Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Not really surprising though is it? The LHD and AWD's are things in production right now, submarines always get press, but generally when something's gone wrong. But the replacements for the ANZAC class are due roughly in the mid-2020s I think, so don't expect to see much for a while.

But glad to hear the decision for a 4th AWD seems in the cards due in the next few weeks.
 

knightrider4

Active Member
4th AWD.

Not really surprising though is it? The LHD and AWD's are things in production right now, submarines always get press, but generally when something's gone wrong. But the replacements for the ANZAC class are due roughly in the mid-2020s I think, so don't expect to see much for a while.

But glad to hear the decision for a 4th AWD seems in the cards due in the next few weeks.
A fourth AWD is vital, if we are to adequately protect the LHD's. Does anyone know the timeline for SM-6 to be introduced?
 

icelord

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
As per the front page of the Australian this morning, stand by for the announcement on the fourth AWD in the next couple of weeks (along with more Super Hornets and an order for the Hawkei armoured 4WD)
And it would have been cheaper and more efficent if announced 12months ago when work would have been streamlined and people had an idea of the work ahead of them, rather then slowing down the production line in the claim of saving jobs. A 4th AWD was always going to work out better for the companies involved then the BS put out a few months ago. I wonder how this will eventually effect Anzac II.

Id wait and see on Hawkei, not sure how it would work into current army cuts and how they have had to shift budgets around to be able to work with what they have got and store the rest. Adding another vehicle so soon will really drain the small funding available for training.
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Wasn't there some talk a while back indicating a late order for a 4th AWD would run into some issues to do with availability and/or delivery of a 4th AEGIS combat system? Or was it just that a late order would be unable to be incorporated into the original production run of the first 3 systems? I might be getting my wires crossed, this was some time ago... can anyone set me straight on this detail?
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Wasn't there some talk a while back indicating a late order for a 4th AWD would run into some issues to do with availability and/or delivery of a 4th AEGIS combat system? Or was it just that a late order would be unable to be incorporated into the original production run of the first 3 systems? I might be getting my wires crossed, this was some time ago... can anyone set me straight on this detail?
The bigger issue will be the out of production auxiliary systems, all the un-sexy boring stuff a ship needs to function, i.e. switch boards, generators, sewerage systems etc.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Wasn't there some talk a while back indicating a late order for a 4th AWD would run into some issues to do with availability and/or delivery of a 4th AEGIS combat system? Or was it just that a late order would be unable to be incorporated into the original production run of the first 3 systems? I might be getting my wires crossed, this was some time ago... can anyone set me straight on this detail?
That discussion was here in the RAN thread in January 2012.

The production run for the 3 SPY-1D and Aegis combat data systems IIRC has already been completed and they are undergoing testing.

The discussion being held at the time was whether or not the dead line had already been passed to order long lead items for a 4th AWD without there being a significant break in ship construction. Abe and I had differing opinions, but the consensus is that somewhere around four years are required for production of an array and combat system, testing, etc before it can be ready to be fitted to an AWD under construction. Best case scenario is that there is still a little time for Gov't to order a 4th AWD without a big break in production, but not much time...

-Cheers
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
That discussion was here in the RAN thread in January 2012.

The production run for the 3 SPY-1D and Aegis combat data systems IIRC has already been completed and they are undergoing testing.

The discussion being held at the time was whether or not the dead line had already been passed to order long lead items for a 4th AWD without there being a significant break in ship construction. Abe and I had differing opinions, but the consensus is that somewhere around four years are required for production of an array and combat system, testing, etc before it can be ready to be fitted to an AWD under construction. Best case scenario is that there is still a little time for Gov't to order a 4th AWD without a big break in production, but not much time...

-Cheers
The best option could be to order three Batch/Flight II ships using the AEGIS back end but with every other system open for replacement based on performance, availability and price. Use latest production LM-2500s, increased electrical generation, look at new generation, in production, or locally produced and supported auxiliaries. Consider improvements that could be effectively and easily incorporated at low risk, I.e. Larger/twin hanger, evolved ASMD radars and directors, hybrid propulsion etc.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
And it would have been cheaper and more efficient if announced 12 months ago when work would have been streamlined and people had an idea of the work ahead of them, rather then slowing down the production line in the claim of saving jobs. A 4th AWD was always going to work out better for the companies involved then the BS put out a few months ago. I wonder how this will eventually effect Anzac II.
I wouldn't be surprised if its a bit of a deliberate tactic to space out production to the last possible minute. There looks to be a bit of a gap between the AWD's and the anzac/collins replacements. I don't know if ASC + related contractors are busy with other things, but I would guess there would be space for at least two builds (replacements are a 2020 start thing AFAIK). A 4th AWD and something else? An AOR /LHD fitout, something else? Or just a slow work period to bridge the gap. Or heck, just lay everyone off until the next build? (Arrggh.)

