Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

rossfrb_1

Member
no air launched mu90 for RAN

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23897956-31477,00.html
Integration doubts sink $300m torpedo project

Patrick Walters, National security editor | June 21, 2008

DEFENCE Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has dumped a $300 million plan to fit anti-submarine torpedoes to the navy's Seahawk helicopters and the RAAF's AP3 Orion surveillance aircraft.

The European MU90 lightweight torpedo is being fitted to the navy's Anzac and FFG-class frigates, but the airborne phase of the $616 million project is now considered a high-risk integration challenge by the Government.

"I am pleased that we have been able to make the MU90 work off the navy's warships," Mr Fitzgibbon said. "However, I was not prepared to follow the previous government's practice of gambling with taxpayers' money by proceeding with the allocation of $300million to fit the torpedo to various aircraft while doubt remained that it would work properly in that role."

The Defence Department had planned to fit the torpedo to up to five separate platforms starting with the Anzac frigates, adding to the overall risk of the project.

Mr Fitzgibbon said the Government would need to be reassured via the upcoming defence white paper that an upgraded air-launched lightweight torpedo was essential for the defence force.

"A complicated systems-integration task involving old aircraft sets off several bright-red warning lights for me, especially when Australia would have been the only country attempting to make that aircraft and weapon combination," he said.

Early this year, the Rudd Government scrapped the $1billion Seasprite helicopter, to which the MU90 was due to be fitted, after years of delays and cost overruns driven by systems integration problems.

The MU90 is 3m long, weighs 300kg and has a range of up to 10km. Already in service with five European navies, it is designed to track and hit submarines at depths of more than 1km.

The Defence Department ordered the MU90 in 1999 amid concerns about the long-term submarine build-up in Asian navies, led by China's.

The torpedo program, Project Djimindi, is a partnership between the Defence Department, Thales Australia, French defence manufacturer DCNS and Italian torpedo-maker Whitehead Alenia.

Last week, the navy successfully test-fired the MU90 from the Anzac frigate HMAS Toowoomba - the first time the torpedo had been fired from an Australian warship. The MU90 has been acquired in three phases, and all eight Anzac frigates are now capable of launching the weapon.

Mr Fitzgibbon also expressed concerns over the RAAF's $3.5 billion Project Wedgetail, involving the delivery of six airborne early warning aircraft from 2010.

"I was disappointed to be informed recently by the prime contractor on the project, Boeing, that there will be a further slippage of 10 months in the delivery of the first fully capable aircraft," he said.

"This is a total delay of 38 months against the original contract the former government entered into."

Fair enough I guess, with the proviso that I would expect at least some of the ADF MRH-90 fleet to be capable of carrying the MU90.
Has there been any word as to ASuW capabilities for ADF MRH-90?

rb
 

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23897956-31477,00.html
Integration doubts sink $300m torpedo project


...Fair enough I guess, with the proviso that I would expect at least some of the ADF MRH-90 fleet to be capable of carrying the MU90.
Has there been any word as to ASuW capabilities for ADF MRH-90?

rb
I can see where the government is coming from but I am starting to become a bit alarmed that the only equipment procurement decisions being made by the present government seem to be cancellations rather than purchases.

I do think that Australia needs to stop trying to go it alone with projects that involve the integration of sophisticated equipment onto ADF platforms. I think we need a few years of successful 'off the shelf' purchases of 'proven' systems to restore the confidence of the government, media and general public in defence procurement. At the moment far too many people regard it as an expensive joke.

It will be interesting to see whether the ADF leadership will try to convince the government that an "upgraded air-launched lightweight torpedo is essential for the defence force!"

Tas
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
The Third LHD is a long way away from a decision. Could happen 1 or 2 federal governments from now.

As long as they don't purchase something to do a simular job, then the door is open. And as long as the F-35B production line is still open.

At this stage there are plenty of possibilities. The 3rd LHD wouldnt be delivered until after 2014 earliest, who knows when Australia could order a batch of F-35B's.

The Falklands did show what can be done if you have the basics (ie a carrier). It also highlighted why its generally not feasable to refuel even long range aircraft for missions across the globe.

Ive heard of the CVF operating during war time up to 50 aircraft with a airwing of about 40 F-35B's. It has a smallish hanger, but a lot of deck space. It won't operate like a Nimitz. But if the CVF's are regularly rotated could be a very effective carrier.
 

