Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[justsomeaussie]

No offence intended. What I was pointing out is the Bays are still in good condition and there are plenty examples of where Defence procurement had failures. So even after "intense platform assessment" there is still impressive failures and Customs isn't a basket case.

After speaking with a former Armidale commander over Christmas I was surprised that he was very interested in seeing the Cape and its performance etc. Negatively he steered mostly at the pressure they were put under to get the boats out no matter what which meant DMS simply couldn't fix things fast enough.

Something particularly interesting is happening where no one wants to take the blame for the state of the Armidales.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Something particularly interesting is happening where no one wants to take the blame for the state of the Armidales.

If you have what are fundamentally green water platforms trawling around in the grey, if you flog them and don't stick to maint schedules, then things will break

using platforms in a role that stretches the limits of what was in the "original" conops will break anything.

helos, skimmers, subs, etc... all suffer from the same mailaise when "mistreated"

 

[ASSAIL]

With all the hoopla about the serviceability of the Armidale patrol boats, why are Customs about to launch 8 Cape Class patrol boats which appear to be just an improved Armidale.

Seems bizarre to me that if these boats a supposed poor design that ACBPS would have gone with an Austal/aluminium hull. Will be interesting to see how their sea trials go this year.

I'm no fan of Aluminium hulls and I've also sailed the N and NW coasts, both as a PB operator and a commercial operator for the last 35 yrs. I know the conditions well.
You do the Armidales a great disservice by being so dismissive of their capabilities. They are very good seaboats and can maintain high speed in quite rough conditions. Its this fact that is part of their downfall, the requirement to react dictates that they go everywhere fast.

The intense operating cycles of the last 5 years and the inadequate maintenance/sustainent practices have lead to the situation where today we are experiencing hull fatigue, their most critical problem, and related mechanical wear through overuse.
I can only summise that ships' charge engineers no longer have the training or
the confidence in their authority to take a stand and inform their CO's that sensible operating limits are being exceeded when that occurs, a fact that occaisionally occurred during my time in boats.
The Cape Class will be a good replacement for the Bays in Customs service provided the lessons learned from the usage experience with the ACPB's is taken onboard.

There have been many suggestions for the Armidale replacements (SEA 1180), on this thread so I wont rattle on but, SEA 1180 will be another waste of opportunity and resources if a larger, steel hulled, OPV type is not chosen.

Cheers

 

[John Newman]

I sometimes wonder if discussions about problems with the Armidale Class would even be an issue today if the border protection laws hadn't been changed by the current Government.

Five years later, 100's of boats, 10,000's of people, and still they come. If the laws hadn't been changed maybe the Armidale's wouldn't be being flogged to death.

Can the next Government stop or stem the tide? Time will tell, but I think, regardless of what they might do, it will take a long time to slow the flood back to a trickle, if at all since the flood gates were opened.

So that brings up the question, if at the current usage levels, can the Armidale Class make it through to their planned retirement date?

Looking at the 2012 DCP, the SEA 1180 ships are not due to achieve IOC till the period 2018-19 to 2020-21. Will the next DCP move those dates closer, the same or further away?

If it's the same or further away, no doubt we will hear of more "problems" with the Armidale Class and the Government will probably keep spending money, at the expense of the navy, on various ships of "opportunity" to assist with the ferry service that is now in place.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I
I can only summise that ships' charge engineers no longer have the training or
the confidence in their authority to take a stand and inform their CO's that sensible operating limits are being exceeded when that occurs, a fact that occaisionally occurred during my time in boats.

Here's a theoretical.....

in the rush to outsource, to keep industry happy, to keep industry supporting Govt, to give the broader public the opportunity to access work through the private sector, then you end up with a situation where those onboard can't even patch paint probs because it would breach a support contract.

so you end up with a military that can only warfight and loses the historical capacity to sustain and support when it needs to

in time of war, does anyone seriously expect the services to bring the widget back into australlia to be maintained - and yet the current philosophy (on both sides of Govt) would see that the services slowly and inexorably head down a path where they deskill everyone

and they wonder why engineers and anyone with half a brain for mechanical aptitude wants to leave and at least try and practice their craft.... even if it's just pulling hydraulics off a Terex truck

 

[StoresBasher]

Most of the donkey work is now going to be done by FFH/FFG, so that should reduce some of the impact that Resolute is having on the ACPB.