A 4th AWD was always a possibility, and was mentioned when the F-100 design won. So there was a fair bit of notice, of course there has been a fair bit of FUD too. I would imagine with the 4th AWD they might want to include some of the upgrades they want for the AWD's into it. With only 4 ships, upgrades are going to have to be carefully planned, and its not like Spain has any sort of money to throw around at them.

Batch building would be highly preferred, but I haven't seen anything suggesting that. The collins and Anzac replacement dates seem to overlap significantly with IOC quite tight. While interleaving is not perfect, it would allow a more sustainable build process. However, if the Collins are in good shape, pushing back the IOC of the replacements would allow a batch build and give more time to the design process. I like the idea of build lots of 4.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I wouldn't be surprised if its a bit of a deliberate tactic to space out production to the last possible minute. There looks to be a bit of a gap between the AWD's and the anzac/collins replacements. I don't know if ASC + related contractors are busy with other things, but I would guess there would be space for at least two builds (replacements are a 2020 start thing AFAIK). A 4th AWD and something else? An AOR /LHD fitout, something else? Or just a slow work period to bridge the gap. Or heck, just lay everyone off until the next build? (Arrggh.)

A 4th AWD was always a possibility, and was mentioned when the F-100 design won. So there was a fair bit of notice, of course there has been a fair bit of FUD too. I would imagine with the 4th AWD they might want to include some of the upgrades they want for the AWD's into it. With only 4 ships, upgrades are going to have to be carefully planned, and its not like Spain has any sort of money to throw around at them.

Batch building would be highly preferred, but I haven't seen anything suggesting that. The collins and Anzac replacement dates seem to overlap significantly with IOC quite tight. While interleaving is not perfect, it would allow a more sustainable build process. However, if the Collins are in good shape, pushing back the IOC of the replacements would allow a batch build and give more time to the design process. I like the idea of build lots of 4.
Redundancies have already occurred at ASC due to the stretching of the original program. Without an increase in funds to cover wages over the longer schedule heads have to go, mostly difficult to replace designers and engineers.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A fourth AWD is vital, if we are to adequately protect the LHD's. Does anyone know the timeline for SM-6 to be introduced?
SM-6 is a long way off seemingly. So far out that it wasn't even included in the Public DCP in 2012 as far as I can see...
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Pity, if we can manage to get CEC integrated with Wedgetail, it would be an exponentially a very capable system.
Yep, though the SM-6 system itself is still in development, so there's no great rush. No point buying this, when we have yet to bed down the AWD capability as it is currently planned and the new missile isn't ready anyway.

The latest Block SM-2 missiles are still very capable and represent the best capability currently in-service for maritime area air warfare in terms of range and performance.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Yep, though the SM-6 system itself is still in development, so there's no great rush. No point buying this, when we have yet to bed down the AWD capability as it is currently planned and the new missile isn't ready anyway.

The latest Block SM-2 missiles are still very capable and represent the best capability currently in-service for maritime area air warfare in terms of range and performance.
I wonder how small a platform CEC can be integrated into, I.e. Will it fit on an AEW helicopter?:D
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I wonder how small a platform CEC can be integrated into, I.e. Will it fit on an AEW helicopter?:D
I don't see why not. Airborne CEC terminals have been designed for E-2C/E-2D and JLENS so far (AN/USG-3 and AN/USG-5A) so I don't suppose integrating appropriately sized (and weight) terminals and the associated planar array antennas onto helo based AEW aircraft would be impossible.

Edit: Tangentially to this, has anyone seen the announcement for AN/USG-7B terminals for Australia's Air Warfare Destroyers? These seem to be CEC capability for the AWD, but not the usual shipborne terminals. Are they receive only perhaps or some other limited CEC capability, or just the foreign export designation?

http://www.lockheedmartin.com.au/co...cuments/AWD-HobartClassDestroyer-brochure.pdf
 
Last edited:

King Wally

Active Member
Can you re post the article for those of us who don't have a membership? I have had a look on the net and everyone refers to the australian. Thanks
Warship to join US fleet in hot zone

THE guided-missile frigate HMAS Sydney is about to join the US Seventh Fleet in Japan at a time of heightened tensions on the Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea.

The warship will be "embedded" with a US aircraft carrier strike group operating out of Yokosuka.

