Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[icelord]

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?

instead of being a reserve officer, intel is full time position.
Its a PQ for Maritime Warfare Officer(seaman branch) but people can join direct entry to the position and a career path has been formed from Midn through to Commander for Intel officers.
A full time Intel centre has been established and ships deploying will see more intel officers,this is as much in regards to open forum (as its avail to public )that i can discuss, as i was hit up by last intelo to change over so do know a bit on the topic.

Its all about increasing navys independace on intel information, and being able to make assesments from sea instead of JOHQ in canberra.
Navy realised there was a lack of reliable info being accessed and took measures to rectify, and will be expanding even more into the future.

 

[Volkodav]

instead of being a reserve officer, intel is full time position.
Its a PQ for Maritime Warfare Officer(seaman branch) but people can join direct entry to the position and a career path has been formed from Midn through to Commander for Intel officers.
A full time Intel centre has been established and ships deploying will see more intel officers,this is as much in regards to open forum (as its avail to public )that i can discuss, as i was hit up by last intelo to change over so do know a bit on the topic.

Its all about increasing navys independace on intel information, and being able to make assesments from sea instead of JOHQ in canberra.
Navy realised there was a lack of reliable info being accessed and took measures to rectify, and will be expanding even more into the future.

Thanks for that.
So a civi can put their hand up and be selected to join as an intelligence officer now?
Will the reserve equivalent still exist or will it be reg only?

 

[icelord]

Thanks for that.
So a civi can put their hand up and be selected to join as an intelligence officer now?
Will the reserve equivalent still exist or will it be reg only?

i think it will, but only a few.
The review basically stated a revamp of navy intel, and full time officers were required.
If you apply from civie still required to pass security clearence and sit a intel officers board.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I though about a 1-2 years ago they got rid of reserve entry into inteligence and made it full time only. I remember specifically asking this when I looked into it.

Interestingly Intelligence officer isn't on the website for the navy as an option at all year clearly appears on the Airforce, but it not recruiting. I think Airforce intel is still a reserve position.

 

[icelord]

I though about a 1-2 years ago they got rid of reserve entry into inteligence and made it full time only. I remember specifically asking this when I looked into it.

Interestingly Intelligence officer isn't on the website for the navy as an option at all year clearly appears on the Airforce, but it not recruiting. I think Airforce intel is still a reserve position.

join as an officer, and apply at Creswell i believe, i can check next week at work and see, but then id have to use our computers, so stand by for reply next year...

 

[StoresBasher]

join as an officer, and apply at Creswell i believe, i can check next week at work and see, but then id have to use our computers, so stand by for reply next year...

My CPO on Manoora is changing over to MWO specializing as an Intel Officer.

 

[icelord]

My CPO on Manoora is changing over to MWO specializing as an Intel Officer.

i was considering it, but im looking around as ROSO is almost done and AFP applications open soon

 

[Sea Toby]

This isn't meant to be spam...

Finally, a waterline 1/700 scale Juan Carlos I resin model kit is available with NH90 helicopters. I am sure Aussies are capable of finding 1/700 proper decals to finish her as either HMAS Canberra or HMAS Adelaide...

Will surely look nice next to a 1/700 scale USS Tarawa/Wasp or a USS Nimitz...

N07-018-280 1/700 Spanish Navy's LHD Juan Carlos I - ORANGE HOBBY Offical Web Site - åšå®¢å¤§å·´

 

[Blas de Lezo]

Nice, but you will also need to replace the LCM-8s with this:

http://www.aliexpress.com/product-fm/479275695-Orangehobby-N07-021-68-1-700-LCM-1E-leopord-2E-2-groups--wholesalers.html

Regards

 

[StingrayOZ]

Awesome.. Quite detailed diagrams. Perfect desk sized model.

Would look more impressive as a 1:72 scale...