RubiconNZ

The Wanderer
It will be interesting to see whether the ADF leadership will try to convince the government that an "upgraded air-launched lightweight torpedo is essential for the defence force!"
Tas
It would be a real plonker DefMin that needs convincing, I would think.
Ah Labor Governments, just like the one to the right where Torpedo's get replaced 3 years after the current ones are decommissioned.
Happy Days.:rolleyes:
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23897956-31477,00.html
Integration doubts sink $300m torpedo project

Patrick Walters, National security editor | June 21, 2008

DEFENCE Minister Joel Fitzgibbon has dumped a $300 million plan to fit anti-submarine torpedoes to the navy's Seahawk helicopters and the RAAF's AP3 Orion surveillance aircraft.

The European MU90 lightweight torpedo is being fitted to the navy's Anzac and FFG-class frigates, but the airborne phase of the $616 million project is now considered a high-risk integration challenge by the Government.

"I am pleased that we have been able to make the MU90 work off the navy's warships," Mr Fitzgibbon said. "However, I was not prepared to follow the previous government's practice of gambling with taxpayers' money by proceeding with the allocation of $300million to fit the torpedo to various aircraft while doubt remained that it would work properly in that role."

"I was disappointed to be informed recently by the prime contractor on the project, Boeing, that there will be a further slippage of 10 months in the delivery of the first fully capable aircraft," he said.

"This is a total delay of 38 months against the original contract the former government entered into."


rb
This should be an alarming decision by an stretch of the imagination. Our 'air' assests will be limted to the Mk46. Hardly a good situation given the age of the technology and stocks of the weapon.

The best we can hope for is the seahawk replacment and the MMA will come intergrated with the next generation weapon and I suspect this is what the government is hoping for to dodge the intergratiosn costs and save money.

Suggest the thinking is old ALP ................. no perceived threat in our time
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
This should be an alarming decision by an stretch of the imagination. Our 'air' assests will be limted to the Mk46. Hardly a good situation given the age of the technology and stocks of the weapon.

The best we can hope for is the seahawk replacment and the MMA will come intergrated with the next generation weapon and I suspect this is what the government is hoping for to dodge the intergratiosn costs and save money.

Suggest the thinking is old ALP ................. no perceived threat in our time
I got the feeling that the MU-90 was the "right" torpedo when it was chosen, but it's capability has already been superseded by the Mk 50, particularly in the air-launched mode, with the standoff kit that it can be equipped with.

God I hope so... ALP has proven awfully adept at cutting capability so far. Let us pray they demonstrate an ability to replace that which has been cut...
 

Salty Dog

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
I got the feeling that the MU-90 was the "right" torpedo when it was chosen, but it's capability has already been superseded by the Mk 50, particularly in the air-launched mode, with the standoff kit that it can be equipped with.

God I hope so... ALP has proven awfully adept at cutting capability so far. Let us pray they demonstrate an ability to replace that which has been cut...
I agree the Mk-50 superseding the Mu-90. IMHO the problem is at the systems integration level. With Boeing as the prime, it would be interesting to see which other company is working on the MU-90 integration. Could be some behind the scenes fuss leading to the delays (especially if a US company is integrating a European torpedo).
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I got the feeling that the MU-90 was the "right" torpedo when it was chosen, but it's capability has already been superseded by the Mk 50, particularly in the air-launched mode, with the standoff kit that it can be equipped with.

God I hope so... ALP has proven awfully adept at cutting capability so far. Let us pray they demonstrate an ability to replace that which has been cut...
When you look at it if the NF-90 is selected as the Seahawk replacment it will come intergrated with the MU-90 while the Romeo will come intergrated with the Mk50. Depending on how quickly this is progressed (noting I don't have much faith int he ALP in this regard) then it may make sense not to intergrate the MU-90 on the current Seahawk.

I am less convinced in regards to the AP-3C as this aircraft will be in service for some time yet. In fact I doubt Mr fitzgibbons wouel have a clue about what was requried to 'make this work' it is simply a money saving exercise. I have to say I am heartily sick of the harking back to the last government that goes on considering the ALP gave the sprite (it was the only contnder left when the change of government occured), the Collins contract and the armed with nothing ANZAC as well as running defence into the ground. I am beginning to wish the opposition would attack them on this.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
actually, at this stage there are bugger all possibilities. the ADF we thought was going to be is not going to happen - not by a long shot.
Well thats disapointing, the dream was a very worthy one. Im hoping that we will eventually get there. I don't think the current government is out to try to destroy the ADF. But there have been a fair few questionable projects in the ADF wasting money and the government is looking at cutting government spending.

