Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Tasman]

short note:happy anzac day to all australians an new zealanders we will never forget

Thanks werty.

Yes, I'm sure the RAN would love to have another one designed as a light carrier operating F-35Bs, but that would probably mean having three replenishment ships instead of two, plus at least one more air warfare destroyer. This would allow the RAN to operate their Canberras as semi-carriers when not being used as an amphibious assault ship in exercises, even when the carrier is in refit. Without the purchase of the F-35Bs, there is no reason to do so. So far, I have not been convinced of the need to fund either a carrier version, much less the F-35Bs.

While its nice to think of the third amphibious ship as that large, I think the RAN and the government would prefer a smaller sized ship, either moving a company group like the Canterbury or a battalion much like a Rotterdam or larger Canterbury, an image a few pages ago. I think a Canberra sized vessel may be too large for many operations, an overkill.

I shall wait for the new white paper, I expect it should have some specifications for the third amphibious ship. I also expect the white paper will provide information on how much the government is willing to spend too, considering the defence over budget problems the new government claims. One route the new Labor government can take is to spend much less on a third amphibious ship the Liberals may have funded. The new government has many choices to choose, including cancellation depending upon a new white paper.

One thing Labor cannot do is blame the Liberals for buying to small a sea/air lift capacity. Not with the purchase of two Canberras and the four C-17s.

I agree with what you have said.

I think, however, that opinions in the RAN about the type and size of vessel may be divided. As indicated in the article mentioned by werty there are some in the RAN, including, apparently, the present Chief of Navy, who would like an aviation enhanced Canberra, and possibly F-35Bs as well. Others may well prefer a smaller ship (or several smaller ships) to back up the LHDs and this may be attractive, for political reasons, to the new government. However, it should be remembered that steel is cheap and an LHD could operate with a skeleton crew when employed as a heavy cargo mover in the sealift role. A third LHD would also ensure that at least two would normally be available for operational use. As you say, the White Paper will provide direction which will guide the navy's decision.

Tas

 

[Sea Toby]

I agree, there is nothing more I would like to see than Australia having a light carrier capability again. Whether with the two Canberras being converted for such a role, or adding a third aviation oriented Canberra. But I am also aware of the budget difficulties, not just for building costs alone, but for operating costs. Not to mention with crewing difficulties too.

It wouldn't be worth it, a third Canberra, if the RAN had to lay up many of their mine hunters and/or patrol boats.

 

[Tasman]

Its a given that larger small landing craft capable of handling the M1-A1s are available to be purchased. A new third amphibious ship may be more a ro-ro container cargo ship than an amphibious ship for strategic sea lift instead of tactical sea lift. Labor could buy a ship that costs as little as $150 million instead of $1.5 billion each...

Agreed!

Mods,

We are discussing the RAN's sealift needs in two threads at the moment. Should this thread be merged into the Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates thread?

Tas

 

[gf0012-aust]

But I am also aware of the budget difficulties, not just for building costs alone, but for operating costs. Not to mention with crewing difficulties too.

• Budget difficulties is 5% off overall spend to save money
• Crewing difficulties - significant and likely to stay that way irrespective of whatever retention models are roled out sans white paper
• Flag capable vessels also require support vessels in ratio to the split fleet model - we can't afford proper support support vessels unless a major cut happens across other projects - and then we still have to crew them
• Flag capable vessels had additional cost burdens outside of the original fitment - afloat comms for fleet management is not cheap and there is no point migrating fleets comms from manoora and/or kanimbla

I'd be absolutely surprised at any white paper content that supports fixed wing fleet air arm as well as a third and redundant flag (task force management) capable asset.

 

[Sea Toby]

So, we should forget about a third Canberra entirely. Probably the largest we could hope for is a Bob Hope styled ro-ro container cargo vessel with no troop lift at all, or a Lars Bay styled Rotterdam/Gallicia.

We won't need a high speed ferry due to no need. A ferry of 20 knots, at best, the size of the Canterbury or larger will be sufficient, possibly a Lars Bay styled Rotterdam, both types without command and control? The size of the ro-ro meeting a required vehicle, cargo or troop lift capability overall. More of a LSD instead of a LPD?

 

[gf0012-aust]

So, we should forget about a third Canberra entirely.

Nope I'm just saying that my prev bullets are things that can have a (serious) impact.

Any major CAPEX is going to need a whole pile of 5%+ >>> FTE savings across a significant number of other projects for it to be realised.

There aren't enough minor CAPEX programs to prune to save all the big ones - and some of the smaller pograms are far more beneficial to keep than some of the more visible and "sexy" gear that get focused on...

