Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ThePuss]

Very impressive video, the ship design looks superb. I particularly like the direct access from the flight-deck to the medical facilities.

Is there any plan to add a couple of Phalanx or SeaRam, or will they just go for 25/30mm's and/or the odd 7.25mm GPMG's?

As I understand it the armament will consist of 4X 25mm Typhoon mounts, 4 X 50cal MG mounts (Not sure if they are crew served or "Mini T's") and up to 8x4 Nulka Decoy launchers.
Mind you, the Spanish BPE has on the STBD side of the AFT Helo Lift is space and weight fot a single module (8 Cells) of VLS, I'm not sure if that space has been reserved on our LHD's but if it has, we already have the combat system (Same as the upgraded ANZAC's) So all they would need to add is an Director/ CEAPAR

 

[Blas de Lezo]

As I understand it the armament will consist of 4X 25mm Typhoon mounts, 4 X 50cal MG mounts (Not sure if they are crew served or "Mini T's") and up to 8x4 Nulka Decoy launchers.
Mind you, the Spanish BPE has on the STBD side of the AFT Helo Lift is space and weight fot a single module (8 Cells) of VLS, I'm not sure if that space has been reserved on our LHD's but if it has, we already have the combat system (Same as the upgraded ANZAC's) So all they would need to add is an Director/ CEAPAR

That is new to me, I thought we had to make do with the four typhoons (we got nothing so far). There was some talk of CIWS or RAMS but I think all we got were the round mounts for the typhoons.
Never heard of VLS, could you show me in this picture more or less where they should go?

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/5375/6137089.jpg


As far as I am aware this is the extent of the magnificent hardkill defensive system on JCI , round mounts for ....we hope typhoons + tripods for .50´s

http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/4705/34498955.jpg

As in your case, our combat system could easily take the vls management but.................. TG we got 5 F100´s!!

Thanks and regards.

Thanks also to fotosdebarcos for the pics

 

[Alonso Quijano]

The Best video:

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rIKtNzvIlc&feature=player_embedded"]YouTube - LHD Launch[/nomedia]

 

[aussienscale]

I am not sure if this is new or not but it's one of the better LHD videos I have seen
YouTube - LHD "Canberra Class", built by NAVANTIA & BAE SYSTEMS for Australian Navy.

As to how the LHD's will transfer to Melbourne, I believe they will get skull dragged here by a Ocean Tug. People continually quote that the MV Blue Marlin will "Piggy Back" the LHD's but I cannot see how they will ever fit onto her back. A 231m long LHD will simply not fit on top of a 217m (TOTAL LENGTH) Semisubmersible with out putting the LHD on a catastrophic angle (In the photo's of the USS Cole on the back of MV BM she looks like she is on one hell of an angle and a Arleigh Burke is only 2/3 thirds of the length of an LHD at 155m).

I also don't understand why people seem to think she needs to be piggybacked even if a suitable vessel exists. A LHD Hull is a water tight hydro dynamically streamed vessel that unlike a holed vessel like the USS Cole or a un hydro dynamically streamed oil rig, She can be easily towed by large Ocean going Tugs..... My two cents out

My first chance to see the launch vid's today Simultaneously gave me a both a lump in my throat and a lump in my pants :

The Blue Marlin was confirmed to me by email from the LHD Project office in Melbourne as being booked to transport both LHD's from Spain to Melbourne

Just to ad, here is a vid from a friend on Youtube who was at the launch, enjoy
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO-z32pS2kE"]YouTube - ALHD CANBERRA launched at Navantia Shipyards Ferrol-Fene[/nomedia]

 

[t68]

With the structure for the LHD being built in Australia is their going to be any changes from the Spanish design or built to an Australian design, if there are no changes would it not have been better for the Spanish to build the complete ship and just fit out here in Australia. Would we have had it in service sooner rather than later consider in hindsight with our problems in regards to amphibious assets.

