Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[StingrayOZ]

So to say that even in a regional context that a carrier or a carrier like capability does not provide “much value” is pretty misguided. Land based air power is a poor substitute for organic in our big region.

I may have not communicated myself well. I said (or ment to) not much return value on our own carrier. Not that it wouldn't be effective (just not cost effective in most common situations), but we are talking about a Navy laying up most of its fleet for better times. Im not arguing against its capability, just its cost.

I am I suppose "F-35B for the ADF", I don't see the point in cutting all other forces to do that. I have to be careful here not to excite the carrier for the RAN stuff again. Our LHD are capable of landing, refuelling and launching F-35B's. I think that is an extremely positive capability to have. However with out current needs I don't think its a priority, yet, but we should procure items that don't specifically exclude it from happening at a later date. As with anything, we are limited by budgets so how much carrier would we get? Are we talking using the LHD and a hand full of F-35B's? Purchase of a bespoke carrier full of F-35C? Are we doing this without US or UK or regional partner support on our lonesome? Who are we up against?

Most muntions in the future will have both sea and land attack capability. I agree, its not cost effective, but each ship does have a 5" which may or may not be useful depending on if we have sea/air dominance or not. A 5" does not make a fighter/bomber but does go some of the way. We also have artillary arriving for us sometime in the future as well which will go some of the way for close support.

The way I envisage the ADF running fixed wing carrier aircraft is all that inital strike power means that the LHD can be freed up for the inital amphib landing. After which Ideally a 3rd LHD would arrive relieving on of the inital LHD's and providing space for half a dozen or so F-35B to operate for CAS. The F-35B would utilise existing air(and sea) refuelling assets but allow a greater number of aircraft to be avalible over any given area.

But what are we taking into this high threat enviroment? 1 AWD? We will have blind spots poking out everywhere and a single point of failure for the whole mission. We need the 4th AWD to do this. Then you need a dedicated carrier or at the very least a 3rd LHD or no amphibious landing to free up the LHD. Then we need the aircraft.

While the Japs aren't invading, who are we fighting with fixed wing aircraft or that we need CAS that the Tigers/5"/Tlam/harpoon can't provide? Why are we doing it alone? Do we have all the other supporting equipment. Possible yes, likely no. Hence my value for money statement.

 

[gf0012-aust]

When it comes to government bureaucracy i think i might make a hundred copies of 'yes minister' and send them up the hill...thinking episode with a hospital of 300 Admin staff, no patients and scaffolding out the front so people dont think its ready and open...much like defence some days.

/off topic.

give me the day when we can sue politicians for enforcing procurement decisions that weren't in the countries military capability interest and I'll be a happy man.

we have some decisions being sheeted home as an ADF issue when it was political.

when these projects ferk up it will be the usual SMH blame game - 5 miles off the real mark.

Collins is going to look like a reference project to successful outcomes in comparison.

 

[Jissy]

A big broom for bureaucracy is needed...

/off topic.

give me the day when we can sue politicians for enforcing procurement decisions that weren't in the countries military capability interest and I'll be a happy man.

we have some decisions being sheeted home as an ADF issue when it was political.

when these projects ferk up it will be the usual SMH blame game - 5 miles off the real mark.

Collins is going to look like a reference project to successful outcomes in comparison.

After reading all of the points raised by the professionals here, I am much more aware of the plight of our Services, of where the fundamental flaws are, and I for one, am greatful that you all care so much to take the time in giving such detailed responses.

I can only hope, one day soonish (nearer to next election maybe?), someone accidentally leaks the hospital fiasco to a more responsible press outlet, say 4 Corners for example, and expose the obvious over staffing and incompetence in the bureaucracy generally. I am sure it is only the tip of the iceberg!

For journos to understand, and the public, it would go a long way to set out the detail of what is needed when assessing staffing needs in relation to eg; bunks on assets etc, and who would be best at developing a working model that allows for the current needs for self supporting actions (such as needed in Afghanistan) and to reveal the common sense of building into purchases today the possible needs for the future, such as, the LHDs having the hardwear to be quickly turned into fixed wing support. In a strategic sense this makes a lot of sense.

The public needs to know this, which will bring huge pressure on the Gov. Public pressure often effects policy change. It seems to me, again after reading here, that the bureaucracy bloat has more to do with overall national employment figures status rather than departmental need, or is a result of long term mismanagement by head bureaucrats.

Their incompetence needs to be exposed, this matter strikes at the heart of our national security and readiness for sudden and unexpected conflcts.

