Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[lopez]

so what does the navy plan to do with the windermere?
the ship that the navy is hiring?


it certainly is an ugly boat...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

so what does the navy plan to do with the windermere?
the ship that the navy is hiring?

The offshore supply vessels that the CoA are hiring are firstly for offshore patrol roles and dealing with unauthorised refugee boat arrivals. Because they can offload cargo outside a port they have been promoted to amphibious ship gapfill. Even the national Antarctic supply vessel has been given a southern winter amphibious gapfill role.

it certainly is an ugly boat...

Its those above the forecastle helo landing decks that do it. But if you want a working cargo deck and a helo flight deck on off the self offshore supply vessel it is the only solution.

 

[justsomeaussie]

Interesting development

Forecast International

Australian radars on US ships?

 

[StevoJH]

Interesting development

Forecast International

Australian radars on US ships?

AUSPAR most likely, not CEAFAR/CEAMOUNT

 

[justsomeaussie]

Just finished reading the Janes Suppliment on CEA's site. Pretty impressive write up. Seems AUSPAR will stay a technology demonstrator and will produce CEAFAR Mk2 rather than being an actual deployable system.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Facts that still seem to be beyond the comprehension of most journo's

On the Record - Department of Defence

Good to see Griggs giving them a bit back, served with him when he was a 2 ringer on the JB as Nav and he was a "spade is a spade" no bullshit sort of guy then, hope he continues this line to expose some of these people for the true fools they are

From the Australian

Sailors feared worst as submarine HMAS Farncomb sank

EXCLUSIVE CAMERON STEWART From: The Australian September 10, 2011

JUST after midnight off the coast of Perth, navy submarine HMAS Farncomb was slicing below the surface of a rough sea when its engines cut out.

For the 60 men and women aboard the Collins-class boat, the next few minutes would be among the longest of their lives. Like a Hollywood thriller, the sailors found themselves grappling with a double engine failure followed by a terrifying, powerless descent towards the bottom of the Indian Ocean, stemmed only by the cool actions of a veteran commander.

This real-life drama, which took place at 12.30am on August 23 about 20km off the northwest coast of Rottnest Island, was not revealed by Defence at the time. When quizzed by The Australian the following day, officials gave only a brief, sanitised version of the incident, omitting key facts while praising the competence and training of the crew for following "standard operating procedures".


Many of the Farncomb's crew are far from relaxed about what took place under the Indian Ocean that night.

"I said to myself, 'I'm gone, I'm dead',' one recalled thinking as the powerless submarine began to slide towards the ocean floor.

Another on the submarine has told friends: "When we started going down, I just tried to accept it and make peace with myself."

In their eyes, the Farncomb incident came uncomfortably close to being Australia's worst naval tragedy in almost 50 years. Defence denies this, claiming crew had "positive control of the submarine throughout the incident".

An investigation by The Weekend Australian reveals discrepancies between Defence's official account and first-hand accounts now circulating in Perth from the Farncomb's crew.

What is undisputed is that Farncomb was conducting operational training in the waters northwest of Rottnest Island soon after spending a month in dry dock where it had its emergency propulsion unit replaced. In charge that night was veteran submarine commander Glen Miles, a ruddy-faced archeology and rugby enthusiast who once served on the old Oberon submarines and who was dux of his submarine officer's course. Also on board was a Sea Training Group assessing the crew's competence.

Shortly after midnight, the Farncomb was gliding at a periscope depth of 20m while undertaking a routine known as "snorting", where air is drawn into the submarine to run the diesel motor in order to recharge the boat's batteries. At 12.30am, without warning, a fault in the control switchboard of the submarine's electric motor caused the motor to stop. "Propulsion failure, propulsion failure" rang out across the Farncomb's address system, as crew ran to emergency stations.

Propulsion failure in a submarine is both uncommon and serious, but it is usually quickly offset by a procedure that allows the motor to be restarted in emergency mode. Faced with a powerless, slowing submarine in a rough sea, Commander Miles ordered the submarine to glide down from its depth of 20m to 50m in order to assess the problem.

