Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[StevoJH]

Also the RAN is actually planning to upgrade Success:
Conversion of HMAS Success to International Maritime Organisation Compliance - Royal Australian Navy

Seems odd if it's only expected to last another ~6 years, especially considering it would be out of service for a year for the modifications...
It makes me wonder if they won't try to keep both Success and Sirius around longer, and delay any replacements.

If its similar to the proposed changes to the Kiwi's Endeavor it mainly involves not using the outer fuel tankers, providing a double hull at the cost of reduced bunkerage.

Frankly, with all the new (larger) ships planned, I would have thought buying three new replenishment vessels of the same type was the way to go, but I guess the money is needed elsewhere.

MARS would be nice, or possibly one of the new Spanish or Italian designs.

 

[PeterM]

If its similar to the proposed changes to the Kiwi's Endeavor it mainly involves not using the outer fuel tankers, providing a double hull at the cost of reduced bunkerage.



MARS would be nice, or possibly one of the new Spanish or Italian designs.

What about the German Berlin class as an option for the new replishment ship?

or even the RFA Wave class?

 

[StevoJH]

What about the German Berlin class as an option for the new replishment ship?

or even the RFA Wave class?

Both designs are over 10 years old now, it would be more efficient to continue production of a ship thats still being produced.

 

[agc33e]

I read the equipment for awd´s that were added with respect the f100, and i can understand you when you say that awd´s or canberras are going to be more expensive, with extra or differente equipment, but let me point that for example the radar lanza-n of the spanish lhd is 350 kms reach, and the land version 450+ kms, and it cost 28 mill euro for the porteguese air force, also i read about the giraffe radar and saw that 5 units of that radar for the uk where 30 mill pounds...so i suppose in this case, the spanish lhd radar should more expensive... the point i dont know exactly the situation for variants of the giraffe that could be more expensive...

 

[StevoJH]

I read the equipment for awd´s that were added with respect the f100, and i can understand you when you say that awd´s or canberras are going to be more expensive, with extra or differente equipment, but let me point that for example the radar lanza-n of the spanish lhd is 350 kms reach, and the land version 450+ kms, and it cost 28 mill euro for the porteguese air force, also i read about the giraffe radar and saw that 5 units of that radar for the uk where 30 mill pounds...so i suppose in this case, the spanish lhd radar should more expensive... the point i dont know exactly the situation for variants of the giraffe that could be more expensive...

Please use paragraphs.....

What were you saying? Since when did the UK use Sea Giraffe?

And what does radar have to do with Comm's and Command and Control gear when you will be datalinked to the nearest Hobart class anyway.

 

[swerve]

Both designs are over 10 years old now, it would be more efficient to continue production of a ship thats still being produced.

Germany has ordered another Berlin, to be called Bonn, pennant number A1413.

Other options include the Spanish Cantabria, or a tanker like those being built by Fincantieri for the Indian navy, of which the first was launched last month. Plenty of choice.

Tanker launch 12/02/2010

 

[PeterM]

Both designs are over 10 years old now, it would be more efficient to continue production of a ship thats still being produced.

Perhaps, but they aren't that old and are among the newer replishment ship designs in service.

Mind you the same could be said for the F100 class.

Actually the Cantabria are a larger version of the Patino class which entered service in 1995, I don't see any reason why the RAN couldn't do something similar with a Berlin class or Wave class (ie update the design for RAN needs).

I guess another option will be whatever the French replace the Durance class with.

there is certainly plenty of options, particularly given that there is another 5 years or so before the ship will be ordered.

 

[agc33e]

Please use paragraphs.....

What were you saying? Since when did the UK use Sea Giraffe?

And what does radar have to do with Comm's and Command and Control gear when you will be datalinked to the nearest Hobart class anyway.

I saw in the google search, the giraffe for the uk, the sea giraffe i dont know. But anyway that was to point the price of the giraffe.

the point is that the canberras are using a radar not the best for carrier things, of course, carrier things for command and control and for comms should be more powerful, like the radar is another example.

 

[Kilo 2-3]

The point is that the Canberras are using a radar which is not the best for carrier things. Of course, carrier things for command and control and for comms should be more powerful, like the radar is another example.

The Canberras really aren't going to be full-fledged carriers, they're going to be the command and amphibious/ aerial assault element for a RAN task force.

Given the fact that they're only operating helicopters in on or slightly over-the-horizon operations, radar and air defence are lower concern for the Canberra's than it would be for a full-fledged fixed-wing operating STOBAR or CATOBAR carrier. In that regard, the Canberras aren't really doing "carrier things" for their air wings, their just acting as a giant floating FARP.

Thus, the bigger issue is the radar on the AWDs, FFGs, etc. within the task forces Canberras will operate in, since the AD mission will be squarely on their plates.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I would imagine that with all the data linking there should be adiquate coverage.

LHD will have Giraffe AMB radar (maybe with Auspar/seamount)
AWD will have AN/SPY-1D(V) with most likely with Auspar/seamount
Frigates with have atleast a airsearch atleast as good as ( Raytheon SPS-49(V)8 ANZ radar) and seasearch with Giraffe, Auspar/seamount for target illumination and a navigational radar.
Wedgetail should be operational.
UAV's should be avalible launching off the LHD that will further improve range.
F35 and F-18F will also provide intel
JORN will cover everthing else over the top of everthing else.

We will have targeting data for anythin within 1000km of the LHD, and warning headings etc of anything approaching it from half a world away. We don't have to have a massive radar on the LHD itself. (Giraffe itself isn't a bad setup).