 

[ASSAIL]

Here's a theoretical.....

..... in the rush to outsource, to keep industry happy, to keep industry supporting Govt, to give the broader public the opportunity to access work through the private sector, then you end up with a situation where those onboard can't even patch paint probs because it would breach a support contract

.

Sadly its not a theoretical, once the RAN lost its corporate engineering knowledge imparted in the main through the trade school at HMAS Nirimba, by dedicated navy trademen, the road to mediocracy was started.

This, coupled with the termination of the Naval Board and the loss of a 2 star engineer position, reduced engineering to a subsidiary status where operators failed to understand the importance of its role.

The results of the changes have been damning and have contributed to all the well known navy blemishes of the last decades.
Let's hope the Rizzo changes can bring back some perspective and more importantly, some engineering competence.

 

[ASSAIL]

Most of the donkey work is now going to be done by FFH/FFG, so that should reduce some of the impact that Resolute is having on the ACPB.

What a pathetic use of a resource, it'll do untold harm to recruitment and retention.

 

[justsomeaussie]

Here's a theoretical.....

in the rush to outsource, to keep industry happy, to keep industry supporting Govt, to give the broader public the opportunity to access work through the private sector, then you end up with a situation where those onboard can't even patch paint probs because it would breach a support contract.

so you end up with a military that can only warfight and loses the historical capacity to sustain and support when it needs to

in time of war, does anyone seriously expect the services to bring the widget back into australlia to be maintained - and yet the current philosophy (on both sides of Govt) would see that the services slowly and inexorably head down a path where they deskill everyone

and they wonder why engineers and anyone with half a brain for mechanical aptitude wants to leave and at least try and practice their craft.... even if it's just pulling hydraulics off a Terex truck

You've hit the nail on the head. A lot of this comes from adopting a pure "lean" project management model. The ADF has escalated out sourcing because it’s seen as cheaper, and it is, but only in the short-medium term and only in times of peace.

Example: Prior to 1999 the Army got rid of all its cooks since cooks on bases could be out sourced to Serco and the overall cost of paying and training the ADF members was determined to be higher than out sourcing to Serco. Then we deployed to Timor and we couldn’t take our civilian cooks into a “war like” environment. Then we had to reopen the cook trade again and spend even more money retraining everyone and finding spots for them in our civilianised messes.

The same appears to have happened with the RAN. Rizzo covered a lot regarding the loss of naval engineering. The logic at the time seemed to be why are we paying a CMDR to be a naval engineer when I can pay a civilian naval engineer and reduce my overheads.

This all falls down when DMS writes a contract so tight that a LS can’t change a light bulb without breaching their maintenance contract and funnily enough the people who maintain the vessel aren’t the ones who use and spend all their time on the vessel.

The next trick this philosophy will try to do is outsource the war fighting ADF roles to civilian contractors who charge three times the amount to do the same job….oopse that’s already happened.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Here's a theoretical.....

.

Sadly its not a theoretical, once the RAN lost its corporate engineering knowledge imparted in the main through the trade school at HMAS Nirimba, by dedicated navy trademen, the road to mediocracy was started..

we need a sarcasm smiley......

 

[gf0012-aust]

Here's a theoretical.....

.

Sadly its not a theoretical, once the RAN lost its corporate engineering knowledge imparted in the main through the trade school at HMAS Nirimba, by dedicated navy trademen, the road to mediocracy was started.

This, coupled with the termination of the Naval Board and the loss of a 2 star engineer position, reduced engineering to a subsidiary status where operators failed to understand the importance of its role.

The results of the changes have been damning and have contributed to all the well known navy blemishes of the last decades.
Let's hope the Rizzo changes can bring back some perspective and more importantly, some engineering competence.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for suits who are engineers trying to do the job - but seriously, a suit as an engineer in a specific service does not have the same depth of understanding of the impact of certain requirements that a uniform engineer would - context and comprehension are key dynamics

alternatively, we end up paying up to and more than triple the cost when those ex uniform engineers go contracting and we pay through the nose for advice that we prev would have had in house. Its sheer nonsense

there's room for uniforms and suits in engineering, but not at the expense of keeping knowledge within and dumbing ourselves down by abandoning uniform engineers

From my perspective the RAAF has it all over the other services in this respect, they have a strong engineering element and they fiercely protect it - one could make a case that they have less procurement stuff ups because of it.

