Well Australia could build the sections usually completed by Northrop Grumman and EB shouldn't have an issue. But then again this is a MOTS solution which is the way the government seems to be heading anyway.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
How much of a problem would Australian public opinion be if the nuclear option is seriously considered? Do you think there is a price-capability point where the opposition to nuclear goes away? I have seen Collins replacement figures up to 36 billion being quoted for a building an Australian designed boat, don't know how many boats that figure includes or the accuracy. I believe 10 Virginias would be less than 30 billion which would be better capability with less cost and risk assuming the 36b for local build is correct. I guess the question is whether this is a good enough deal given that Australian industry would be mostly excluded.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Hard to say but there might be some common technology shared between nuclear and non-nuclear boats that Australia could support. On the nuclear side, it would likely be easier to contract any necessary support stuff with the Americans. Ideally, convincing to them set up a joint USN/RAN support base would be a plus for them as well as Australia.
t68
Well-Known Member
Whith our small numbers don't think that would wash logistically, trying to find out why the UK went all nuc when the Upholders where relatively young when they tied them up.
Ref. the discussion about the Type 26, there is this in The Australian today.................
Part of a story in today’s Australian newspaper.
Defence procurement and co-op*eration will be discussed in Sydney on Monday during talks between Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, new Defence Minister Kevin Andrews, Britain’s Secret*ary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Philip Hammond and Secretary of State for Defence Michael Fallon.
The Abbott government has considered bringing forward the planned construction of eight frigates to bridge the work shortfall faced by the local shipbuilding industry once the navy’s new air warfare *destroyers and giant landing ships are completed.
It has examined building the frigates on the same hull as the *destroyers to ensure yards in Melbourne and Adelaide can build them. The British frigate would provide another option.
The choice of frigate and where it is built will prove crucial if the government opts to have new submarines built overseas, possibly in Japan.
Mr Fallon told The Weekend Australian the possibility of Britain and Australia co-operating on shipbuilding would be discussed at the Australia-United Kingdom Ministerial Consultations (AUKMIN) talks on Monday.
“We are both looking to replace our frigate fleets and we both have the challenge of sustaining our own shipbuilding industry. I think there is plenty of scope to a partnership approach to that,” Mr Fallon said. “There’s plenty to discuss.”
Design work on the Type 26 frigate had been completed and Mr Fallon said Britain had to make important decisions in the next couple of months, including how many of the warships should be built.
Mr Fallon said both nations faced the challenge of sustaining their shipbuilding industries. “I see the key to that as more partnership working between our respective yards and I don’t want to go further than that.”
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
Part of a story in today’s Australian newspaper.
Defence procurement and co-op*eration will be discussed in Sydney on Monday during talks between Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, new Defence Minister Kevin Andrews, Britain’s Secret*ary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Philip Hammond and Secretary of State for Defence Michael Fallon.
The Abbott government has considered bringing forward the planned construction of eight frigates to bridge the work shortfall faced by the local shipbuilding industry once the navy’s new air warfare *destroyers and giant landing ships are completed.
It has examined building the frigates on the same hull as the *destroyers to ensure yards in Melbourne and Adelaide can build them. The British frigate would provide another option.
The choice of frigate and where it is built will prove crucial if the government opts to have new submarines built overseas, possibly in Japan.
Mr Fallon told The Weekend Australian the possibility of Britain and Australia co-operating on shipbuilding would be discussed at the Australia-United Kingdom Ministerial Consultations (AUKMIN) talks on Monday.
“We are both looking to replace our frigate fleets and we both have the challenge of sustaining our own shipbuilding industry. I think there is plenty of scope to a partnership approach to that,” Mr Fallon said. “There’s plenty to discuss.”
Design work on the Type 26 frigate had been completed and Mr Fallon said Britain had to make important decisions in the next couple of months, including how many of the warships should be built.
Mr Fallon said both nations faced the challenge of sustaining their shipbuilding industries. “I see the key to that as more partnership working between our respective yards and I don’t want to go further than that.”
