Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[John Newman]

Nothing I've seen shows a retrofit.

Largs is being considered (and its still subject to a deeper materiel examination and basic trials) because there is a capability gap of some urgency

to attack her superstructure with significant structural changes would delay her for some time, I'd estimate another 2 yrs, and as she is arriving (subject to successful final review and trials) I cannot see anyone pulling her offline for another 2 years to make mods that are outside of her employment intent. This also ignores the reality of how long it would take to get an approved and accepted engineering solution approved - let alone actioned

To put her into maintenance for another 2 yrs would make a nonsense of the urgent intent to get her in the first place.

Canterbury will not cover off the capability - and she is only designed to supplement any deficiencies generated by Tobruks potential withdrawal

Forget about major changes. The planning and implementation realities suggest not.

Again I agree, the RAN is in the "poo" and needs the Largs Bay in service ASAP as is, I get that 100% no argument.

All I keep asking is, because I have seen reference to it, in both print and online, that in the original design a hangar was a "possible retrofit" if required.

I'm not saying it does or doesn't need a hangar, all I want to know if that it is true.

I'm sure the only modifications the RAN will do to Largs Bay is change anything that is "necessary" to put her into service, again, agree 100%

Somewhere down the track, and that will be well after the LHD's are in service, there probably would be consideration for major changes, inconjunction with a major refit / modernisation.

And again, that's is something the navy will work out for themselves in the years ahead.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Somewhere down the track, and that will be well after the LHD's are in service, there probably would be consideration for major changes, inconjunction with a major refit / modernisation.

And again, that's is something the navy will work out for themselves in the years ahead.

There is an aversion to going out and doing major mods to major assets, one of the considerations for buying an asset like Largs (assuming that she does pass all the final hurdles) is that she is fundamentally fit for purpose.

ie the Cabinet and the NSC are not going to get "ambushed" by RAN or CDG that there is some major work to do to bring her up to the capability requirement.

Unless there is a compelling need (ie a tactical requirement) then nobody will be going to the NSC for a financial handout to make additional mods for the next 10 years.

Monies have been pulled already, that means that orgs are actually running on less money as its a forced saving. Even ops support has less money.

This is the real world state of play for the next 10 years. So, could she get major structural changes if:

we find a worm hole and shorten the 10 years
we have a compelling tactical requirement that has been unforseen (which would make a few TAC planners feel very twitchy about their future employment)
SRP savings means that Navy decides that she wants to lose other capabilities to pay for the mods - the fact that Navy has a whole pile of work in the 10-15 year horizon that has a greater priority and they won't want them jeopardised makes major mod builds highly unlikely...

losing major capability delivery due to a minor asset being modified beyond its capability remit makes no sense at all - RAN has been hurt before, they're not going to go for round 2 and cop another whack in the mouth.

 

[PeterM]

Crew accommodation is ridiculously decadent at the moment so we will not have any problems finding room for a larger RAN crew (the three top offices have 4 different rooms each!)

What are the general crew numbers being discussed for the RAN?

 

[SASWanabe]

What are the general crew numbers being discussed for the RAN?

i dont think numbers have been released into the public domain yet, but it should be around 137 navy 48 army

*Again credit to Abe*

 

[StoresBasher]

What are the general crew numbers being discussed for the RAN?

No one seems to know just yet.
Four different compliments have been discussed and NPCMA have 4 schemes of compliments ready to go.

 

[John Newman]

Unless there is a compelling need (ie a tactical requirement) then nobody will be going to the NSC for a financial handout to make additional mods for the next 10 years.

Monies have been pulled already, that means that orgs are actually running on less money as its a forced saving. Even ops support has less money.

Yes money is tight everywhere!

But it would be realistic to assume that while the $100m (plus the $'s to be spent to bring into RAN service) that had to be found to purchase Largs Bay is not so great that it will put the Navy's budget totally out of wack for years to come.

I would have thought that monies spent now on the "near new" Largs Bay would be recouped in the not too distant future.

Smaller crew costs than Manoora (which would have been budgeted for), the savings on fixing Manoora, the operating costs of Manoora had she made it through to her retirement date, etc.

While there is a small spike in unplanned expenditure (in comparison to the overall size of the Navy's and defence budget), that expenditure will probably, over a 4-5 year period, equal itself out.

Is there somewhere in the Defence budget papers that lists the cost of running/ownership for each ship for a year?

For example, I know with military aircraft, that it costs $X,000's per flying hour. As as example an F/A18F will be signifcantly cheaper over a year to run and maintain that an F111.

Obtaining Largs Bay is sort of like getting rid of your very very old petrol guzzling V8 that needed lots of maintenance every few months and buying a new (very cheaply) fuel efficient car.

 

[t68]

With the hopefully arrival of RFA Largs Bay and the conjecture in the past that we need a third LHD, if reports are correct that RFA Largs Bay has the lift capacity of HMAS Tobruk, Kanimbla and Manoora combined is their still the need for a third LHD or even a second Bay class, and can we make do with only HMAS Tobruk plus the Bay class and save the money from decommissioning both Kanimbla class ships.