It was a bad time to lose propulsion because it meant the submarine had to stop snorting. When snorting stops, a submarine instantly becomes much heavier because the snort masks and exhaust, which are outside the hull, fill up with water.

Normally the submarine balances this extra weight by pumping out compensating water, but this takes time. So Commander Miles suddenly found himself in charge of an overweight submarine with no power, sliding south.

By the time the Farncomb reached its desired depth of 50m, there was more bad news. Despite the frantic efforts of crew, they could not get the emergency mode of the main motor to work. Defence said this week: "The reason for delay in restoring propulsion in emergency (mode) remains the subject of a technical investigation."

Commander Miles faced a full-blown emergency. He had lost both his engine and his emergency back-up.

Defence declined to tell The Weekend Australian how deep the Farncomb sank, saying only that such details were "not openly discussed".

According to several crew members' versions, the Farncomb slowed to a virtual halt, tilted nose up and began to slide backwards towards the ocean floor. The tilt was so steep that sailors eating in the mess room had to grab their dinners as they slid off the table. Those in the sleeping quarters found themselves "on top of each other".

In the control room, Commander Miles was not panicking, but was watching the sliding depth gauge hoping that the propulsion motor would restart before the Farncomb sank too deep. He knew that, as a last resort, he could take the dramatic step of blowing the submarine's ballast tanks to stem the descent.

In those long, agonising seconds - perhaps a minute or more - as the submarine kept sliding towards the seabed, some of the Farncomb's crew started to consider the unimaginable. The submarine is believed to have been operating in more than 1300m of water off the continental shelf. This meant that if they continued to sink, the water pressure would crush the submarine and its crew long before they hit the seabed.

Their fate would have mirrored the 129 men of the US navy submarine USS Thresher, which was crushed by water pressure when it sank in the Atlantic Ocean during deep diving tests in 1963.

Crew accounts of how deep the Farncomb sank differ. The consensus is that it plunged to between 150m and 190m. If so, this is uncomfortably close to the submarine's permissible deep diving depth, the actual figure of which is classified.

At some point during the Farncomb's powerless descent and without any sign of life from the motor, Commander Miles ordered a partial blow of the submarine's main ballast in which air expels water from the ballast tanks, making the boat lighter.

"Because the submarine was still heavy as compensating water was being pumped (out), the commanding officer chose to blow main ballast to arrest descent," a Defence spokesman said.

What happened next depends on whose account you believe. Defence says that the initial ballast blow stemmed the descent and that the Farncomb actually began to slowly rise. Some crew members maintain the submarine was still sinking, although at a slower rate.

Either way, Commander Miles then decided to take the most drastic step available to a submarine commander: to order a full emergency blow of all ballast tanks.

"That was the last resort available to the crew at that time and if it did not work, there would have been no hope for them," one source said.

To the enormous relief of its crew, the plan worked and the Farncomb - powerless, overweight and stricken - began to rise at last.

Once back on the surface and with no further ballast to blow, Commander Miles ordered the crew to try again to get emergency propulsion back.

This time, they succeeded, regaining emergency propulsion and the Farncomb was able to limp back to Fremantle.

Navy argues that Commander Miles was not completely out of options because there was an autonomous Emergency Propulsion Unit on board that was manned during the incident but was not activated.

Navy claims the EPU "would be sufficient to maintain control of the submarine in such situations". Submarine experts dispute this and say that, if this was so, why did Commander Miles not use this option rather than order the more drastic blowing of all ballast tanks.

"The EPU is only designed for surface propulsion and there is no way that it could have controlled a 3000-tonne submarine heading backwards towards the seabed," said one expert, who asked not to be named.

The incident will not help the troubled reputation of the Collins-class fleet, which has been plagued by technical problems, but it will be seen as good example of the ability of a well-trained crew to get out of sticky situations.