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian
Looking more like many of the oddball defence plans were a result of Johnston's love of the high life provided by lobbyists and his preference for being back grounded by those who entertained him rather than listening to the professionals he was supposed to be consulting.
I see the Navy has something now worthy of promotional duties.
Navy helps launch FGX Falcon
Got to say, Love the Canberras.
Navy helps launch FGX Falcon
Got to say, Love the Canberras.
t68
Well-Known Member
They should see if they can really fly of the end of the ski jump, now id like to see that we're is Jeremy clarkson something he would do
Hey everyone, I've signed up here because I'm interested in joining the Aus navy and since this is the 'Australian Navy discussions' thread I will ask a question in here.
I am Australian born and background but I follow Sikh religion (people find this odd as you don't usually come across white Sikhs) ok so basically, would I not be accepted into the navy because of my religious beliefs?
I am Australian born and background but I follow Sikh religion (people find this odd as you don't usually come across white Sikhs) ok so basically, would I not be accepted into the navy because of my religious beliefs?
Can't speak for RAN but most militaries do allow Sikhs to continue wearing their turbans with military uniforms. They might stipulate what colour of turban is to be worn though.
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
You'll likely find your answer here:
Guide to Religion and Belief in the Australian Defence Force
http://content.defencejobs.gov.au/p...nd Belief in the Australian Defence Force.pdf
Thankyou
secondly I am considering joining as musician, can anyone tell me the kind of things they do and how often they might serve out at sea? want to get an idea of it before I go in
There are certainly sikhs in the RAAF
The RAN is definitely a broad church where an individuals personal performance rather than their ethnicity or religion determines their success in the service. For instance religion rarely if ever comes up but when it does its not an issue, i.e. discovering a member is a Muslim when you offer them a drink, no problem, you've just identified your designated driver.
Just been doing some rough number crunching following reading some old magazines I have recently unpacked after 13 years and three moves. Specifically the mid 90s and the approaching need to replace the DDGs then the first four FFGs and maybe even the Australian built FFGs as well.
Options ranged from not replacing the DDGs and upgrading the FFGs to fill the gap, through a new class of frigates armed with ESSM, Harpoon etc. second hand Kidd class DDGs, or new build DDGs (likely Arleigh Burkes). We know what did happen, a shipbuilding valley of death, a hideously expensive, seriously delayed upgrade of four rather than six FFGs, an expensive upgrade of, too small, patrol frigates into GP frigates and a troubled AWD project whittling the nine primary surface combatants to six, four and eventually three.
The ideal replacement for the Perth class DDGs would have been the purpose designed replacement for the USNs Charles F Adams class DDGs (which is what the Perths were). Order three Flight IIA Burkes from Williamstown to follow straight on from the ANZACs, no FFG UP, no ANZAC WIP or ASMD and then replace the FFGs with either an F-100 type or possibly a large modern hull designed around an optimised CEAFAR / ASMD set up.
Options ranged from not replacing the DDGs and upgrading the FFGs to fill the gap, through a new class of frigates armed with ESSM, Harpoon etc. second hand Kidd class DDGs, or new build DDGs (likely Arleigh Burkes). We know what did happen, a shipbuilding valley of death, a hideously expensive, seriously delayed upgrade of four rather than six FFGs, an expensive upgrade of, too small, patrol frigates into GP frigates and a troubled AWD project whittling the nine primary surface combatants to six, four and eventually three.
The ideal replacement for the Perth class DDGs would have been the purpose designed replacement for the USNs Charles F Adams class DDGs (which is what the Perths were). Order three Flight IIA Burkes from Williamstown to follow straight on from the ANZACs, no FFG UP, no ANZAC WIP or ASMD and then replace the FFGs with either an F-100 type or possibly a large modern hull designed around an optimised CEAFAR / ASMD set up.
t68
Well-Known Member
Sometimes I wonder if all we ever do is downsize the fleet because of this boom bust ad hock way of doing things if we just went to the South Koreans and say six se Jong the great DDG to this level then put them on the Blue Merlin and fit out here in oz same with the type 26 say to the poms 12 hulls please and so fourth
- Status