Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Interestingly my dad served on Sydney in the late 50s and described her flight deck as a rollercoaster, it was so shagged. Two decades latter he ended up working for Tos Dadswell when he was running things in Darwin, including preliminary work on the naval base at Coonawarra / Larrakia., I remember him as the bloke with a broken leg from when I was a kid at the regular functions at Coonawarra.

I'm not saying I know more than people who were there, just that I have a background in shipbuilding and maintenance so am very familiar with what happens when government over works and under invests in existing assets. Rizzo, like Coles is a very good read that really hit the nail on the head reference sustainment. If you over work and don't adequately maintain your platforms they deteriorate and will eventually be incapable of being deployed, or even operated safely.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Volkodav said:
Interestingly my dad served on Sydney in the late 50s and described her flight deck as a rollercoaster, it was so shagged.
Click to expand...
funnily enough, my dad served on Sydney as a PO (Comms) in the early 50's - did his Korean tour aboard her.

they possibly knew each other
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
gf0012-aust said:
funnily enough, my dad served on Sydney as a PO (Comms) in the early 50's - did his Korean tour aboard her.

they possibly knew each other
Click to expand...
Dad was a nasho RO, he was on her post 56 after she finished flight ops. He stayed in the reserves after and ended up deploying on Queenborough during the Confrontation while going public service in civy street, ending up as the last Navy Civil Secretary in Darwin before the amalgamation of the separate service departments into the Defence Dept. in the late 70s. A couple of years ago I discovered dad had actually applied for Creswell as thirteen year old but my grandad refused to sign off as it was a bad look for his maritime union career.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Volkodav said:
Dad was a nasho RO, he was on her post 56 after she finished flight ops. He stayed in the reserves after and ended up deploying on Queenborough during the Confrontation while going public service in civy street, ending up as the last Navy Civil Secretary in Darwin before the amalgamation of the separate service departments into the Defence Dept. in the late 70s. A couple of years ago I discovered dad had actually applied for Creswell as thirteen year old but my grandad refused to sign off as it was a bad look for his maritime union career.
Click to expand...
another coincidence - dad served on queenborough prior to sydney :)
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
SpazSinbad said:
Go here for the story and start from the top of the page to work down to the 'text version of the 885 pdf' mentioned above: 'ASSAIL' will know 'Nick Thorne' (I do not but know him personally but know who he is etc.)

Loss of Skyhawk 885
ADF Serials Message Board -> Loss of Skyhawk 885
Click to expand...
Thanks Spaz, those links served to jog an ancient memory and gel the events of late 1980 for me.
As CAGTAS I didn't have a lot to do with 805, apart from mess activities but I did have a lot to do with the other 2 squadrons and did several launch and recoveries in the middle seat of an S2 (that aft part of the island looked awful close to the stbd wingtip on touch and goes).
I remember Nick Thorne's name but can't picture his face.
 
SpazSinbad

SpazSinbad

Active Member
ASSAIL said:
Thanks Spaz, those links served to jog an ancient memory and gel the events of late 1980 for me.
As CAGTAS I didn't have a lot to do with 805, apart from mess activities but I did have a lot to do with the other 2 squadrons and did several launch and recoveries in the middle seat of an S2 (that aft part of the island looked awful close to the stbd wingtip on touch and goes).
I remember Nick Thorne's name but can't picture his face.
Click to expand...
Zooming the photo attached does not make the face of Nick any clearer from 1979 VS-816 onboard - the second photo is the overall photo with more names.
 
Last edited:
I

InterestedParty

Active Member
Sorry but I cannot let this one go by.
The fort at Bare Island at LaPerouse in Sydney has been waiting 100 years for reactivation.
It kept the Russians away in the 1800's and can do it again
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
InterestedParty said:
Sorry but I cannot let this one go by.
The fort at Bare Island at LaPerouse in Sydney has been waiting 100 years for reactivation.
It kept the Russians away in the 1800's and can do it again
Click to expand...
Don't forget Forts Glanville and Largs in SA, they may need to complete Torrens as well though.
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The future submarine project: one step, two step

I've just read the linked article by Mark Thompson and Andrew Davies which discusses how we should deal with the SEA 1000 CEP results.
Even though they condemn the lack of utility in the process, the conclusion they reach makes sense to me, which is words to the effect that - we must decide whether we want a strategic partner or an industrial partner in the submarine process. If the answer is strategic, then cut to the core, stop faffing around and get on with finessing the Japanese submission and build it.

If there was a like button for ASPI articles I would have used it.
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Nice article on the Submarines, And they do hit the nail on the head with Industrial vs Strategic. If it's Strategic then we could have an extra year of proper R&D into the Japanese option without sifting out way through the CEP.