2 LHD are go, 3 AWD are go, 4th I still recon is likely... Australia will buy the F-35.. Anything above and beyond your looking out past 2015 for delivery.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well thats disapointing, the dream was a very worthy one. Im hoping that we will eventually get there. I don't think the current government is out to try to destroy the ADF. But there have been a fair few questionable projects in the ADF wasting money and the government is looking at cutting government spending.
I could comment but can't. It's not that simple. Unfortunately, I would argue that we're in a situation where good advice doesn't have legs, and bad advice from ill informed ears (with no military background or comprehension of how militaries work) gets up.

Unfort free and open debate about this is a career limiting move. That's even sadder than some of the ferk ups that are being generated as it means that free frank and robust debate from people who are actually closer to the coalface will not get heard for fear of screwing your career. Thats an indictment on the system more than manipulating the numbers to get a free kick on the prev Govt all the time.


4th I still recon is likely
and an australian astronaut walking on the moon will happen next week as well......
 
Last edited:

icelord

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
an australian astronaut on the moon will happen next week as well......
Andy thomas is coming out of retirement?

Is it just me, or does it seem the current "Govt." is hanging all its "ideas" on the new white paper. I can see the benefit they want, but at what cost? Have all the last white papers priorities been completed...
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Andy thomas is coming out of retirement?

Is it just me, or does it seem the current "Govt." is hanging all its "ideas" on the new white paper. I can see the benefit they want, but at what cost? Have all the last white papers priorities been completed...
Forgive me for being jaded but the white paper will say what they want it to say and will justify the decisions thye make. I would not presume that it will acturately reflect anything except the current political climate.
 

Sea Toby

New Member
All I expect from an ALP white paper is to hold the line on spending, but they will have to address a third sea lift ship which could be cut, a fourth destroyer which could be cut, a second replenishment ship which is needed, and development of a new class of submarines which won' be ordered until after the LHDs and destroyers are built, and most likely the Sea Sprite replacement which is most needed as far as the RAN is concerned. I wouldn't expect more than a second replenishment ship and a Sea Sprite replacement helicopter buys during ALP's first government for the navy and of course the long awaited Lightning IIs for the air force.
 
Last edited:

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
All I expect from an ALP white paper is to hold the line on spending, but they will have to address a third sea lift ship which could be cut, a fourth destroyer which could be cut, a second replenishment ship which is needed, and development of a new class of submarines which won' be ordered until after the LHDs and destroyers are built, and most likely the Sea Sprite replacement which is most needed as far as the RAN is concerned. I wouldn't expect more than a second replenishment ship and a Sea Sprite replacement helicopter buys during ALP's first government for the navy and of course the long awaited Lightning IIs for the air force.
I think that what you have said is a fairly accurate prediction of what is likely during the government's present term. In fact getting these projects approved and avoiding cutbacks with existing projects is probably close to being a best case scenario! :rolleyes:

Tas
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
I think that what you have said is a fairly accurate prediction of what is likely during the government's present term. In fact getting these projects approved and avoiding cutbacks with existing projects is probably close to being a best case scenario! :rolleyes:

Tas
They'll probably say "We are getting 24 Super Hornets so we only need 76 F35's now, not 100." And thats just for a start. ;)
 

battlensign

New Member
They'll probably say "We are getting 24 Super Hornets so we only need 76 F35's now, not 100." And thats just for a start. ;)
Whilst obviously the change of government will alter the perceptions of the important people at the political level I would suggest there are two arguments against that likelyhood. 1) that was most definately not the intention of the DefMin at the time, and 2) Labour seems to be big on aircraft and subs (general observation).

Brett.
 

PeterM

Active Member
They'll probably say "We are getting 24 Super Hornets so we only need 76 F35's now, not 100." And thats just for a start. ;)
Wasn't the deal with the USN such that we hand the 24 Superhornets back to the USN once the JSF comes into service in sufficient numbers?
 

StevoJH

The Bunker Group
Wasn't the deal with the USN such that we hand the 24 Superhornets back to the USN once the JSF comes into service in sufficient numbers?
Erm, not at the price that is being paid for them.

As i understand it. The Super Hornets are to replace the F111's and the F35's are to replace the original F18's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top