Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
I've no idea what specific type of vessel they have in mind, but defence has been talking about (relatively) cheap South Korean vessels, already manufactured and which, like HMAS Sirius could be modified in a limited way to suit RAN's military requirements (Comms, helo platform, limited self defence capacity - 12.7mm guns etc) and satisfy the capability requirement ADF is looking for.
Such a vessel would not be manufactured upon order, but like Sirius, would already exist, in civilian guise...
No. The Bays are LSDs. Landing Ship Dock. Entirely military design, though built to a commercial standard (note: not a merchant ship standard, but a commercial standard for military auxiliaries).
The Point-class are slightly militarised merchant ships. A commercial design, slightly modified to suit military use. e.g. the vehicle decks are reinforced so that they can take tanks & other heavy AFVs nose to tail. A standard commercial ro-ro would have to space them out. There are some other modifications. Nothing drastic, & I think all the mods could be applied retrospectively to an existing merchant ship without having to spend a fortune.
The Point-class are a bit bigger, & a lot cheaper, than the Bay-class. That's the difference between a military design, even built to a commercial standard, & a merchant ship design, even a militarised one.
[edit]BAe received over £187 mn to build two Bays, but part of that was costs incurred supporting Swan Hunter in building the other two. Allowing for inflation, a new Bay should cost about £100 mn, maybe a bit more.
You could get at least 2 Point class for that price. The two built by Harland & Wolff cost £40 mn each, & the four built by Flensburger were reported to be cheaper. The Koreans could do it cheaper still.
Last edited:
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
What i like about the Bay class/Point class combo is that if you linked up the mexafloats from the Bay's you could theoretically build a temporary unloading dock for the point class to unload their equipment onto without a proper port.
Don't forget the Bob Hope class the US Navy Maritime Command uses. They are Panamax sized and ran a bit more than US$200 million. I figure Australia could have one for around than A$300 million. They have around 12000 lane meters, or 35000 square meters of vehicle space. I would think a Bob Hope would be overkill though.
But cargo ships that size could probably be leased. But a Panamax sized ship which could carry too much isn't that expensive. I am sure a used ship similar in size to a Point class could be purchased for half that price.
But cargo ships that size could probably be leased. But a Panamax sized ship which could carry too much isn't that expensive. I am sure a used ship similar in size to a Point class could be purchased for half that price.
Last edited:
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
What sized unit's vehicles would you fit into 12000 lane metres? a Brigade or Division? In between?
A heavy tank division. Its a bit too much for Australia's requirements I am sure. I only posted their cost to compare prices with other more probable ships Australia will probably buy. I can't think of a larger ship than a Bob Hope that could fit through the current Panama Canal.
A cargo ship such as a Bob Hope which can haul a heavy division runs over US$200 million. But a San Antonio LPD which can haul a marine brigade runs nearly US$1.5 billion. There is a big difference in price here depending on the ship's mission.
A cargo ship such as a Bob Hope which can haul a heavy division runs over US$200 million. But a San Antonio LPD which can haul a marine brigade runs nearly US$1.5 billion. There is a big difference in price here depending on the ship's mission.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
I don't see Australia ever deploying a force larger then a Single Brigade group at a single time, we simply don't have a large enough army to support anything larger then that. Most of the equipment is relatively light as well, with the heaviest units the sea lift would be likely to carry being the ASLAV or M113AS4 or possibly an extremely low number of M1A1's.
If you want the capacity of a Bob Hope, it would make more sense to buy a few smaller ships. One mega-ship is too inflexible, & I agree, it's overkill.
A used ship the size of a Point class should be a lot less than half that price.
Yeah but we dont live in a vacuum.
Fielding a larger number of smaller ships is such a huge drain. We just dont have the people (or nowadays the funds). There are other factors as well.
... which is more of an argument against often relatively manpower-inefficient (... due to use of ancient machinery ...) US-designed ships ...
(even a modern Bob Hope has an active duty complement of around 45-50, a Point of around 18-22)
I still think the JHSV would be a reasonable alternative.
The JHSV cost are reportedly $100 million per vessel. If we could tack onto the US production run, then there are alot more savings (as well as very low risk and includes local involvement).
They provide substantial operational cost savings and offer capability the other options don't such as high speed and very shallow draft (providing exceptional littoral capability).
I think the range is sufficient for the ADF (from Incat):
Operating Range is a minimum of 1,200NM at 35 knots (average speed) in SS3 with 600 tonne pay load
Transit Range is a minimum of 4,700NM at 25 knots (average speed)
It is worth noting the US are going to use these for regional deployment from Guam, so they must have sufficent range.
I am not saying the JHSV is a leading contender, but at the same time, I wouldn't completely discard it as an option either.
The JHSV cost are reportedly $100 million per vessel. If we could tack onto the US production run, then there are alot more savings (as well as very low risk and includes local involvement).
They provide substantial operational cost savings and offer capability the other options don't such as high speed and very shallow draft (providing exceptional littoral capability).