It was interesting to note in a newspaper article putting the blame on the RAN for not managing their assets and goes onto say that the RAN mislead the government about the notification that HMAS Tobruk can go on 48 hours notice, minster for defence Stephen Smith is quoted as saying the RAN has severely compromised Australia national security in the way Navy has have handled our amphibious assets. (Sorry I cannot remember the paper that I read it from should have ripped it out and saved it)

The similarities between our current situation and the problem we had before the Kanimbla class LPA came into service. We leased HMAS Jervis Bay (AKR45) as a fast troop and equipment ferry, but hopefully the government can do something right in purchasing or a new build Bay class if the RN gets a better deal from someone else

Call for ferry to boost navy's enfeebled fleet - National News - National - General - The Border Mail

 

[aussienscale]

The LHD Superstructure will look the same as the JC1 but the internal fitout will be different, in particular the command spaces will be very different to the JC1. The decision for it to be done like that was IIRC that if we had the ability to make such a large ship the whole thing would have been made in Australia, but we don't so the hull and some fitout to be done in Spain and the remainder in Melbourne.

As for the media.....pfffft

 

[Sea Toby]

With the structure for the LHD being built in Australia is their going to be any changes from the Spanish design or built to an Australian design, if there are no changes would it not have been better for the Spanish to build the complete ship and just fit out here in Australia. Would we have had it in service sooner rather than later consider in hindsight with our problems in regards to amphibious assets.

It was interesting to note in a newspaper article putting the blame on the RAN for not managing their assets and goes onto say that the RAN mislead the government about the notification that HMAS Tobruk can go on 48 hours notice, minster for defence Stephen Smith is quoted as saying the RAN has severely compromised Australia national security in the way Navy has have handled our amphibious assets. (Sorry I cannot remember the paper that I read it from should have ripped it out and saved it)

The similarities between our current situation and the problem we had before the Kanimbla class LPA came into service. We leased HMAS Jervis Bay (AKR45) as a fast troop and equipment ferry, but hopefully the government can do something right in purchasing or a new build Bay class if the RN gets a better deal from someone else

Call for ferry to boost navy's enfeebled fleet - National News - National - General - The Border Mail

Australia should have bought a new amphibious ship back during the early 1990s for $350-400 million, but the government wouldn't do so... Therefore, they bought used Newport LSTs cheaply and reconfigured them to LPAs finding considerable rust which led to lengthly delays and huge cost over runs...

What bothers me the most about this is the defence minister scoring brownie points claiming half of the fleet isn't ready to go... Duh, the ships are rotated three to one, half shouldn't be ready to go... He is acting that buying the Largs Bay to close a gap is an extra unwanted buy, although buying a third amphibious ship is planned in the white paper... He should be singing praises getting this ship early for less than a new buy as finding a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, but isn't... The ship are nearly 40 years in age and should have been replaced five years ago at the latest... He is not asking the question why a new ship wasn't bought earlier...

Ever heard of the old saying, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bs....

 

[SASWanabe]

has anyone seen anything of Adelaides keel laying?

 

[Samoa]

The LHD Superstructure will look the same as the JC1 but the internal fitout will be different, in particular the command spaces will be very different to the JC1. The decision for it to be done like that was IIRC that if we had the ability to make such a large ship the whole thing would have been made in Australia, but we don't so the hull and some fitout to be done in Spain and the remainder in Melbourne.

While the general arrangement of the superstructure is the same, ie the compartment layout is the same, the command, control and communications equipment within them is completely different. That means the upper deck of the superstructure and mast layout is also different, as ALHD uses different radars, sensors, antennas, and hence arrangement of these also differs. In otherwords for a layman looking at the exterior profile of the superstructure there are significant differences.