 

[aussienscale]

Nice, but you will also need to replace the LCM-8s with this:

Wholesale Orangehobby N07 021 68 1/700 LCM 1E & leopord 2E (2 groups)

Regards

Except, AFAIK, Australia has not decided on what to put on these yet, the LCM-1E is in the fray, but no decision yet

 

[Volkodav]

Nice, but you will also need to replace the LCM-8s with this:

Wholesale Orangehobby N07 021 68 1/700 LCM 1E & leopord 2E (2 groups)

Regards

Oh boy I can feel a domestic comming on, maybe if I let her buy a new hand bag she'll let me borrow the Visa. It will look the goods with my HMAS Hobart.

 

[ngatimozart]

Oh boy I can feel a domestic comming on, maybe if I let her buy a new hand bag she'll let me borrow the Visa. It will look the goods with my HMAS Hobart.

I suggest handbag, bubbles and a good dose of chocolates to sweeten the deal. I used to work out of a radiology department with a 95% female population and chocolates worked very well. Bubbles and chocolates together were even better.

 

[hairyman]

I see in "The Age" today Hugh White is attacking the AWD and amphibs, saying both are overkill for Australia's purposes, and that we would have been better off with the Arleigh Burke at $1b each. He may be right but what is the purpose of raising the issue now?

 

[ngatimozart]

I see in "The Age" today Hugh White is attacking the AWD and amphibs, saying both are overkill for Australia's purposes, and that we would have been better off with the Arleigh Burke at $1b each. He may be right but what is the purpose of raising the issue now?

This is the link for those of us who don't get The Age: No defence to warship blowout and for those of us who are unfamiliar with this ship Arleigh Burke Class (Aegis), Guided Missile Destroyers - Naval Technology. The first Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer was commissioned in 1991 and the latest in June this year with another in October this year. This appears to be the latest update: Adding Arleigh Burkes: H.I.I. is Underway

I will add my insignificant comments. I don't know the validity of Whites costings but I would presume that $1 billion for a brand new fully modernised Arleigh Burke Class Flight III Destroyer with the digital phased array radar and all the ABM capability is very cheap, so I suspect that is for the earlier Flight IIA. I also note that the Flight IIA do not carry CIWS. Also of note the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer has never been exported, is the longest build and most numerous of any one class of ship for the USN. The USN has cancelled the Zumwalt Class build (3 ships built) to concentrate on the Arleigh Burke Class build. Originally the Zumwalt was to replace the Arleigh Burke Class.

Does Australia need a seaborne ABM capability? I think yes because of possible threats to the north and north west. Does Australia need a land based ABM capability? I think the answer to that is also yes and for exactly the same reasons. If the RAN had a chance of obtaining the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer then I think an offer would have been made by the USG to the AUG when the AUG was doing the initial groundwork for the RAN ADF Destroyers. Since I haven't seen any comments of one being made (correct if I am wrong) then Whites argument is invalid because the USG is not going to export the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer, well at the moment anyway.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

There is no doubt you can buy Arleigh Burke's from the USA cheaper than you can in There is no doubt you can buy Arleigh Burke's from the USA cheaper than you can in Australia. But every dollar spent then goes overseas and you never see it again. You then need to spend a much higher amount to sustain the vessels in Australia because you do not have any of the infrastructure established to build the ships in the first place. But while you pay twice as much (or more) to build in Australia most of that money stays here in the economy and at least a 1/3 of it goes straight back to Govt. coffers via taxation.

As to the argument that we could buy Arleigh Burkes from the USA for $1 billion each and that Australian built ships cost “three times” as much this fails to take into account a range of costs within the SEA 4000 contract that aren’t in the per unit price the US pays but that they do in other ways. These include inflation, government furnish equipment, support equipment and training systems, a more capable ASW system, etc.

The Govt. has done the numbers extensively over many generations on the benefits of domestic building and it always comes out ahead. As long as we have the industrial capacity it is actually cheaper in total cost to Government. Anyone arguing against it just isn’t credible on a professional level. As for his strategic arguments they are extremely narrow and subsequently pointless.