 

[aussienscale]

we need a sarcasm smiley......

I second that motion !

 

[Volkodav]

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for suits who are engineers trying to do the job - but seriously, a suit as an engineer in a specific service does not have the same depth of understanding of the impact of certain requirements that a uniform engineer would - context and comprehension are key dynamics

alternatively, we end up paying up to and more than triple the cost when those ex uniform engineers go contracting and we pay through the nose for advice that we prev would have had in house. Its sheer nonsense

there's room for uniforms and suits in engineering, but not at the expense of keeping knowledge within and dumbing ourselves down by abandoning uniform engineers

From my perspective the RAAF has it all over the other services in this respect, they have a strong engineering element and they fiercely protect it - one could make a case that they have less procurement stuff ups because of it.

There is a push at the moment to class as many ships as possible and hand the whole thing over to a contracted classing society, basically the same thing the USN spent many years working towards. Well it didn’t work out too well for the USN and they are now trying to rebuild their lost institutional knowledge while we continue to head blindly down the wrong path.

I should point out that the USN still had INSURV NAVSEA covering many of the quality, acceptance and certification functions the CoA chooses to contract out. It is certainly cheaper to rely on auditing OQE than to have a team of stake holders physically check the quality of work but unless you have a level of confidence that the OQE docs reflect reality, how can you justify the lack of physical inspections? Taken to the next level, if you have suitably qualified and competent personnel checking the work that has already been checked why not just imbed those same people in the process when the work is being done and actually certify the OQE at the point of creation?

Almost forgot, it has recently been announced that the USN is cutting the 60 survey cycle to 30 months to provide greater resolution of the material state of their platforms and improve the effectiveness and value of maintenance conducted.

Long story short, IMO Australia needs an equivalent to INSURV NAVSEA to over see and advise on construction, maintenance, upgrade and repair.

 

[ASSAIL]

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for suits who are engineers trying to do the job - but seriously, a suit as an engineer in a specific service does not have the same depth of understanding of the impact of certain requirements that a uniform engineer would - context and comprehension are key dynamics

alternatively, we end up paying up to and more than triple the cost when those ex uniform engineers go contracting and we pay through the nose for advice that we prev would have had in house. Its sheer nonsense

there's room for uniforms and suits in engineering, but not at the expense of keeping knowledge within and dumbing ourselves down by abandoning uniform engineers

From my perspective the RAAF has it all over the other services in this respect, they have a strong engineering element and they fiercely protect it - one could make a case that they have less procurement stuff ups because of it.

The saddest thing about all this is was that the results of the dumbing down changes were always going to kill navy engineering.
I guess it was a case of either, total lack of advocacy on the part of uniformed engineers or, beancounters gaining ascendancy over reason or boofheaded political interference or all of the above.

Its a classic case of the "emporers new clothes". Its not as if this tragedy happened overnight, the train has been speeding out of control on the watch of many navy leaders and nothing was done. Many of the old guard have been shaking our heads for some time.
Well, the wreck happened, all ducked for cover and we know the rest.

 

[gf0012-aust]

There is a push at the moment to class as many ships as possible and hand the whole thing over to a contracted classing society, basically the same thing the USN spent many years working towards. Well it didn’t work out too well for the USN and they are now trying to rebuild their lost institutional knowledge while we continue to head blindly down the wrong path.

and look at the last 2 vessels we commissioned into service using that model.... the cynic would question the intent of the model pretty quickly and point out is flaws - but hey
what would the services know about whats best for their needs....

long live ministerial consultants... /smirk off

 

[weegee]

Possible other Spanish navy raids?