 

[t68]

A lot of these problems were not only that we bought second hand ships full of rust is that from memory money was taken aside from other ships maintenance funds to cover the Kanimbla class conversion, money which should not have come from the RAN budget but from additional supplement. I’d bet that the RAN has had budgetary problems to cover contingencies from when Kanimbla class become operational of an overworked fleet, and if the RAN is not funded correctly we will have the same problems in the future with only 2 LHD and the extra sealift ship(bay?) a overworked asset and to little maintenance. It’s great we are getting assets so badly needed but we also need enough to sustain the capability 24/7.

 

[recce.k1]

The similarities between our current situation and the problem we had before the Kanimbla class LPA came into service. We leased HMAS Jervis Bay (AKR45) as a fast troop and equipment ferry, but hopefully the government can do something right in purchasing or a new build Bay class if the RN gets a better deal from someone else

Call for ferry to boost navy's enfeebled fleet - National News - National - General - The Border Mail

T68 - did you also see Andrew Davies' full article (as used as the basis of the news article)? Click on Download PDF.
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
What's the situation with LPA's and Tobruk's crew being occupied until the Bay and LHD's arrive later? Canterbury's core ship crewing is only 53 (excluding flight and army handling crews embarked, and the Bay only 60 according to the Davies PDF etc).

 

[t68]

T68 - did you also see Andrew Davies' full article (as used as the basis of the news article)? Click on Download PDF.
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
What's the situation with LPA's and Tobruk's crew being occupied until the Bay and LHD's arrive later? Canterbury's core ship crewing is only 53 (excluding flight and army handling crews embarked, and the Bay only 60 according to the Davies PDF etc).

Thanks for the link recce k1.

No I have not seen it yet; I only get to the computer on weekends or on a RDO.
Its sounds like he’s after an enlarged Austral MRV which in a good sea state MIGHT do the job in a regional context or a French MPV (multi purpose vessel) about halfway down the page.

Multi-Role Vessel - Austal

Mer et Marine : Toute l'actualité maritime

I had it translated from French to English and this is what it came up with, AG might be able to expanded on the French thinking he seems to have a really good grasp on these thing’s.

MPV: When the concept of L - CAT becomes an offshore intervention vessel

The largest of the family is MultiPurpose Projection Vessel. Long 90 metres, the MPV is a real offshore unit, both patrol vessel (OPV) and large vehicles (LST) landing gear. Can embark on weapons (artillery, anti-aircraft missiles and anti-ship...), its size enables to have a platform and hangar for helicopter (NH90 type) or drones. Two floats, given their size, they can host a system water-cooled fast craft (see even a towed sonar system). With a lateral loading ramp has MPV of 160 linear meters of parking lots, is 500 m² surface in a closed garage. With a height of 5 metres, the garage can accommodate 20 vehicles, including tanks. The maximum accommodation capacity is 300 people, including a crew of 25. Nevertheless, the boat was designed to a company of 120 men and a staff that has a small embedded command post MPV.
Displaying a very significant autonomy of the 12,000 nautical at 12 knots, order its speed reaches 20 knots at full load and no-load 25 knots. He can browse by seas force 6 or 7.

The MultiPurpose Vessel - MPV (©: CNIM)

The MPV lends itself so well to surveillance and maritime traffic protection missions (e.g. against piracy), or missions to combat drug trafficking. But at the same time as we have seen, it preserves transport and L - CAT landing capabilities. It can therefore be used for projecting the troops and vehicles, as well as to conduct humanitarian operations. Indeed, due to natural disasters, sending aid in a disaster zone where port infrastructures are non-existent or unusable is often difficult. Landing ships use is very useful in the image of the multitude of missions carried out in recent years by buildings of French light transport based overseas. With the MPV CNIM hope, indeed, position on the draft BIS (buildings of Intervention and sovereignty), aimed at replacing the current Batral.
Nevertheless, the first orders could be registered in the civil sector, where the CNIM based also hopes its new range of boats. For example, could see rich individuals acquire variants of the MPC for use as units of exploration...