 

[Tasman]

I'd be absolutely surprised at any white paper content that supports fixed wing fleet air arm as well as a third and redundant flag (task force management) capable asset.

I am sure that what you are saying describes the reality of the situation. Whilst many of us would like to see a third aviation enhanced LHD, we would not want that to be at the expense of other essential ADF assets.

So far as the need for embarked fixed wing aviation in the RAN, the reality of the situation is that for operations in the SW Pacific armed helicopters should suffice. If the RAN is ever deployed operationally to areas where a threat from the air might exist it would almost certainly be as part of a coalition force with air combat assets provided by the USN, USMC or perhaps the RN, together with land based support from the RAAF and allied air forces.

Tas

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am sure that what you are saying describes the reality of the situation. Whilst many of us would like to see a third aviation enhanced LHD, we would not want that to be at the expense of other essential ADF assets.

The big ticket items are going up against other critical capabilities - and the others IMO are more useful and essential

ISo far as the need for embarked fixed wing aviation in the RAN, the reality of the situation is that for operations in the SW Pacific armed helicopters should suffice. If the RAN is ever deployed operationally to areas where a threat from the air might exist it would almost certainly be as part of a coalition force with air combat assets provided by the USN, USMC or perhaps the RN, together with land based support from the RAAF and allied air forces.

Tas

We currently have people on exchange with USMC/USN/RN "learning" about expeditionary operations. There has also been noise towards the spanish and dutch. Primarily though, our interoperability is with US Force elements - and so is our doctrine.

we don't intend going into environments where we need our own fixed wing fast movers. the intent is to provide capability outside of that niche set.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Without the purchase of the F-35Bs, there is no reason to do so.

There is, rotation. If you have three you can have one training, one operational and one in refit. The original need was for 3, we just ran out of money so it became 2 LHD's and a sea lift vessel.

While its nice to think of the third amphibious ship as that large, I think the RAN and the government would prefer a smaller sized ship, either moving a company group like the Canterbury or a battalion much like a Rotterdam or larger Canterbury, an image a few pages ago. I think a Canberra sized vessel may be too large for many operations, an overkill.

If you look at all of our significant south pacific deployments they have been battalion battlegroup+, its resonable to assume it will be similar or worse in the future. That is precisely what a canberra is designed to do, deploy & sustain a mech battalion and provide it with air cover.

A Cantubery would be compleatly inadequate for a 1999 timor leste or even the more recent deployment, same for the Soloman's. All of those deployments were relatively benign, what if we have to go into a hot environment against a relatively well armed foe? Without ARH or heavy units its going to be a tad more difficult i would think.

Fundimentally a company sized deployment isnt large enough to have an impact on any of the major peace enforcement problems in the SPac at the moment. A heavy battalion or brigade group is manadory for annother Timor Leste, and there has to be annother one on the horizon.

Canberra can do the job well, and it buys us insurance. Canberra means we can deploy ARH, M1, SPH and provide real air mobility anywere in the SPAC, a super Cantuberry could not. The ADF will be able to apply a significant local capability overmatch on anyone in region because of canbera. I'd say it was the perfect choice, even without F-35B.

If they dont want a 3rd one, we'll id suspect it would be similar in size, probably a Ro-Ro.

 

[Lofty_DBF]

How would the ADF handle and opposed landing equipped with these ships in fiji to over throw the military coup.

 

[Aussie Digger]

How would the ADF handle and opposed landing equipped with these ships in fiji to over throw the military coup.

First of all, our Government will dither for months awaiting a UN Security Council resolution "allowing" us to do something. Meanwhile the unarmed diplomats, AFP and Embassy staff already in-Country will be shot at and attacked numerous times. Oh, and a few hundred civilians will probably die, half the Country will be burnt to the Ground and the main offenders will have months of warning about the "heavy hitters coming to get them", but hey, without the UN's permission...

Meanwhile artillery units in Townsville would be confiscating mobile phones and wrapping public payphones with barbed wire in order to preserve "Opsec" and not allow any of it's troops to contact relatives and tell them they are about to deploy overseas.

This activity will be conducted at EXACTLY the same time that Channel 7/9/10/ABC, SBS, BBC and CNN are showing live video footage around the world of Infantry, Special Forces, Cavalry and Air Force and Navy units rolling out of their respective barracks and heading off on the EXACT same deployment...

Apparently Privates and Corporals/Bombadiers are "strategic" now (if you read Army/ADF Journals) but can they maintain "Opsec" of their own accord? Apparently not...

The special warfare operations elements will be inserted along with 3RAR to hold an airfield and once this is safely achieved, RAAF will deploy ADGies to take over the role from the Army units already there, but the ADgies will proclaim to anyone who will listen that THEY and THEY alone conducted the vital mission of "securing the airfield" to allow ALL the other ADF elements (RAN included) to enter the Country and commence operations...

