the nh90? and if so, will the seasprites remain in the role of asw and all of that stuff?

Also, what is the current status of the decision on the F-35's, will we be getting any stovl variants for the carriers, and if so what would be a good number to get?

I know there have been a lot of topics on the F-35 and whether it is the best choice, but i was still wondering if we have completely ruled out the F-22, and if so why (cost i guess?), considering that it seems the f/a-18 decision at least was partly due to it having 2 engines (over the f-16 etc), it seems strange that we would go for a single engined jet to replace everything

edit: i realise i shouldnt have put the air force question in this thread, but it was still kind of navy related being a question about the carrier variants and all

 

[gf0012-aust]

Hey all, i just have some questions about the Royal Australian Navy, i was just wondering what the plan is for the seakings, will their role be replaced by the nh90? and if so, will the seasprites remain in the role of asw and all of that stuff?

Ultimately they'll be replaced by the NH90's. As for the Seasprogs, I'd be either selling them to the Egyptians or Kiwis, or if that doesn't work donating them to Indonesia (after all, we've given them sabres, nomads, dc3's, iriquois in the past!)

Also, what is the current status of the decision on the F-35's, will we be getting any stovl variants for the carriers, and if so what would be a good number to get?

Australia is a Tier 2 partner in the JSF. We are also the 3rd largest buyer of the breed outside of the US. UK. Italy and Australia are the largest buyers. Considering the fact that some of the most significant fabrication modifications have been done by Australian specialist companies - then I think we're pretty committed to it. I personally have some difficulty in accepting one platform for all of our aviation requirements for various reasons. I'd rather see an open and split purchase of type to keep the vendors honest, and to also reduce risk on vulnerability of platform depedancy. eg, If one plane goes down due to mechanicals, then the whole fleet will be pulled whilst its investigated. with a split frontline of types we would still have presence and delivery options.

I know there have been a lot of topics on the F-35 and whether it is the best choice,

see above

but i was still wondering if we have completely ruled out the F-22, and if so why (cost i guess?),

Ambassador Tom Schieffer and the Regional Head of Boeing both said last year that if there was a requirement and a need, then the US Govt would be favourable to Aust having F-22's. The bottom line (IMV) is that we don't need that capability for our threat matrix anyway.

considering that it seems the f/a-18 decision at least was partly due to it having 2 engines (over the f-16 etc), it seems strange that we would go for a single engined jet to replace everything

Personally I prefer twins, but the reliability factor of singles (the F-16 has broken all records for losses against hours) makes the argument less from the singular reliabity perspective. However, IMV thats still a dumb decision. We are responsible for the largest island continent on the planet, almost as big as the US or Canada. we are responsible for managing and policing the integrity of 1/9th of the worlds oceans - so I'd hate to be a pilot flaming out in a JSF over one of our longest distanced responsibilities. Look at the Mirage, the Atar C was a dog, it could have been a better plane if we'd persisted with Avon engines in them (one was built) but it wasn't to be. Single engined jets in the RAAF just don't appeal to me at all.

 

[Aussie Digger]

As to the Seasprites, I'd only recommend giving them to Indonesia if they were stripped of every avionic component, besides those necessary to conduct basic flying tasks, they'd be way to capable otherwise (not that Indonesia could actually afford to fly them anyway), but the Seasprites (AND Seahawks) will do anti-submarine and anti-surface work for quite a few years yet.

As to the STOVL F-35's, maybe (with a slight leaning towards probably). Defence I'd say are doing their sums and seeing if we can afford them. Senator HILL originally said that Australia had no requirement (ie: need) for this variant. However not too long ago, he publicly said that this is being re-evaluated.

However, the JSF buy is going to be in phases. If we do go for them, it's unlikely that we'll get them before Phase 2 (circa 2015-2017).

I agree with GF about the sole combat aircraft for the RAAF issue, but if we acquire F-35A's AND F-35B's, then we already operate 2 basically similar (though still markedly different) aircraft. I can't see how YET another aircraft type could be afforded...

An option could be an F-35B purchase only, and another aircraft type to provide the RAAF's main combat capability, but this would require a massive re-adjustment in political and ADF thinking. Given Senator HILL and ACM Angus HOUSTON's (chief of ADF) enthusiasm for the JSF, I can't see this realistically happening, though the decision is not due to 2008, and we will have another election in 2007... Thinking "may" change in that time...