Anyone who says there is no need for a build up of our forces (and I have read such arguments abroad) does not see the reality of what is happening in our region, an overall military build up, and in some places where change of power could become more fundamentalist. I could name names, but that is not the point.

Our national defense necessarily needs to cover any eventuality, the trick is, to get the full bang for our military buck. Reading here, I see the reality of how gross incompetence has affected our forces, and all unaccountable to the public it seems.

It is as infuriating as it is depressing.

The Government cannot argue revelation of this incompetence is contrary to the national interest, indeed, the reverse is true. The cover up is absolutely against the national interest and contrary to our national security. There maybe elements that want Australia to remain weak militarily, or don't care. One way to combat that, at least in part, is to restructure the bureaucracy.

Just my thoughts on the matter after reading here...

I am no expert, but I am sick and tired of seeing our military tax dollars wasted by bureaucrats and bunglers, resulting in either nothing happening (Sea Sprite fiasco) or huge waste and damage to assets (Collins subs) and most importantly, the unnecessary exposure of our front line troops to harm from a small and technologically inferior force, Taliban for example.

I know the Sea Sprite and Collins stuff ups have had their day in the partially occluded media sunlight, but, these aspects regarding the bureaucracy have not been delved into enough, and it needs to be done, before more harm is done.

One last point, I am all for, as much as competently possible, Aussie contracts being constructed here. But, when we can buy something "off shelf" already proven and highly effective more cheaply and/or delivered in perfect working order and on time, then that is the way we must go.

cheers to you all,
and remember,
by far the majority of Aussies want a highly effective and strong military force!

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I can only hope, one day soonish (nearer to next election maybe?), someone accidentally leaks the hospital fiasco to a more responsible press outlet, say 4 Corners for example, and expose the obvious over staffing and incompetence in the bureaucracy generally. I am sure it is only the tip of the iceberg!

He was referring to a story from an episode of a British comedy show about Governance and the civil service called “Yes, Minister” written by Sit Antony Jay. Its not real in detail but very real in how the system works, or doesn’t work. Used to be a time when you could learn real lessons from watching television.

The Yes (Prime) Minister Files - Introduction

 

[Jissy]

He was referring to a story from an episode of a British comedy show about Governance and the civil service called “Yes, Minister” written by Sit Antony Jay. Its not real in detail but very real in how the system works, or doesn’t work. Used to be a time when you could learn real lessons from watching television.

The Yes (Prime) Minister Files - Introduction

OH! hehe!
Thanks for that!

I obviously overlooked the wit, as it is a serious subject to my mind, yet I appreciate those on the inside having a good sarcastic humour... a result of frustration and constant disappointments.

But, obviously the there is more than enough to be looked into, and nothing will happen without more disclosure to the right source.

cheers

jay

 

[gf0012-aust]

But, obviously the there is more than enough to be looked into, and nothing will happen without more disclosure to the right source.

best of luck with that happening... people like their jobs too much. it keeps the banks away, puts food on the table, and they don't have to make involuntary friends in gaol...

 

[syed2011]

Army unlike the German, co-operation between the arms was neither instinctive nor automatic. Many cavalry regiments had only recently given up their horses and ideas of social superiority, compounded by tradition, stifled new concepts. While the regimental system conveyed many benefits, it tended to hamper flexibility.

 

[scatterbrains]

He was referring to a story from an episode of a British comedy show about Governance and the civil service called “Yes, Minister” written by Sit Antony Jay. Its not real in detail but very real in how the system works, or doesn’t work. Used to be a time when you could learn real lessons from watching television.

I attended a lecture by a bloke from BAE and it was mainly about dealing with the bureaucracy in this country and what a nightmare it is. Yes, Minister did came up during this talk although unfortunately none of the younger crowd understood, but the old guys certainly did!

 

[Jissy]

I attended a lecture by a bloke from BAE and it was mainly about dealing with the bureaucracy in this country and what a nightmare it is. Yes, Minister did came up during this talk although unfortunately none of the younger crowd understood, but the old guys certainly did!

"..a lecture by a bloke from BAE and it was mainly about dealing with the bureaucracy in this country and what a nightmare it is."

Hey Scatterbrains,
now that is interesting!

Did he elaborate with some specific examples? Is there a transcript or audio/vid of this criticism that you know of, and where to get it?

cheers

jay

 

[gf0012-aust]

"..a lecture by a bloke from BAE and it was mainly about dealing with the bureaucracy in this country and what a nightmare it is."