In regards to Russia, Well there has been lots of talk about them expanding out every where but I have to ask... With what? In the last 6 months from my shoddy recollection we have talked about the Russian navy ageing faster then the corrupt naval industry could replace, I dont think that has since changed.

On the plus side extra work for Australia shipbuilding industry, We can repair there ships when they break down around Australia :D
 
StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
vonnoobie said:
In regards to Russia, Well there has been lots of talk about them expanding out every where but I have to ask... With what? In the last 6 months from my shoddy recollection we have talked about the Russian navy ageing faster then the corrupt naval industry could replace, I dont think that has since changed.
Click to expand...
Russian forces aren't all rust buckets. They will probe territories with what ever they have that is functional. Deploying tugs to bring them back. It was only last year had a visit..
There are a few in the region who operate Russian gear, it wouldn't surprise me that they would take a bigger interest, which includes little unexpected visits.

Putin has been casing Australia's Anti-Russian installations for quiet a while
Putin shows his lighter side in Sydney - Breaking News - National - Breaking News

The ASPI article I think is quite interesting. A big concern was that it was Abbott's private/secret little deal, involving minimal input from cabinet, defense minister, Navy, DMO, industry etc. I think if the current regime was in power back then, we may have just chosen the Japanese option for the details listed.

I expect that we won't get an extra year of CEP, but can use existing time to strengthen relationships between Japan and Australia.

Japan is going to build new submarines regardless if Australia buys, so its not like nothing is happening while the CEP is going on.

If we want a strategic partner Japan is a lot more than a submarine builder. It would be worthwhile pursuing other aspects of a relationships while the submarine project is creeping along. Socially, economic, technology, finance, defense, etc. The sub build would just be another stone in that, not the entire relationship.
 
Last edited:
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
StingrayOZ said:
Russian forces aren't all rust buckets. They will probe territories with what ever they have that is functional. Deploying tugs to bring them back. It was only last year had a visit..
There are a few in the region who operate Russian gear, it wouldn't surprise me that they would take a bigger interest, which includes little unexpected visits.

Putin has been casing Australia's Anti-Russian installations for quiet a while
Putin shows his lighter side in Sydney - Breaking News - National - Breaking News

The ASPI article I think is quite interesting. A big concern was that it was Abbott's private/secret little deal, involving minimal input from cabinet, defense minister, Navy, DMO, industry etc. I think if the current regime was in power back then, we may have just chosen the Japanese option for the details listed.

I expect that we won't get an extra year of CEP, but can use existing time to strengthen relationships between Japan and Australia.

Japan is going to build new submarines regardless if Australia buys, so its not like nothing is happening while the CEP is going on.

If we want a strategic partner Japan is a lot more than a submarine builder. It would be worthwhile pursuing other aspects of a relationships while the submarine project is creeping along. Socially, economic, technology, finance, defense, etc. The sub build would just be another stone in that, not the entire relationship.
Click to expand...
IMO the reason we have a new PM now is due to the litany of poorly executed good ideas from Abbott. Things that should have been straightforward were screwed up in detail and execution, usually through the incorporation of some completely unnecessary political, or worse, parochial or ideological distraction that overshadowed the merit of what was actually intended. i.e.the blatantly political, parochial and ideological attacks on ASC as justification for a Japanese build where a grown up government would have left the theatrical bs out of it, explained why the Japanese design was the best option, explained why a long term strategic arrangement was critical and once that was done determine where and how to build the boats.

The previous administration went about it back to front, they decided to justify a Japanese submarine by pretending that a Japanese build was the only way the RAN could stay in the submarine game because ASC were too incompetent to build the next generation. They made it about dumb lazy Australians (or more to the point South Australians) not being good enough and wanting to rip the tax payer off.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
Volkodav said:
IMO the reason we have a new PM now is due to the litany of poorly executed good ideas from Abbott. Things that should have been straightforward were screwed up in detail and execution, usually through the incorporation of some completely unnecessary political, or worse, parochial or ideological distraction that overshadowed the merit of what was actually intended. i.e.the blatantly political, parochial and ideological attacks on ASC as justification for a Japanese build where a grown up government would have left the theatrical bs out of it, explained why the Japanese design was the best option, explained why a long term strategic arrangement was critical and once that was done determine where and how to build the boats.

The previous administration went about it back to front, they decided to justify a Japanese submarine by pretending that a Japanese build was the only way the RAN could stay in the submarine game because ASC were too incompetent to build the next generation. They made it about dumb lazy Australians (or more to the point South Australians) not being good enough and wanting to rip the tax payer off.
Click to expand...
Talk about hitting the nail on the head, defence should be non-political and just get the job done to our best interests
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top