I think the range is sufficient for the ADF (from Incat):
Operating Range is a minimum of 1,200NM at 35 knots (average speed) in SS3 with 600 tonne pay load
Transit Range is a minimum of 4,700NM at 25 knots (average speed)
It is worth noting the US are going to use these for regional deployment from Guam, so they must have sufficent range.
I am not saying the JHSV is a leading contender, but at the same time, I wouldn't completely discard it as an option either.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Just for reference, 600t is 20 ASLAV's without any support vehicles or anything, by the time you add in logistics etc, you are probably talking about deploying about 12 ASLAV's maximum. Compared to the point class which can carry a full mechanised battalions worth of vehicles and the bay class which can carry 32 Challenger 2 MBT's (63t each)
Does the ADF need a ship that can carry a full mechanised battalion in addition to the capability of 2 LHDs?
As far as the JHSV goes, it is designed to transport US Army and Marine Corps company-sized units with their vehicles, or reconfigure to become a troop transport for an infantry battalion. I believe the nominal capacity is listed at around 950t and 500 people.
That kind of size would be sufficient for ADF needs when you consider it is in addition to the LHDs
The JHSV is more flexible than traditional vessels, it can fill a wide variety of roles in more environments including shallow water operations and with limited facilities. The much higher transit speeds allow alot more operational activity.
There are ample cost effective options for the ADF depending on exactly what kind of thing they are looking for.
Personally I believe the JHSV is a wildcard, particularly as the RAN has operational experience with a similar type (although much smaller) and the RAN could leverage the considerable US operational experience. More importantly it is proven, mature technology and would most likely leveraging existing US production with additional cost and production benefits. As such the JHSV has minimal risk of cost over runs or production delays.
I freely admit that I am no expert, but there is a reason the US are building the JHSV class depsite a plethora of large scale amphibious and sealift capacity. I think the JHSV is an option that will have been seriously considered/evaluated by the ADF in the white paper and defence capability plan.
As far as the JHSV goes, it is designed to transport US Army and Marine Corps company-sized units with their vehicles, or reconfigure to become a troop transport for an infantry battalion. I believe the nominal capacity is listed at around 950t and 500 people.
That kind of size would be sufficient for ADF needs when you consider it is in addition to the LHDs
The JHSV is more flexible than traditional vessels, it can fill a wide variety of roles in more environments including shallow water operations and with limited facilities. The much higher transit speeds allow alot more operational activity.
There are ample cost effective options for the ADF depending on exactly what kind of thing they are looking for.
Personally I believe the JHSV is a wildcard, particularly as the RAN has operational experience with a similar type (although much smaller) and the RAN could leverage the considerable US operational experience. More importantly it is proven, mature technology and would most likely leveraging existing US production with additional cost and production benefits. As such the JHSV has minimal risk of cost over runs or production delays.
I freely admit that I am no expert, but there is a reason the US are building the JHSV class depsite a plethora of large scale amphibious and sealift capacity. I think the JHSV is an option that will have been seriously considered/evaluated by the ADF in the white paper and defence capability plan.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
If 1 Armoured Regt ever deploys by boat on an operation, I find it unlikely that less than a squadron would be deployed (13x tanks).
That is not an insignificant capability...
It should therefore be possible to buy two Point-class for a lot less than the cost of one Bob Hope, man them with fewer (overall) crew, & almost certainly operate them for less cost. And you'd have the flexibility & better availability of two ships vs one. Overall cargo capacity would be less, but as already said, a Bob Hope is more than is needed in any case, so that's not a problem.
I expect a Korean yard could build a Point equivalent, or militarise an equivalent low-manning merchant ship, for even less.
While I agree a high speed ferry may do the job in and around Australia, no one is going to perform an amphibious operation during a storm, its much tougher to predict the weather and the seas for a long distance operation, say to the Middle East or Africa. That is why I prefer a slow sea going ship, and New Zealand was criticized by Mr. Coles for picking a slow coastal ferry with the Canterbury. A ship similar to the Point class will be better when considering operations far from home.
One has to look no further than ferry operations worldwide. The first to shut down during a storm are the high speed ferries.
One has to look no further than ferry operations worldwide. The first to shut down during a storm are the high speed ferries.
The ADF might need a ship that can carry a lot of lorries full of supplies & heavy AFVs (SP artillery, tanks) to resupply & reinforce the assault force that has landed from the LHDs. After all, that's what we got the Points for.
The USA has "a plethora of large scale amphibious and sealift capacity". It can afford to supplement it with niche capabilities. The idea of this ship is to supply the RAN with that sealift. The JHSV is the icing on the: the heavy sealift is the cake. If you can't afford both, buy the cake without icing, not icing without a cake.
battlensign
New Member
Totally agree!!
- Poor bad weather performance
- Limited range
-Limited capacity beyond lifting a couple hundred light infantry
- No real capacity for Vehicles in the numbers needed by the ADF for its sealift solution under JP 2048 Phase 2 (C?).
EVERYTIME SOMEONE MENTIONS JHSV I WANT TO PUKE!!!!!
FFS, GET OFF THE DAMNED JHSV PEOPLE!!!!
Brett.
P.S okay, I am reverting to my 'happy place' now.....
- Status