SOCOMD operators will then walk around in flash kit, with flash gats different to everyone else in ADF, the world's flashest vehicles, again different to everything else in ADF and the worlds most expensive sunglasses, boots, webbing and packs and will then start complaining longly and loudly that their "Opsec" has been compromised because reporters happen to be running around the place filming and taking thousands of still photographs of them...

A single contact will happen, in which the inevitable (the thing that happens when groups of men with training and automatic weapons start shooting at each other) occurs and Government will have to try and defend to the media why we shot someone...

Government will also come to a sudden realisation that it has under-funded ADF for years and go on a subsequent spending spree that annoys the hell out of Academics (aka "strategic analysts") in Australia, who despite never spending a day in a uniform performing military duties will "line up" to tell ADF how it SHOULD be doing it's job and of course with which tools...

Members of ADF not remotely attached to a line unit, will deploy for a 24 hour period, to ensure they qualify for the Active Service medal, UN medal for the deployment and probably a few more gongs ("Army Combat Badge anyone?) to ensure they present a proper military bearing in the YEARS that they will be wearing their "polyester uniforms" for...

Or am I a bit cynical?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Or am I a bit cynical?

Not at all mate.....

 

[battlensign]

First of all, our Government will dither for months awaiting a UN Security Council resolution "allowing" us to do something. Meanwhile the unarmed diplomats, AFP and Embassy staff already in-Country will be shot at and attacked numerous times. Oh, and a few hundred civilians will probably die, half the Country will be burnt to the Ground and the main offenders will have months of warning about the "heavy hitters coming to get them", but hey, without the UN's permission...

Meanwhile artillery units in Townsville would be confiscating mobile phones and wrapping public payphones with barbed wire in order to preserve "Opsec" and not allow any of it's troops to contact relatives and tell them they are about to deploy overseas.

This activity will be conducted at EXACTLY the same time that Channel 7/9/10/ABC, SBS, BBC and CNN are showing live video footage around the world of Infantry, Special Forces, Cavalry and Air Force and Navy units rolling out of their respective barracks and heading off on the EXACT same deployment...

Apparently Privates and Corporals/Bombadiers are "strategic" now (if you read Army/ADF Journals) but can they maintain "Opsec" of their own accord? Apparently not...

The special warfare operations elements will be inserted along with 3RAR to hold an airfield and once this is safely achieved, RAAF will deploy ADGies to take over the role from the Army units already there, but the ADgies will proclaim to anyone who will listen that THEY and THEY alone conducted the vital mission of "securing the airfield" to allow ALL the other ADF elements (RAN included) to enter the Country and commence operations...

SOCOMD operators will then walk around in flash kit, with flash gats different to everyone else in ADF, the world's flashest vehicles, again different to everything else in ADF and the worlds most expensive sunglasses, boots, webbing and packs and will then start complaining longly and loudly that their "Opsec" has been compromised because reporters happen to be running around the place filming and taking thousands of still photographs of them...

A single contact will happen, in which the inevitable (the thing that happens when groups of men with training and automatic weapons start shooting at each other) occurs and Government will have to try and defend to the media why we shot someone...

Government will also come to a sudden realisation that it has under-funded ADF for years and go on a subsequent spending spree that annoys the hell out of Academics (aka "strategic analysts") in Australia, who despite never spending a day in a uniform performing military duties will "line up" to tell ADF how it SHOULD be doing it's job and of course with which tools...

Members of ADF not remotely attached to a line unit, will deploy for a 24 hour period, to ensure they qualify for the Active Service medal, UN medal for the deployment and probably a few more gongs ("Army Combat Badge anyone?) to ensure they present a proper military bearing in the YEARS that they will be wearing their "polyester uniforms" for...

Or am I a bit cynical?

That seems so accurate it's actually scary........ (definately rings a bell)

Brett.

 

[swerve]

Its a given that larger small landing craft capable of handling the M1-A1s are available to be purchased. A new third amphibious ship may be more a ro-ro container cargo ship than an amphibious ship for strategic sea lift instead of tactical sea lift. Labor could buy a ship that costs as little as $150 million instead of $1.5 billion each. The US Navy bought their Bob Hopes, up to 40,000 tons, for about $200 million each. And New Zealand bought their Canterbury, of 8-9,000 tons, for NZ$ 138 million, or around US$ 100 million.