Hey guys,

I just had a hypothetical thought run through my head.
With all this talk of navy's and countries hurting financially around the world and that this seems to put the RAN in a good position to take advantage of other navy's miss fortune. Using the same idea of us trialling the oiler Cantabria and with many people here thinking we will probably not send her home (we hope).
Maybe we could do the same thing with the Juan Carlos 1? (long shot I know) but it would give us the 3rd LHD which everyone on here wants. She could actually come before our LHD's are up and running so that would help us out for training on our LHD's, and with the added benefit that she can support fixed wing aircraft which might also give us an insight into getting fixed wing capacity back into the Navy, then we could keep her too and not allow her to go home. I know this would never happen but surely it would not be too hard to twist the Spanish Navy's arm to send her down her too for evaluation/training ? better to have her here than have her sit along side collecting barnacles?
Just a thought!

 

[ASSAIL]

and look at the last 2 vessels we commissioned into service using that model.... the cynic would question the intent of the model pretty quickly and point out is flaws - but hey
what would the services know about whats best for their needs....

long live ministerial consultants... /smirk off

Particularly certain female ones

 

[justsomeaussie]

Some good news at least:

Austal launches Customs vessel - The West Australian

Austal believes it can win overseas orders for the patrol boats it is making for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.
The first of eight Cape Class vessels was launched at the WA shipbuilder's Henderson shipyard yesterday for sea trials ahead of a handover in March.

Chief executive Andrew Bellamy said there had been considerable interest in both the patrol boats and warships Austal is building in Alabama for the US Navy from potential customers from the Middle East and Asia.


"There's an increasing need for maritime security," Mr Bellamy said. "I don't see any sense that governments have lost focus on that. I'd be looking to see us having something contracted in the next 12 to 18 months."

The construction phase of the $330 million contract ends in 2015. The Henderson facility became defence-focused when commercial shipbuilding was no longer viable.

"The sooner we can line something up beyond this program then obviously the better," Mr Bellamy said. Named Cape St George, the 58m aluminium monohull makes a clean break from the steel grey of its forerunners with a royal blue livery and red racing stripe similar to those sported by US Coast Guard vessels.

Customs maritime acquisitions branch national manager Ian Laverock said while contract negotiations, amendments and design reviews had sometimes been bruising, a high degree of trust had been forged with Austal.

"This project is emerging as one of the great success stories of major capital procurement for the Commonwealth," Mr Laverock said.

"It still remains on budget, within schedule and is poised to deliver a greatly enhanced capability for Australia's maritime border security."

Mr Bellamy said more than two-thirds of Austal's 305 suppliers for Cape St George were WA-based. "It's a great manufacturing story in tough times," he said.

Colin Ayres, director of project supplier Ayres Composite Panels, said the patrol boat program had enabled his company to keep employees on and make new investments.

"The last few years have been pretty rough in the marine industry," Mr Ayres said. "But the Cape Class project for us has stopped the rot. It's bought stability back to our business."

 

[Vanguard]

Hey guys,

I just had a hypothetical thought run through my head.
With all this talk of navy's and countries hurting financially around the world and that this seems to put the RAN in a good position to take advantage of other navy's miss fortune. Using the same idea of us trialling the oiler Cantabria and with many people here thinking we will probably not send her home (we hope).
Maybe we could do the same thing with the Juan Carlos 1? (long shot I know) but it would give us the 3rd LHD which everyone on here wants. She could actually come before our LHD's are up and running so that would help us out for training on our LHD's, and with the added benefit that she can support fixed wing aircraft which might also give us an insight into getting fixed wing capacity back into the Navy, then we could keep her too and not allow her to go home. I know this would never happen but surely it would not be too hard to twist the Spanish Navy's arm to send her down her too for evaluation/training ? better to have her here than have her sit along side collecting barnacles?
Just a thought!

The Spanish Navy are already removing their older carried (PdA) from service I am led to believe, combined with the removal of their Newport class unit already, that should cover for the continued service of the JC1. Also on her fixed wing capabilities talks regarding the status of the Spanish Harriers (Matadors) have been heard, at the very least they have reduced their flight hours in line with budget cuts.

 

[Volkodav]

Principe de Austurias, now that would be an interesting acquisition for the RAN, I wonder what condition she is in? It would be full circle as the SCS was one of the final two contenders to replace Melbourne before Invinsible was offered at a knock down price.