When asked this week by The Weekend Australian how serious the Farncomb incident was, Defence avoided giving a direct answer, saying only that "standard procedures were employed to recover from this propulsion failure while snorting".

"These procedures are regularly exercised," Defence said.

The Farncomb has been repaired and is now back at sea, but at least one crew member, an engineer, is said to have stayed behind in Perth to deal with the stress of what happened on August 23.

As one submariner put: "This (incident) shows that even when things go wrong on a submarine, there is usually a way to get out of trouble.

"But those blokes would have been very glad to get home."

 

[Hoffy]

Mate that is a seriously large cut & paste!

Anyway , this specifically shows the yawning gap between truth & misinformation!

On the Record - Department of Defence

Note point 6.
The print media have a habit of sensationalist reporting. It makes the "story" more dramatic reading. So don't automatically believe everything you read.

 

[gf0012-aust]

journos wonder why they're held in contempt, despite the fact that they were given a brief to explain actual events.

 

[STURM]

i can answer that as i happened to be up there for Bersama(lima or shield i kept mixing them up and getting in shite)

She made it to Singapore straits, had issues onboard(what and where is not for here) and stayed alongside for 2 weeks then went back to FBW.
Navy news did a story about how it was hunting the ships participating, even though it was on its way home, and copped a lotta flak from HQ for it. ...

Thanks for the info. This explains a lot.

We had to cancel alot of ASW excercises, although i got money there were subs out there though not ours...

As in there were subs from non-FPDA countries snooping around?

Apart from HMAS Ottoma in 1997, have any other RAN subs participated in Bersama Lima/Shield?

 

[aussienscale]

journos wonder why they're held in contempt, despite the fact that they were given a brief to explain actual events.

Slam dunk !!

I stand by my first statement, and that cut and paste proves it, you can't take that article seriously can you ? I really don't know what else to say about it, I could rant and rant to point out all the factual error's, the very obvious made up bits, and well I just plain can't be bothered

 

[icelord]

Thanks for the info. This explains a lot.

As in there were subs from non-FPDA countries snooping around?

Apart from HMAS Ottoma in 1997, have any other RAN subs participated in Bersama Lima/Shield?

Considering the region we were in, and the nations that now have subs i wouldnt be surprised, we were advised that one or two were either transiting or would be around, but never picked them up(in saying that, ive been off Jervis Bay and had our opso ringing HQ to ask what sub was in the EAXA that we picked up on sonar...the reply all collins are alongside in the west was...well, amusing at best:eek)

i cant say for certain as this was my first SEAD, but we do send 2 warships and sometimes refuellers for the excercises, and subs would be no stranger to them. its disapointing that an excercise like this only gets 1-2 ships from FPDA nations out, when they have a lot more alongside, ie singapore.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Cash incentive to stop Navy poaching | News.com.au

RAN pays $80,000 bonus to sub and surface engineers. Wow, what specific roles are those... For $180k I would concider a career change. Is that ontop of the $60k sub bonus?

Seems a bit pricey. While sub ones, would be tough to get, I would imagine surface sailors would be an easy find.

Surely this has to add pressure about moving some of the subs east coast where it would solve most of the staffing issues. Plus give east coast assets a good work out with subs. With the LHD's based east coast(with the AWDs?), and would be the centre of of any ASW you would want them to atleast have a sub to try and find other than the subs that aren't ours hiding around Jervis bay?

 

[Trackmaster]

Cash incentive to stop Navy poaching | News.com.au

RAN pays $80,000 bonus to sub and surface engineers. Wow, what specific roles are those... For $180k I would concider a career change. Is that ontop of the $60k sub bonus?

Seems a bit pricey. While sub ones, would be tough to get, I would imagine surface sailors would be an easy find.

Surely this has to add pressure about moving some of the subs east coast where it would solve most of the staffing issues. Plus give east coast assets a good work out with subs. With the LHD's based east coast(with the AWDs?), and would be the centre of of any ASW you would want them to atleast have a sub to try and find other than the subs that aren't ours hiding around Jervis bay?