Hey Scatterbrains,
now that is interesting!

Did he elaborate with some specific examples? Is there a transcript or audio/vid of this criticism that you know of, and where to get it?

cheers

jay

having worked for BAE I'd not be putting too much stock on what some individual bitches about wrt process.

its a bit cute for someone in industry complaining.

Having worked as a contractor, as a consultant, (in a number of countries, not just Aust) and on the govt side of the shop I'd be cautious in some of the self promotion and aggrieved behaviour that gets flung about as procurement wisdom.

 

[Jissy]

best of luck with that happening... people like their jobs too much. it keeps the banks away, puts food on the table, and they don't have to make involuntary friends in gaol...

hehe! Yes, we all understand the realities, but, it might take someone who wishes to stand up for those on the front line today,and in the future, who maybe has just retired...maybe living OS in some far flung place that doesn't have extradition...

I can dream, but, nothing changes unless change is demanded, and that is only going to come about by these morons in bureaucracy being exposed.

It can be done without direct representation on screen, anonymously too...

Well, I can hope, in the meantime, everyone should keep talking about it, hopefully the penny will drop and someone will investigate.

Oh, and no, I am not an agent provocateur, in case that is what people are thinking!
I'm just a concerned citizen.
cheers

jay

 

[LancasterBomber]

jay

Look Jay just settle down a bit mate.
Quite frankly you are starting to worry me.

These issues are complex. Beware anyone who comes forth suggesting otherwise.

A grossly under resourced govt sector can make equally horrific forward planning platform decisions. You must implicitly understand the tradeoffs to any policy decision.

Our system is not broken. There are enough 'nutbags' floating around (in society in general) with grossly simplistic views of the world and how to 'spend defence dollars' without adding you to the list.

Discussion is good. No problems with that at all (i,e not trying to shut you up)

Keep reading books and absorbing the considered opines of those more qualified than yourself on these forums before you become too heavily invested in your own social reformation ideology.

Keep an open mind. There are many very switched on people in both govt and non govt sectors that have your national security covered.

Based on my interpretation of your postings (and the way in which you choose to propagate your arguments) it is my opinion you should let them get on with what they do best.

 

[scatterbrains]

Hey Scatterbrains,
now that is interesting!

Did he elaborate with some specific examples? Is there a transcript or audio/vid of this criticism that you know of, and where to get it?

There is no transcript of any sort, it was mainly to do with the aerospace industry in Australia and dealt with CASA , UAVs and a few other topics I cannot remember the specific of. It was hosted by the Royal Aeronautical Society at Usyd. AIAA talk on Friday, more BAE. Qantas CEO having a talk/dinner coming up also. I wont elaborate further out of fear for getting growled at due to off topic-ness.

having worked for BAE I'd not be putting too much stock on what some individual bitches about wrt process.

its a bit cute for someone in industry complaining.

Having worked as a contractor, as a consultant, (in a number of countries, not just Aust) and on the govt side of the shop I'd be cautious in some of the self promotion and aggrieved behaviour that gets flung about as procurement wisdom.

You are perhaps right, though though most of his grievance was with politicians. Just for reference he is ex-RAAF, DMO, Tenix and currently BAE in some departmental head position.

This was mainly related to the aerospace industry so I will not go into it further really, apologies for non-topic relevant post.

 

[ThePuss]

I attended a lecture by a bloke from BAE and it was mainly about dealing with the bureaucracy in this country and what a nightmare it is. Yes, Minister did came up during this talk although unfortunately none of the younger crowd understood, but the old guys certainly did!

I have been very quite recently, reading and not posting but this is too rich to let pass. I have been dealing with idiots from Tenix for over a decade( Mind you we don't call them Tenix in the navy but TENDIXS). Sure they may be BAE these days but it's still the same old Morons. If the Yes Minister comparison should be applied to anybody its them.....Useless rip off merchants

 

[scatterbrains]

I have been very quite recently reading and not posting but this is too rich to let pass. I have been dealing with idiots from Tenix for over a decade( Mind you we don't call them Tenix in the navy but TENDIXS). Sure they may be BAE these days but it's still the same old Morons. If the Yes Minister comparison should be applied to anybody its them.....Useless rip off merchants

The propaganda videos he showed us were pretty sexy though

 

[icelord]

Push to axe Collins subs now, buy European

A RADICAL plan is being pushed by a group of senior Australian submariners.