With the two RAN ships plus the one New Zealand ship (HMNZ Canterbury) will that be enough sealift shipping for the short term till the arrival of HMAS Canberra and Adelaide.

With thanks to AG for the link to seatransport, that 65m ATV on a SLV hull as a replacement for the Balikpapan class looks promising conducting small scale ops around the pacific islands with helicopter support and a Canberra class plays the mothership role if multiple LCH are needed over large area, not sure how effective and restrictive to types of plant equipment that could be loaded on board and if helicopter support would be warranted. But I suppose it adds to the flexibility of the platform not only the price.

 

[gf0012-aust]

But it would be realistic to assume that while the $100m (plus the $'s to be spent to bring into RAN service) that had to be found to purchase Largs Bay is not so great that it will put the Navy's budget totally out of wack for years to come.

that would be the aspirational view. the reality is that purchasing the Largs is going to impact on Navies money even though the SRP issues have "nominally" been addressed.

there are a few who would be worried whether they will have the same amount of fuel that they had last financial year available this financial year etc... its unavoidable and its already had impact

I would have thought that monies spent now on the "near new" Largs Bay would be recouped in the not too distant future.

the issue is what monies need to be spent to make it capable within the requirement articulated - beyond that it becomes scope creep, beyond that it impacts upon other navy requirements and more importantly, financial tolerances.

Smaller crew costs than Manoora (which would have been budgeted for), the savings on fixing Manoora, the operating costs of Manoora had she made it through to her retirement date, etc.

thats already factored in when they identified her and made the pitch to govt.

While there is a small spike in unplanned expenditure (in comparison to the overall size of the Navy's and defence budget), that expenditure will probably, over a 4-5 year period, equal itself out.

the I suggest that you get a job in RAN Planning Believe me, when people are trying to get extra capability, anyone with financial and scheduling black magic skills are worth their weight in gold.

Is there somewhere in the Defence budget papers that lists the cost of running/ownership for each ship for a year?

The actual costs and identifiers are classified.

For example, I know with military aircraft, that it costs $X,000's per flying hour. As as example an F/A18F will be signifcantly cheaper over a year to run and maintain that an F111.

and the material that does get released into the public domain only has a vague similarity to actual estimates and predicted costs

Obtaining Largs Bay is sort of like getting rid of your very very old petrol guzzling V8 that needed lots of maintenance every few months and buying a new (very cheaply) fuel efficient car.

yes, and as part of the SRP req, they did the sums to identify the obvious financial savings. the actual breakdown of savings and forward estimates re same is classified.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

With the hopefully arrival of RFA Largs Bay and the conjecture in the past that we need a third LHD, if reports are correct that RFA Largs Bay has the lift capacity of HMAS Tobruk, Kanimbla and Manoora combined is their still the need for a third LHD or even a second Bay class, and can we make do with only HMAS Tobruk plus the Bay class and save the money from decommissioning both Kanimbla class ships.

Second question first: the mechanical state of both Tobruk and Kanimbla is such that neither is fully reliable at this stage. But by keeping two of them then hopefully one will be available. Also Kanimbla with Largs Bay is a much more capable mix than Tobruk with Largs Bay.

As to the third LHD you miss the point of this argument entirely. The whole reason for having three LHDs is so that two LHDs are available all the time. With only two LHDs the need for periodic maintenance will mean that only one will be available most of the time and two together will be available only some of the time.

It is the requirement of the amphibious ready group to have two LHDs on hand to lift it. So for a fair wag of time this will not be possible. In these cases it is planned to have the sealift ship (Largs Bay) on hand to provide additional lift capability but this will be inferior to the LHD.

With thanks to AG for the link to seatransport, that 65m ATV on a SLV hull as a replacement for the Balikpapan class looks promising conducting small scale ops around the pacific islands with helicopter support and a Canberra class plays the mothership role if multiple LCH are needed over large area, not sure how effective and restrictive to types of plant equipment that could be loaded on board and if helicopter support would be warranted. But I suppose it adds to the flexibility of the platform not only the price.

The Balikpapan replacement is not planned on having embarked aviation. The ATV (aviation training vessel) is an offer for the new helicopter aircrew training system (HATS) that will require such a ship based at Jervis Bay for flight training. The ATV is likely to be civilian manned and a fleet auxiliary with little operational capability beyond infrequent border patrol.

 

[SASWanabe]

The actual costs and identifiers are classified.

but they do occasionaly get released into the public domain... i found a report a couple months ago from 98 that detailed yearly costs of major platforms, ill try and dig it out and see if K&M were on there. it is a little missleading tho because ANZACs+Collins were still being built

Edit: nevermind they're not on there Adelaides and Perths are tho

www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jfadt/def_funding/fundch9.pdf

 

[John Newman]

that would be the aspirational view. the reality is that purchasing the Largs is going to impact on Navies money even though the SRP issues have "nominally" been addressed.

there are a few who would be worried whether they will have the same amount of fuel that they had last financial year available this financial year etc... its unavoidable and its already had impact

the issue is what monies need to be spent to make it capable within the requirement articulated - beyond that it becomes scope creep, beyond that it impacts upon other navy requirements and more importantly, financial tolerances.

thats already factored in when they identified her and made the pitch to govt.

the I suggest that you get a job in RAN Planning Believe me, when people are trying to get extra capability, anyone with financial and scheduling black magic skills are worth their weight in gold.