PS
I forgot to ad that Stores basher would probably be the one to ask about crew situation, from what I can see he is posted to HMAS Manoora.

 

[aussienscale]

Hey everyone, just wondering if anyone has picked up what Navantia has done wrong with the Canberra ? Here is a video link
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO-z32pS2kE"]YouTube - ALHD CANBERRA launched at Navantia Shipyards Ferrol-Fene[/nomedia]

Have another look and see if you can pick up what they have F#%*&*D up ?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

If you need speed you use air. The RAAF could have evacuated Hamilton Island while a fast catamaran was still motoring there from where-ever.

 

[Sea Toby]

Hey everyone, just wondering if anyone has picked up what Navantia has done wrong with the Canberra ? Here is a video link
YouTube - ALHD CANBERRA launched at Navantia Shipyards Ferrol-Fene

Have another look and see if you can pick up what they have F#%*&*D up ?

The only thing I saw wrong was the painted wrong number on the hull aft to port... The small 02.... I was under the impression Canberra will be either 53 or 54 depending upon whether the Largs Bay or another amphibious ship is commissioned before the Canberra...

Looks to me Navantia can't win in this no win situation... At least the 02 reflects the second LHD/BPE Navantia has launched... Whatever her hull number is eventually I am sure that painted number will be corrected... Or did you see something else?

 

[StoresBasher]

A lot of these problems were not only that we bought second hand ships full of rust is that from memory money was taken aside from other ships maintenance funds to cover the Kanimbla class conversion, money which should not have come from the RAN budget but from additional supplement. I’d bet that the RAN has had budgetary problems to cover contingencies from when Kanimbla class become operational of an overworked fleet, and if the RAN is not funded correctly we will have the same problems in the future with only 2 LHD and the extra sealift ship(bay?) a overworked asset and to little maintenance. It’s great we are getting assets so badly needed but we also need enough to sustain the capability 24/7.

Finger pointing isn't going to to anyone any good at all.
All we can do now, is to try and right the wrong's.
That would be to get the Bay right now, and get her in service.
Otherwise in a few years time, we'll be kicking ourselves for not doing it.

Yes I am on Manoora, questions?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The only thing I saw wrong was the painted wrong number on the hull aft to port... The small 02.... I was under the impression Canberra will be either 53 or 54 depending upon whether the Largs Bay or another amphibious ship is commissioned before the Canberra...

That’s the RAN’s number for when she is commissioned. That event is two years off so the sub-contractor (Navantia) can paint any number they want on the side. She will be repainted before commissioned especially as she has to be hauled to the other side of the world before this happens.

 

[ThePuss]

That is new to me, I thought we had to make do with the four typhoons (we got nothing so far). There was some talk of CIWS or RAMS but I think all we got were the round mounts for the typhoons.
Never heard of VLS, could you show me in this picture more or less where they should go?

Imageshack - bpev.jpg

It may seem close to the rear aircraft parking area but ESSM does very little damage to it's own launcher when it fires, so I do not believe it would damage any Helo's: parked a couple of meters away....It may give the aircraft handlers a bit of a fright tough! :eek

I advocate the inclusion of a VLS module a few years down the track when the FFG's pay off and their almost new Mk41's are looking looking for a new home......Awww he followed me home can i keep him mum? :cat

 

[StoresBasher]

That’s the RAN’s number for when she is commissioned. That event is two years off so the sub-contractor (Navantia) can paint any number they want on the side. She will be repainted before commissioned especially as she has to be hauled to the other side of the world before this happens.

I was under the impression that the pennant numbers of Adelaide and Canberra were to be, 01 and 02, the same numbers that the FFG ships of the same name had?

 

[icelord]

I was under the impression that the pennant numbers of Adelaide and Canberra were to be, 01 and 02, the same numbers that the FFG ships of the same name had?

All draft Images ive seen show 01 HMAS Canberra and 02 HMAS Adelaide, first in class would get first number...seems like an odd error on navantinas part