Wot...the ones sent here to kidnap Australian Prime Ministers when they go surfing?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Wot...the ones sent here to kidnap Australian Prime Ministers when they go surfing?

Well yeh, they might even be the same one Icelord is talking about..

 

[icelord]

Cash incentive to stop Navy poaching | News.com.au

RAN pays $80,000 bonus to sub and surface engineers. Wow, what specific roles are those... For $180k I would concider a career change. Is that ontop of the $60k sub bonus?

Seems a bit pricey. While sub ones, would be tough to get, I would imagine surface sailors would be an easy find.

Surely this has to add pressure about moving some of the subs east coast where it would solve most of the staffing issues. Plus give east coast assets a good work out with subs. With the LHD's based east coast(with the AWDs?), and would be the centre of of any ASW you would want them to atleast have a sub to try and find other than the subs that aren't ours hiding around Jervis bay?

Leading seaman and above are the priority, theres only a few people on each ship who hold the quals. i know a few of my mates are seriously considering it, as "hey, free money!"
For the submariners it is on top of the sub bonus, which is standards for most sailors these days( im not sure if it applies to officers,as this was a previous problem)
Its just as tough to find people on FFH quals, as once you get on a certain platform thats your career path, with very few changing across in the technical world.
Theres talk most of the FFH will head West and leave AWDs, LHDs,LPD and AOR in the East. nothing about subs however...fools

 

[Volkodav]

Cash incentive to stop Navy poaching | News.com.au

RAN pays $80,000 bonus to sub and surface engineers. Wow, what specific roles are those... For $180k I would concider a career change. Is that ontop of the $60k sub bonus?

Seems a bit pricey. While sub ones, would be tough to get, I would imagine surface sailors would be an easy find.

Surely this has to add pressure about moving some of the subs east coast where it would solve most of the staffing issues. Plus give east coast assets a good work out with subs. With the LHD's based east coast(with the AWDs?), and would be the centre of of any ASW you would want them to atleast have a sub to try and find other than the subs that aren't ours hiding around Jervis bay?

There were retention issues in the O boat days as well, its not just a case of sailors perfering Sydney to Perth. The hassel is they never seem to achieve the necessary critical mass of staffing to prevent over working and over stressing the crews they already have.

 

[StingrayOZ]

There were retention issues in the O boat days as well, its not just a case of sailors perfering Sydney to Perth. The hassel is they never seem to achieve the necessary critical mass of staffing to prevent over working and over stressing the crews they already have.

Well yes, but the crewing probably wasn't as bad, nor as volitile. Subs are always going to be bastards of things to crew, who wants to see the world in something with no windows. Tapping into two pools has to help that, it also happens to be that the new pool is the largest pool. O-boats had larger crews and back then, and Sydney was a lot smaller.

There are some very good operational and strategic reasons to have Subs based on the east coast and in Sydney. Im sure they will eventually have to concider it.

 

[ThePuss]

Theres talk most of the FFH will head West and leave AWDs, LHDs,LPD and AOR in the East. nothing about subs however...fools

How about I trade you the 6 SSK's for the 3 AWD's?. Sound like a fair deal to me!.

Stirling would be such a lovely place without all those stinky Bugmariners and their Sewer tubes :dance3

 

[Volkodav]

What is happening with the intelligence function in the RAN?

I understand that previously it was a Functional Qualification but now it is to become a Primary Qualification with its own career path. What exactly does this mean, will Intelligence become a branch in its own right, i.e. Seaman Branch?

What is happening in terms of the Intelligence function within the reserves, will it be opened up again?

 

[aussienscale]

What is happening with the intelligence function in the RAN?

I understand that previously it was a Functional Qualification but now it is to become a Primary Qualification with its own career path. What exactly does this mean, will Intelligence become a branch in its own right, i.e. Seaman Branch?

What is happening in terms of the Intelligence function within the reserves, will it be opened up again?

Hey Volk, nor sure what you are meaning by this ?
Message me, maybe I can clean this up for you ?