The actual costs and identifiers are classified.

and the material that does get released into the public domain only has a vague similarity to actual estimates and predicted costs

yes, and as part of the SRP req, they did the sums to identify the obvious financial savings. the actual breakdown of savings and forward estimates re same is classified.

If monies are as "tight" as you have suggested, thats a bit of a worry.

With an overall annual Defence budget of $20Billion, approx, (don't know the RAN's share of that?), you would think that $100m wouldn't be too hard to absorb.

So that brings me to another question.

At the same time that the Def Min announced the purchase of Largs for $100m he also announced the planned purchase of a 5th C17, which will be around $300m.

From what I understand the C17 will be purchased in lieu of purchasing two C130J's, which the $'s allocated for the C130's being a fair way into the future and not in the current "pool" of RAAF budgeted money.

Largs Bay is being purchased to get the navy out of the poo with the current problems we have with the LPA's and Tobruk.

And Largs Bay will no doubt fill the role of the proposed JP2048/4C, which wasn't planned to happen for many years into the future anyway.

Is the C17 being purchased with "a special allocation" of money? or does the RAAF have to find that money out of their current allocation too?

I would have assumed the monies being allocated for the purchases of the 5th C17 and possibly Largs Bay would have be coming from some sort of supplementary funding and not out of "current" RAN and RAAF budget allocations.

 

[John Newman]

but they do occasionaly get released into the public domain... i found a report a couple months ago from 98 that detailed yearly costs of major platforms, ill try and dig it out and see if K&M were on there. it is a little missleading tho because ANZACs+Collins were still being built

Edit: nevermind they're not on there Adelaides and Perths are tho

www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jfadt/def_funding/fundch9.pdf

Interesting report.

If you do the maths on those figures, 3 DDGs and 6 FFGs in service, it shows the cost of, at that time, a single DDG $35.3m and a single FFG @25.3 per annum.

A $10m per ship / per annum operating difference. ....

 

[gf0012-aust]

but they do occasionaly get released into the public domain... i found a report a couple months ago from 98 that detailed yearly costs of major platforms, ill try and dig it out and see if K&M were on there. it is a little missleading tho because ANZACs+Collins were still being built

Edit: nevermind they're not on there Adelaides and Perths are tho

www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/jfadt/def_funding/fundch9.pdf

No, they don't "occasionally get released" - what you have is the uncontrolled version, ie the publicly released data, Classifications above that do not go into public gazettes, they stay classified until released (and some of those don't get released even after 30 yr expiry dates trigger)

When costings and estimates are made there are multiple versions. the publicly released data is the coarsest iteration of the release

The real data sits on the higher level networks and cannot be released until or unless it is declassified.

 

[gf0012-aust]

the mechanical state of both Tobruk and Kanimbla is such that neither is fully reliable at this stage.

and I'd say that you're being excessively charitable here....

 

[SASWanabe]

now that Manoora has been Cannabalised Kanimbla should be in a better material state should she not?

 

[gf0012-aust]

now that Manoora has been Cannabalised Kanimbla should be in a better material state should she not?

As Pusser obliquely said in another post - I like my job

 

[SASWanabe]

sorry, that was meant to be more of a statement than a question, i just assume she's in a better state than she has been for a couple years

 

[diggumsbang]

Aren't Kanimbla/Newport and Bay classes both fitted for but not with Phalanx?
RAN is still persisting with Phalanx into the future, so I'd imagine that'd have to be an option.

rb

Good point. Most of the photos I have seen of both Kanimbla and Manoora have been with a Phalanx, but more recently (past couple of years) I have only seen it sporadically deployed on either vessel in what photos have been posted on the Defence website.

Does anyone know what the status, or likely outcome will be for those two Phalanx with eventual demise of the Kanimbla and Manoora? I am not sure if those two systems were upgraded unlike the FFG's as part of their upgrade program, but if there are two systems available for integration onto another platform(s), is it fair to say that they could end up on the Largs Bay?

In the event that Largs Bay gets one or both, is it arguable to suggest that the LHD's may end up with a similar capability down the track - given they are of a higher strategic and monetary value?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Does anyone know what the status, or likely outcome will be for those two Phalanx with eventual demise of the Kanimbla and Manoora? I am not sure if those two systems were upgraded unlike the FFG's as part of their upgrade program, but if there are two systems available for integration onto another platform(s), is it fair to say that they could end up on the Largs Bay?

weapons systems go into storage...

 

[Volkodav]

now that Manoora has been Cannabalised Kanimbla should be in a better material state should she not?

Unfortunatly its not possible / practical to cannabalise hull plating and structural tanks. They can change out pumps, motors etc until the cows come home but when the hull is being held together by paint it is a pretty pointless exercise.