 

[aaaditya]

As to the Seasprites, I'd only recommend giving them to Indonesia if they were stripped of every avionic component, besides those necessary to conduct basic flying tasks, they'd be way to capable otherwise (not that Indonesia could actually afford to fly them anyway), but the Seasprites (AND Seahawks) will do anti-submarine and anti-surface work for quite a few years yet.

As to the STOVL F-35's, maybe (with a slight leaning towards probably). Defence I'd say are doing their sums and seeing if we can afford them. Senator HILL originally said that Australia had no requirement (ie: need) for this variant. However not too long ago, he publicly said that this is being re-evaluated.

However, the JSF buy is going to be in phases. If we do go for them, it's unlikely that we'll get them before Phase 2 (circa 2015-2017).

I agree with GF about the sole combat aircraft for the RAAF issue, but if we acquire F-35A's AND F-35B's, then we already operate 2 basically similar (though still markedly different) aircraft. I can't see how YET another aircraft type could be afforded...

An option could be an F-35B purchase only, and another aircraft type to provide the RAAF's main combat capability, but this would require a massive re-adjustment in political and ADF thinking. Given Senator HILL and ACM Angus HOUSTON's (chief of ADF) enthusiasm for the JSF, I can't see this realistically happening, though the decision is not due to 2008, and we will have another election in 2007... Thinking "may" change in that time...

how many collins class subs and anzac frigates will australia ultimately have,also do they plan to have any maritime combat aircraft in the near future?
is there any website dedicated to the australian armed forces,can you give me the link please?:coffee

 

[Jezza]

Replace SEAKING,SEASPRITE,SEAHAWKS and BLACKHAWKS with the NH90's.

Aus dont need all those different types.

The savings alone you could purchase more TIGERS.

CHINOOKS,NH90's and TIGERS.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I agree. Chinooks, Tigers, NH-90 and a new light utility/training helo, would serve the ADF magnificently. Unfortunately the RAN doesn't want to give up it's Sea Hawks and Seasprites (not sure about Sea Kings, they'd probably happily trade them for new build NH-90's).

Army doesn't want to get rid of it's Blackhawks and doesn't want NH-90's at all, and the RAAF doesn't care WHICH helo's are operated, just so long as IT operates them...

Australia has 6 Collins Class Submarines and 8 ANZAC frigates. This is all that will be acquired of these 2 classes.

The most information on the ADF on the net can be found at:

www.defence.gov.au

It's the most up to date and one of the most informative.

Alternatively you can go here:

http://www.thefifthcolumn.ru/forum/viewforum.php?f=6

Where most Australian Defence Force issues (plus other Nations') are discussed. It's also not bad for "insider" info with a few serving ADF members posting occasionally.

For Australian special forces info:

This: http://www.ausspecialforces.com/

isn't a bad site...

Cheers mate.

 

[machina]

What sort of money would be actually saved by reducing the number of helicopter builds?

 

[aaaditya]

I agree. Chinooks, Tigers, NH-90 and a new light utility/training helo, would serve the ADF magnificently. Unfortunately the RAN doesn't want to give up it's Sea Hawks and Seasprites (not sure about Sea Kings, they'd probably happily trade them for new build NH-90's).

Army doesn't want to get rid of it's Blackhawks and doesn't want NH-90's at all, and the RAAF doesn't care WHICH helo's are operated, just so long as IT operates them...

Australia has 6 Collins Class Submarines and 8 ANZAC frigates. This is all that will be acquired of these 2 classes.

The most information on the ADF on the net can be found at:

www.defence.gov.au

It's the most up to date and one of the most informative.

Alternatively you can go here:

http://www.thefifthcolumn.ru/forum/viewforum.php?f=6

Where most Australian Defence Force issues (plus other Nations') are discussed. It's also not bad for "insider" info with a few serving ADF members posting occasionally.

For Australian special forces info:

This: http://www.ausspecialforces.com/

isn't a bad site...