 

[StevoJH]

And one very important factor, is that if the RAN bought DDG-51's and followed USN Manning for them, they would require roughly double the crew of an F-100 derived AWD.

 

[Sea Toby]

As to the argument that we could buy Arleigh Burkes from the USA for $1 billion each and that Australian built ships cost “three times” as much this fails to take into account a range of costs within the SEA 4000 contract that aren’t in the per unit price the US pays but that they do in other ways. These include inflation, government furnish equipment, support equipment and training systems, a more capable ASW system, etc.

The Govt. has done the numbers extensively over many generations on the benefits of domestic building and it always comes out ahead. As long as we have the industrial capacity it is actually cheaper in total cost to Government. Anyone arguing against it just isn’t credible on a professional level. As for his strategic arguments they are extremely narrow and subsequently pointless.

Furthermore, they cost more than a US $1 billion. In FY 2011 the US Navy bought two for US $3.5 billion, or US $1.75 billion each... That amount would probably be over A $2 billion each, not A $1 billion each...

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Adding-Arleigh-Burkes-Northrop-Grumman-Underway-06007/

I wish the anti-defence media pundits would get prices right, but their not so hidden agenda shines everytime... While its true Australia may get them for less buying from the US, what you said is also true, Australia gets more bang for their dollars buying Australian built ships. Keep in mind generally a factory job usually generates ~7 other jobs. Its why cities give tax breaks to attract factories...

 

[ADMk2]

I see in "The Age" today Hugh White is attacking the AWD and amphibs, saying both are overkill for Australia's purposes, and that we would have been better off with the Arleigh Burke at $1b each. He may be right but what is the purpose of raising the issue now?

He probably just now heard about BAE's stuff-ups that were reported 12 months ago...

Hugh White likes to proffer his opinion on any number of defence topics, but he doesn't like to base his opinion in fact.

His costs for an AB are about $750m per ship short of the ACTUAL cost and that is the cost the USN pays for them. Not that which a foreign buyer would pay for them AND that cost doesn't include logistical or training support, weapons packages, infrastructure and so on, it's just the cost of the actual ship. Then of course there are the manning issues, through life support etc none of which this "expert" even looks at.

Add to which no examination of the benefits to Australia or the Government that comes back through taxation, industry skilling programs, development of new technologies and industry base within Australia and so on, and you can see just how unprofessional this "professor" really is when it comes to defence topics.

The reason of course is because he is an un-apologetic "Defence of Australia" supporter and believes the total role that Defence should have is in defending our "Air -Sea gap" and training and structuring our land forces to clean up 4x man teams of Musorian or Kamarian special forces who for some unknown reason are landing in the outback of Australia far beyond effective support, sustainment or reinforcement.

In short an unrealistic and wholly discredited defence scenario masquerading as a "strategy" that some people, Hugh White and Paul Dibb especially, just cannot let go of.

White would have us having no more deployment capability than that needed to move forces around inside Australia, if it were up to him. He even wrote a publicly released paper arguing strongly for Australia to reject the idea of a "balanced" force!

:hitwall

In his own way, he's as bad as Kopp or Goon. He is obsessed with a certain idea and he will not let it go.

 

[John Newman]

Except, AFAIK, Australia has not decided on what to put on these yet, the LCM-1E is in the fray, but no decision yet

Well they have now!! See link below from Defence:

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence Materiel – LHD Watercraft and Enhanced Joint Operations Centre Command and Control Capability Projects Approved


The Government will be ordering 12 LCM-1E's, with the first four to be delivered at the same time as HMAS Canberra in 2014.

Edit: I've read the Spanish have 14 (two prototypes and 12 production) in use by Juan Carlos and the two LPD's.

Was the plan always to order 12? Or is this more than originally planned in the DCP?

And one more question, are the LCM-1E's capable of being carried by HMAS Choules?