Certainly! The Point-class cost about £40 million each if built in the UK, & a bit less if built in Germany. The cost of the four German-built ships can be inferred from the total cost of the PFI contract - £950 million - less the sum spent in the UK - £800 million. Therefore £37.5 mn each. For that, you get a 22000 ton, lightly militarised ro-ro, capable of deploying Mexeflotes, cargo deck strong enough for nose to tail Challenger 2s, & exceeding the specs of standard commercial ro-ros in other useful ways, without being in any way warships. A very good buy, IMO, signs that even the MoD can get it right sometimes.

While I don't know exactly what role the RAN envisages for a third ship, if it's just transport into austere harbours, something along those lines, of whatever tonnage the RAN think right, should do the job, at much lower cost than a proper amphib.

 

[old faithful]

AD, thats gold!"Contact" would pobably be started by UD from Adgie! LOL

 

[Tasman]

Or am I a bit cynical?

Just a little bit perhaps - but it does seem scarily close to reality! :shudder

Tas

 

[barra]

First of all, our Government will dither for months awaiting a UN Security Council resolution "allowing" us to do something. Meanwhile the unarmed diplomats, AFP and Embassy staff already in-Country will be shot at and attacked numerous times. Oh, and a few hundred civilians will probably die, half the Country will be burnt to the Ground and the main offenders will have months of warning about the "heavy hitters coming to get them", but hey, without the UN's permission...

Meanwhile artillery units in Townsville would be confiscating mobile phones and wrapping public payphones with barbed wire in order to preserve "Opsec" and not allow any of it's troops to contact relatives and tell them they are about to deploy overseas.

This activity will be conducted at EXACTLY the same time that Channel 7/9/10/ABC, SBS, BBC and CNN are showing live video footage around the world of Infantry, Special Forces, Cavalry and Air Force and Navy units rolling out of their respective barracks and heading off on the EXACT same deployment...

Apparently Privates and Corporals/Bombadiers are "strategic" now (if you read Army/ADF Journals) but can they maintain "Opsec" of their own accord? Apparently not...

The special warfare operations elements will be inserted along with 3RAR to hold an airfield and once this is safely achieved, RAAF will deploy ADGies to take over the role from the Army units already there, but the ADgies will proclaim to anyone who will listen that THEY and THEY alone conducted the vital mission of "securing the airfield" to allow ALL the other ADF elements (RAN included) to enter the Country and commence operations...

SOCOMD operators will then walk around in flash kit, with flash gats different to everyone else in ADF, the world's flashest vehicles, again different to everything else in ADF and the worlds most expensive sunglasses, boots, webbing and packs and will then start complaining longly and loudly that their "Opsec" has been compromised because reporters happen to be running around the place filming and taking thousands of still photographs of them...

A single contact will happen, in which the inevitable (the thing that happens when groups of men with training and automatic weapons start shooting at each other) occurs and Government will have to try and defend to the media why we shot someone...

Government will also come to a sudden realisation that it has under-funded ADF for years and go on a subsequent spending spree that annoys the hell out of Academics (aka "strategic analysts") in Australia, who despite never spending a day in a uniform performing military duties will "line up" to tell ADF how it SHOULD be doing it's job and of course with which tools...

Members of ADF not remotely attached to a line unit, will deploy for a 24 hour period, to ensure they qualify for the Active Service medal, UN medal for the deployment and probably a few more gongs ("Army Combat Badge anyone?) to ensure they present a proper military bearing in the YEARS that they will be wearing their "polyester uniforms" for...

Or am I a bit cynical?

Cynical? You have nailed it pretty well. Except you forgot the part were the ADF control who the media has access to, ensuring only people properly trained to spew forth the "correct" answers are interviewed. We may protect "freedom of speech" but god knows you can't practice it !!!

 

[Lofty_DBF]

I makes me laugh everytime i see a RAN bandies getting around with AASM and ASM. got to love war fighting bandies.

 

[alexsa]

...

Or am I a bit cynical?

cynical .... not at all. Susinclty and ammusingly put I would say. The saddest part of this is that it has all happened at one time or another before. I was around when the fleet wore a rut in the ocean off Fiji (the first time) for no purpose at all. The Hawke government ditthered while the navy chewed up its budget on fuel and increased maintenacne requirements. (A bit like using C-130 hours for the pilots stricke). I understand a few in government wanted us to go in boots and all but the reality was the we were woefully ill equipped even for that.

 

[RubiconNZ]

cynical .... not at all. Susinclty and ammusingly put I would say. The saddest part of this is that it has all happened at one time or another before. I was around when the fleet wore a rut in the ocean off Fiji (the first time) for no purpose at all. The Hawke government ditthered while the navy chewed up its budget on fuel and increased maintenacne requirements. (A bit like using C-130 hours for the pilots stricke). I understand a few in government wanted us to go in boots and all but the reality was the we were woefully ill equipped even for that.

Do you think we could do it now?