Frigates, AWD and LHD are most likely going to get what ever comes out of Sea 1448 4a and 4b.

To the extent it can be achieved, there is a desire to align procurement activity of the ES system for ANZAC and LHD and, if possible, AWD.

So we will have to see what comes out of that project. But the maxium allocated is $500 million for each, so theres no reason to doubt it won't be very decent.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the point is that the canberras are using a radar not the best for carrier things, of course, carrier things for command and control and for comms should be more powerful, like the radar is another example.

oh for goodness sake

what bit did you not read in my previous about what the canberras roles are - they are NOT, repeat NOT, repeat NOT - carriers.

it is idiotic to compare them to the JC's because the CONOPS for both are different.

if we wanted carriers we would have recrewed the Wasps.

 

[Sea Toby]

The Canberra LHD's will most likely be escorted by a networked Hobart class Aegis destroyer. I can't imagine a more powerful radar. Its very likely networked Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft will be flying overhead. Appears to me the Canberra LHD's will have a great overall radar picture.

Not every ship in a task force has to have Aegis radars. In my mind the only ships that have to have such powerful radars are the ships tasked for long range air defence, i.e., with SM-2 SAMs. Ships with shorter range SAMs don't require such powerful radars to shoot ESSMs or RAMs. This includes LHD's.

What is the sense of networking this super powerful radar coverage if every ship has such radars? Its not as if the LHD's will be facing the enemy alone, they will be a part of a task force....

Stop trying to compare ships as if its a pissing contest.

Australia isn't building a light carrier, they are building expeditionary warfare amphibious ships. Unlike Spain, Australia has to overcome seas and oceans with sea lift to meet any aggressor in neighboring nations. Australia is surrounded by a huge moat.

The Irish are somewhat taken aback that the CAR wants their peacekeepers to leave their country. The under equipped EU/UN peacekeeping forces have been more of a burden than they have been any help...

 

[agc33e]

oh for goodness sake

what bit did you not read in my previous about what the canberras roles are - they are NOT, repeat NOT, repeat NOT - carriers.

it is idiotic to compare them to the JC's because the CONOPS for both are different.

if we wanted carriers we would have recrewed the Wasps.

i know, i know, but someone said that the canberras are more expensive than the jci, i am continuing on that, doubting on that, because a lhd-carrier should be more expensive than an lhd, i say should be, maybe if you have jets than can do more things and further away maybe you need also a bigger support for it, command and control and comms etc..
We dont know the price of the jci like we dont know the price of the canberra.

 

[hairyman]

The third ship that we are yet to order, what differences is it likely to have as compared with the Canberras? Is a third Canberra the only answer, or are we likely to order something else?

 

[StevoJH]

The third ship that we are yet to order, what differences is it likely to have as compared with the Canberras? Is a third Canberra the only answer, or are we likely to order something else?

More likely to be a militarised RO-RO (aka.Point Class) or LSD/LPD along the lines of the enforcer class i'm guessing.

 

[LancasterBomber]

The world’s smallest microlaser

Hmmm interesting. Microcavity laser oscillating in a circuit based resonator (subwavelength electronic inductor-capacitor).

This could really open up 'micro machine' UUVs for our subs (from a processing power perspective).

You could have a mothership. Inside the mother ship will be a 'bulk haul' UUV to drive to and from station (with a strong focus on energy efficiency and stealth). Inside the bulk haul UUV will be your micro machine UUVs (with a focus on situational awareness and intelligence) for localised mission sets on station.

Human capital on the mothership could be controlling up to 10-15 micro UUVs each at any one time. These micro UUVs are perhaps highly modular and structured to meet specific mission objectives.

So you may have two types of tactical teams form on future subs - inbound and outbound. Outbound control the execution of UUV missions. Inbound teams manage the live data feeds streaming from missions. Obviously a degree of overlap but essentially two 'specialisations'.

Back to the skimmer talk.

 

[LancasterBomber]

Submarine escape and rescue exercised off the West Coast - Royal Australian Navy

What if we cant surface but can hold our depth (and we are way off the shelf).
Is it more complex to marry the support pod when the sub isnt 'grounded'?

Cheers.

 

[Lofty_DBF]

\\
I can not see why a submarine would be in that situation? why would a Collins class only be able to hold its depth and not surface? They can not hover.

 

[LancasterBomber]

They can not hover.

The terms "hovering" or "hover" as used herein and as understood in the art of a submarine vessel operating condition wherein the vessel is ballasted in such a way that its depth below the water surfaceremains substantially constant and the horizontal velocity of the vessel is substantially zero with respect to the surrounding water.

Inability to adjust ballast due to damage?

You are the expert. Feel free to school me. I am only learning about this stuff!

 

[agc33e]

With respect to crew problems for the subs, what about make the life of the subber very good, like going out to sea 1 month per year just, and the rest of the time with simulators and going out maybe 2 or 3 days, for example once or twice a month for 4 days plus the big out of one entire month, in peace time, so the subber has lot of spare time, good money, most of time at home, you can have many subbers able to rotate using the subs, so less time per crew at the sub...also for the crew number of smaller subs, for ex the s80 has 32 crew, so one collins crew gives for 2 s80´s, and if smaller than s80 maybe still less. But for that you need good simulators, for ex the s80´s tactical sim: type in youtube "SIMULADOR TÁCTICO DE ADIESTRAMIENTO PARA LOS SUBMARINOS DE LA SERIE S-80A" .

Also you can type in youtube "LHD JUAN CARLOS I segundas pruebas de mar" for the second sea trials of the jci with interesting movements.