It is to retire two Collins-class submarines immediately and fast-track the purchase of four ready-made submarines from Europe.

The proposal, which has been sent to both the federal government and the opposition, reflects growing concern among some former senior naval officers that the government's plan to build 12 of the world's most sophisticated conventional submarines is flawed and unrealistic.

The proposal comes after Treasury last week urged the federal government to buy more off-the-shelf weaponry.

The former submariners say that Australia cannot afford to wait until 2025 for the new submarines and must take urgent action to buy off-the-shelf submarines from Europe to progressively replace the under-performing Collins-class fleet.

"Australia should rapidly acquire four locally built military-off-the-shelf (MOTS) submarines to address the submarine availability issue and address the growing capability gap between the Collins-class submarines and the modern submarines proliferating throughout the region," said Rex Patrick, a former submariner who assists the navy in undersea warfare training and who has authored the proposal.

"The Collins-class submarine program has been an unmitigated failure and two of the submarines should be decommissioned immediately (the HMAS Rankin and HMAS Collins) -- they are not available anyway, there are no crews for them and maintaining them is placing an ever increasing burden on the navy's budget."

The Rudd government's defence white paper committed to building 12 large, sophisticated submarines in Australia to replace the six Collins-class boats from the mid-2020s.

The plan to build 12 large homegrown submarines has been costed by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute at more than $36 billion, making it the nation's largest ever military project.

The government says it is still committed to the controversial plan, but there is growing debate in the defence community about whether such a large, complex and time-consuming project makes strategic and economic sense.

Mr Patrick argues it would be cheaper and easier for Australia to purchase proven off-the-shelf submarines from Europe, such as the German Type 214 or French Scorpenes, rather than try to build a new generation of unique, homegrown submarines like the Collins.

He said a military off-the-shelf submarine would meet Australia's strategic needs at a fraction of the cost of building a new class of Australian submarine.

Under his plan, the first boat of an initial batch of four MOTS submarines would be operational for the navy within five years and the remaining three in under eight years.

The first batch would be supplemented by two more batches of similar, but perhaps modified, design in the years ahead.

Push to axe Collins subs now, buy European | The Australian

Why is there never a smiley that best describes my feelings towards this...o wait, found it
:hitwall

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Push to axe Collins subs now, buy European | The Australian

Why is there never a smiley that best describes my feelings towards this...o wait, found it
:hitwall

Yeah great. Now that the F-111 is gone we have another BS proposal for force modernisation to occupy the attention of the defence gumbies.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yeah great. Now that the F-111 is gone we have another BS proposal for force modernisation to occupy the attention of the defence gumbies.

I can think of 2 ex RN nuke drivers who joined the RAN as conventional sub drivers who have the opposite view to Collins.

again its a bit cute when these guys were the ones who assisted in scoping the requirements for Collins - eg long range strike able to conduct missions out to Vladivostok, able to back up the USN 7th fleet and able to reflect US nuke combat cycles., and able to sport the same combat room fit out to ease interoperability issues and to move towards common combat rooms. some of these blokes were the same one who pushed for getting the Upholders as a 2nd interim squadron whilst Collins was repaired. (This despite the damning report that was done by RAN on the Upholders in 98-99

so to get equivalency fitout and to allow for future growth, try doing that with a scorpene or 214.

if we were to look at a co-op build then my preference would be to use Oyashios and their ilk as partber platforms. they have the size and fitout to retain the sensor and combat room environments we seek.

 

[Ananda]

The Rudd government's defence white paper committed to building 12 large, sophisticated submarines in Australia to replace the six Collins-class boats from the mid-2020s. The plan to build 12 large homegrown submarines has been costed by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute at more than $36 billion, making it the nation's largest ever military project.

Gent's a question may I Ask ? Is this cost calculation can be justified ? I Mean if not mistaken the initial plan for this subs will costs Australian Tax Payers $2 bio each, now it's going to be $ 3 bio each ?
IN that price, why don't just Australian goes with French Baracuda's..It's nuke, but it will worth while in that kind of price.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Gent's a question may I Ask ? Is this cost calculation can be justified ? I Mean if not mistaken the initial plan for this subs will costs Australian Tax Payers $2 bio each, now it's going to be $ 3 bio each ?
IN that price, why don't just Australian goes with French Baracuda's..It's nuke, but it will worth while in that kind of price.

The last thing we need is another french asset where we get screwed on through life costs and broken promises on capability.

besides we don't need nukes.