Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
What do you mean there goes the economy ?? We can use the extra cattle for manual hauling labour, saves wages, fuel costs, maint, etc
Hell we could even use them in the shipyards to drag loads of steel or move around wagons or something ?This would surely have to lower overall costs whilst increasing the country's GDP, and making a positive impact on our Defence industry
Farmers will most likely be compensated. However the world is currently undergoing a GFC (no not financial crisis.. food crisis) and I don't think it will be too hard to find a replacement country or that long until Indonesia gets its stuff together.
I just bought a new deep freezer in anticipation of cryo-vac'd steak dropping significantly in price...What do you mean there goes the economy ?? We can use the extra cattle for manual hauling labour, saves wages, fuel costs, maint, etc
This would surely have to lower overall costs whilst increasing the country's GDP, and making a positive impact on our Defence industry
Anyone up for a barbie?
PS - Please return to naval news now...
Any chance of somebody discussing something to do with the RAN? Mind you, nobody should let the thread title get in the way.....I just bought a new deep freezer in anticipation of cryo-vac'd steak dropping significantly in price...
Anyone up for a barbie?
PS - Please return to naval news now...
Australian_1000
New Member
can someone tell me if anyone in the RAN wants to put fixed wing aircraft on the LHDs?
OpinionNoted
Banned Member
manned fixed wing aircraft no,uav's probably.
If you have a read of this thread - http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/navy-maritime/sea-trials-lhd-jci-9587/
There is lots of discussion on this very subject, also looking back through the RAN thread also lots of discussion on why it will not happen you might have to go back a hundred pages or so at least, also try using the site search function. The only possibility of seeing fixed wing (apart from our future UAV's) would be cross decking from the US, UK or other allies
Cheers
heres some news
Not a single submarine seaworthy
Breakdowns sink our defences
they're both from The Australian so im not sure of their truthfulness, i would be interested to know if it was actualy true that no Collins are seaworthy at the moment.
Not a single submarine seaworthy
Breakdowns sink our defences
they're both from The Australian so im not sure of their truthfulness, i would be interested to know if it was actualy true that no Collins are seaworthy at the moment.
...I clicked the links and then saw you said The Australian
Its not that they are reporting bad news that buggers me.. its that they make it seem like the sky is falling and then blame people who are not involved at all. I will then go to their comments section and just see everyone accusing the government of being the problem. Although to be fair in recent days I have seen some very, very well done balanced articles and am very impressed. It seems they have even let people from both sides of politics the ability to comment on these articles in particular, instead of just the one.
A lot of the time it is plain ignorance in fact they had an article at the start of the year (I saw it in this thread) where they said only 1/3 of the fleet was operational... but the thing is, this is to be expected.. its not like we have our entire fleet all out at once.
Three ships are in refit at FBE, not sure about the west and up north with the MWV.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Two things of note struck me when reading the article. The first is the following:
Please note the bolded text. While the lead ship, HMAS Collins was laid down about twenty years ago, and the newest vessel HMAS Rankin was laid down about 15 years ago, Collins has only been in commission about 15 years, and Rankin about eight years. While I do not consider the vessels to be 'new' vessels, IMO it is a bit of a stretch to call them "ageing" when the lead ship is approaching the midpoint of her service life. Yes, the subs need maintenance, and yes, the subs will need to start undergoing some sort of MLU. That is normal for a naval vessel with an expected service life of ~30 years. More worrisome IMO is the possibility of some manufacturing or design defect that makes the Collins less effective or available for RAN service. That is the sort of thing which if it does occur, is not the fault of Defence or the RAN, but that does not seem to occur to the writers of the article.
The next item is also below, again note the portion in Bold:
I could be mistaken, and please feel free to correct me if I am, but I had thought that ASC had changed its name from the Australian Submarine Corporation to ASC not long after winning the AWD contract. Part of the reason for the change I had thought was that with ASC building the AWDs, they would be a ship and sub-building concern, and therefore should have 'just' submarine in the corporate name.
The last thing which I found interesting, and while I am not as aware of more subtle areas within Australian politics, it does sound sort of like a political beatup for the defence opposition spokesman to criticise the chiefs about evasiveness regarding sub availability. That strikes me as being the sort of thing which should not be discussed anything other than general terms in any sort of public settings, for national interest/defence reasons.
-Cheers
This is exactly what we need in a Democracy.
Highlight the problems, and put those in the spotlight if they are incompetent.
Replace them them with smeone who can do the job.
I haven't really read over this but.. how can The Australian claim none are seaworthy when...
ADM: Submarine escape and rescue capability exercised
Hmas Waller is pictured here dated 2011.
ADM: Submarine escape and rescue capability exercised
Hmas Waller is pictured here dated 2011.
The article states:
"Defence declined to answer detailed questions from The Australian about submarine availability, saying only that two boats were in deep maintenance, two were in mid-level maintenance and two "are in the water in Western Australia".
What is the desired/expected operational availabilty - 2 in dock/maintenance, 1 in training, 3 available for operational deployment, or are only 2 supposed to be fully operational at all times?
Also is the JFSRS vehicle used under a lease agreement or is it now formally part of the RAN and crewed by Naval personnel? And is it available for other NATO partners in the Southern Hemesphere? Other than Singapore and the USN it must be the only other system active in the region.
Australian_1000
New Member
sorry i should have said, i know the RAN is not putting fixed wing aircraft on the LHDs, however has anyone in the RAN said they want to put them one there?
Anixtu
New Member
Mounts Bay has received the modified exhausts. Ugly. They come up just forward of the flight deck "goalpost" lighting gantry. [The forum software won't let a noob post a link, you'll just have to search for pics.]
Other known modifications from Mounts' refit include the addition of the gantry joining the three foremasts, the provision of hardware thruster controls on the bridge wings to aid berthing operations, and the addition of a starboard side accommodation ladder.
There were some questions earlier about why Teekay had been used to conduct the survey. In RFA service Largs Bay was run more like a merchant ship than a warship: merchant manning (crew of 69, not the widely quoted 60), built and classed to merchant construction rules, certified as a merchant ship. Teekay (and the Lloyds surveyors that accompanied them) understand merchant ship regulations, certification, equipment, etc. in a way that a RAN survey team might not. One of the acquisition options was a lease, in which case one of the condition may have been to maintain the civilian/merchant certification.
- Status