Cheers mate.

hey aussie i have a couple of doubts regarding this website:www.defence.gov.au

1. they did not mention what and how many anti ship missiles the aznac class frigates are equipped with?
2. they claim that the aznac class is based on the meko200design ,but they just dont have the level of stealthiness in their design as compared to the south african meko200's
3. they gave the diving depth of the collins class submarine as 180+metres,what is its actual diving depth?somehow 180metres seems to be too less ,the scorpene has 300+ metres and the u214 has 450metres.
4. can you give me some info regarding what advantages a submarine obtains due to its diving depth in combat.

thanks for the above links. :coffee

 

[scraw]

hey aussie i have a couple of doubts regarding this website:www.defence.gov.au

1. they did not mention what and how many anti ship missiles the aznac class frigates are equipped with?
2. they claim that the aznac class is based on the meko200design ,but they just dont have the level of stealthiness in their design as compared to the south african meko200's
3. they gave the diving depth of the collins class submarine as 180+metres,what is its actual diving depth?somehow 180metres seems to be too less ,the scorpene has 300+ metres and the u214 has 450metres.
4. can you give me some info regarding what advantages a submarine obtains due to its diving depth in combat.

thanks for the above links. :coffee

Doubts? It's the official website of the Department of Defence...

As for the Collins diving depth isn't publicly available and probably won't ever be.

For ANZAC weapons see here http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/anzac/

 

[gf0012-aust]

they claim that the aznac class is based on the meko200design ,but they just dont have the level of stealthiness in their design as compared to the south african meko200's

actually, everyone including the design owners (MEKO) claim it. The Meko200 is a different vessel altogether.

they gave the diving depth of the collins class submarine as 180+metres,what is its actual diving depth?somehow 180metres seems to be too less ,the scorpene has 300+ metres and the u214 has 450metres.

Nobody gives out accurate figures on sub depth capability. eg, we officially only say that the Harpoon has a range greater than 50km - when it's decidedly more than that. I can tell you quite unequivocably that the Collins goes way beyond 180m, but no publication will admit to that. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find out what steel and titanium its made out of. Once again, can I just point out that especially in things military - the data is not always on the internet or in public domain publications. It's why Govts have data held in the public and national interest.

can you give me some info regarding what advantages a submarine obtains due to its diving depth in combat.

the use of absolute depth is not so great the advantage that it used to be - it doesn;t matter to the sensor systems, and it doesn't matter too much to a torpedo like the Mk48 or Mk 50. The issue is not just depth, but where you dive deep.

The Aust Govt, like the UK, NZ and Canadian Govts - give out very little info on defence equipment capability. For obvious reasons.

 

[Aussie Digger]

The reason they don't mention any ASM's for the ANZAC's is that because the majority of the ANZAC fleet isn't equipped with any... HMAS Warramunga (an ANZAC class frigate) was the 1st of the ANZAC class to be fitted with Harpoon ASM's and this only occurred in December 2004.

Each ANZAC frigate will eventually be equipped with 8x Harpoon Block II ASM's. I believe this will be completed by around the end of December 2006.

The ANZAC's are "based" on the Meko 200. The design must have been changed somewhat if it's dissimilar to other variants. Doesn't surprise me that an Australian platform was modified significantly (to it's detriment)...

 

[pepsi]

Thanks for all the replies, i was kind of wondering if there were any plans for that catamaran ship, the one that was HMAS Jervis Bay in East Timor

Would its role mostly be transport or replenishment or something, and would it be worth using it over our current ships that do those roles, obviously its one big advantage is speed, but i cant think of any others

 

[gf0012-aust]

Thanks for all the replies, i was kind of wondering if there were any plans for that catamaran ship, the one that was HMAS Jervis Bay in East Timor

Would its role mostly be transport or replenishment or something, and would it be worth using it over our current ships that do those roles, obviously its one big advantage is speed, but i cant think of any others

HMAS Jervis Bay is now in the USN as HSV-1

 

[scraw]

Thanks for all the replies, i was kind of wondering if there were any plans for that catamaran ship, the one that was HMAS Jervis Bay in East Timor

Would its role mostly be transport or replenishment or something, and would it be worth using it over our current ships that do those roles, obviously its one big advantage is speed, but i cant think of any others

It was sold ages ago.

 

[pepsi]

oh i didn't realise we had sold it, does the RAN plan on buying any for us though?

I was thinking because of the speed it could be a useful patrol boat or something