The deployment comes as the Gillard government is working to manage Australia's relationships with China and the US after the Prime Minister sealed a "strategic relationship" with Beijing during her recent visit, and with the new defence white paper due out in June.

Analysts say it is significant that the frigate will operate from Japan.

The mission has been long-planned to increase the navy's experience at providing air defence for a fleet, in preparation for the arrival of the navy's two massive landing ships and three air warfare destroyers.

But it comes at a tense time, with North Korea's bellicose posturing and the possibility of clashes between warships from China and Japan.

There are several potential flashpoints in the region and as North Korean rhetoric escalated this month, Defence Minister Stephen Smith said Australia strongly supported the US in its commitment to protect South Korea.

"Australia has made it clear we stand shoulder to shoulder with the Republic of Korea, also with Japan," Mr Smith said.

The minister noted that South Korea had endured enormous provocation, including the sinking of its navy corvette, the Cheonan, with the loss of many lives.

Peter Jennings, a former senior Defence official who now heads the Australian Strategic Policy Institute think tank, said the deployment was significant. "It does reflect a return to the type of co-operation that used to happen in the 1980s and 90s when we exercised more frequently with the Americans," Mr Jennings said.

"What we are seeing here is part of a pattern of us starting to rebuild relations with the US Pacific command operating out of Honolulu."

Mr Jennings said while the Australian frigate could make only a small contribution compared with the firepower of the massive US Seventh Fleet, the Australian warship's inclusion was important.

"It would have a role to play in a conflict if that happened," Mr Jennings said. "It's an important thing to do in light of the tensions in North Asia."

If there was even a limited conflict in North Asia, that could have a huge impact on Australia, Mr Jennings said.

He said the fact the frigate would operate from Japan indicated that "we are getting close to the Japanese".

The Japan Coast Guard said in a statement three days ago that eight Chinese government ships had entered Japanese territorial waters near the disputed Senkaku-Diaoyu islands that both nations claim.

The Senkaku chain, which China calls the Diaoyu, lies in the East China Sea and the islands are also claimed by Taiwan.

China claims territorial rights over the entire South China Sea, but that is disputed by several of its neighbours. Last month, Vietnam accused China of firing on a fishing boat near the Paracel Islands. It was denied by Beijing.

In an official statement issued yesterday after an ASEAN meeting, Southeast Asian leaders reaffirmed the importance of peace, stability and maritime security in the South China Sea and the need to ensure disputes were resolved without the use of force.

For its deployment, HMAS Sydney has been fitted with a highly sophisticated new communications system to allow it to operate with the US Navy.

Should tensions escalate into a confrontation, the warship is configured to form part of the protective screen for the US carrier battle group.

HMAS Sydney is an Adelaide-class guided-missile frigate launched in 1980. It was sent to the Persian Gulf five times in support of US operations during the Gulf War, the war in Afghanistan, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Its role will ultimately be taken over by one of the navy's three air warfare destroyers now being built.

Mr Jennings said the Gillard government appeared to be underplaying the increasing military co-operation between Australia and the US.

As part of that growing military co-operation, a team of about 250 US marines arrived in Darwin last weekend in the second rotation of a force that is intended to build up to 2500 in about 2016-17.

A US Senate committee noted this month that accommodating a fully equipped US marines taskforce in Darwin would require new infrastructure costing an estimated $US1.6 billion.

The potent and self-contained Marines Air Ground Task Group will eventually come with its own ships and aircraft.

Australian Strategic Policy Institute analysts Andrew Davies and Mark Thomson have said it made strategic sense for Australia to help out its US ally with the cost of its rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific region at a time of defence budget cuts in both countries.

The announcements made by Ms Gillard in China included a plan for "working-level" talks between Defence officials and China's People's Liberation Army later this year on regional security issues and the defence white paper. China has also been asked to send warships to take part in a naval review to mark the 100th anniversary of the arrival of the RAN's first ships in Sydney Harbour on October 4, 1913.
Good to see the RAN contributing to this operation. I've always felt it's particularly important for us to be visible and active when ever drama arises in Asia. NZ I beleive is also deploying an ANZAC Frigate to the region as well.
 

weegee

Active Member
Good to see the RAN contributing to this operation. I've always felt it's particularly important for us to be visible and active when ever drama arises in Asia. NZ I beleive is also deploying an ANZAC Frigate to the region as well.
Thanks for that
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
As per the front page of the Australian this morning, stand by for the announcement on the fourth AWD in the next couple of weeks (along with more Super Hornets and an order for the Hawkei armoured 4WD)
Could somebody please post a copy ot this article that was on yesterdays Australian front page. Even trying Google won't let me through the cookies must be enabled and you must have an account etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top