Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[vonnoobie]

I have to wonder if the Galicia or any of the Enforcer variants (The base design of them all) would even be considered considering by that time the design would be 30+ years old.

I imagine by then as is happening now there will be improvement's in hull design and various other improvements that would be easier and cheaper with a clean sheet design then trying to fit into a 30 year old design.

On the other hand thinking about the evolution in ship sizes we could conceivably end up with something quite a bit larger (So long as crewing is similar in size).

 

[alexsa]

I have to wonder if the Galicia or any of the Enforcer variants (The base design of them all) would even be considered considering by that time the design would be 30+ years old.

I imagine by then as is happening now there will be improvement's in hull design and various other improvements that would be easier and cheaper with a clean sheet design then trying to fit into a 30 year old design.

On the other hand thinking about the evolution in ship sizes we could conceivably end up with something quite a bit larger (So long as crewing is similar in size).

Just for context on the age issue ...... the Arleigh Burke design stems from a design selection from 1983 with the first of class laid down in 1988. So the design basis for this vessel is 34 years old with the first construction started 29 years ago.

 

[ASSAIL]

Landing Platform Dock 13000
A more up to date version from Damen.

It's a lot more attractive than paper bag ugly Bay Class. What is it with the Brits? They turn a perfectly reasonable looking ship into A mother in law.

 

[SpazSinbad]

Hi Spaz, Apologies for the link, you have found the correct photo. I have PM'd you with some links to other forums that have relevant information. Would love to post the photo's here but they are not appropriate.

The photo of the fin in your original photograph has the strip half way down the trailing edge of the fin. The Ikara transponder is more bulbous at the rear of the fin and had an opaque plastic cover. The Turana transponders were longer, more bulbous at the front and were orange.

I think your original photograph shows a prototype Turana transponder, but that is only my opinion.

regards, Alf

'Alf662': Your PM to me does not appear in my PM list so I'll post this info (with OTHER info not included because it is addressed differently but you will find it interesting nevertheless). You can e-mail me please, which I find much more reliable and convenient: phillipthompson2 bigpond.com (just put the @ in the space). The quote is from CDRE Da Costa RAN (retd) addressed to me and the other correspondent (whose message is NOT below but relevant):

""As it happened, I had quite an association with the Government Aircraft Factory (GAF) Torpedo-release Trials programme for Ikara.* First, in 1962, when Lieutenant E.S Bell and I flew Firefly aircraft from Avalon airfield* carrying an under-wing, scaled down, model of Ikara to test the design of the release mechanism.* We carried GAF personnel in the rear cockpits to film the releases.

In 1963, the GAF Trials progressed to operations at the instrumented Woomera Range for more precise coverage of the Mk.44 torpedo releases.* These releases were from a full-scale mock-up of the Ikara missile body that was attached under the port wing of Sea Venom WZ-897.* It was balanced by six dummy 3" rockets under the starboard wing.* On two separate occasions I flew from NAS Nowra to Woomera, via Avalon and RAAF Edinburgh (where the Ikara body and rockets were attached).* These flights were interesting in that the Sea Venom had no civilian navigation aids, and the purpose of the flights was highly classified.* The only solution was to close the airways to all other traffic until I had landed at each of the en route airfields.* This "closure" was authorised by some "Higher Authority" and I can only imagine the operational implications of the flight plans for civilian airline schedules!

On the first WZ-897 21-day "deployment" to Woomera in February 1963, I was accompanied by Lieutenant John Cooke. Again, GAF personnel were carried in the aircraft for the actual Range operations.* Before the next Woomera deployment, a number of further GAF trials with WZ-897 were carried out at Avalon airfield in April, May, June and July 1963.* The final WZ-897 Trials at Woomera were carried out by me and Lieutenant Neil Louer, in November 1963 over a 17-day deployment. Small parties of Navy aircraft maintenance personnel were positioned at Woomera for these operations.

In total, my log book indicates that I flew WZ-897 on 35 sorties associated with Ikara trials, for a total of just over 28 hours.* A very interesting time on a highly classified operation."

 

[oldsig127]

It's a lot more attractive than paper bag ugly Bay Class. What is it with the Brits? They turn a perfectly reasonable looking ship into A mother in law.

Pretty bigoted to be fair.

It's essentially a Dutch/Spanish design and the Rotterdam and Galicia classes look very similar from any sort of distance. In this case, the ship started out as a MiL and they copied her.

oldsig

 

[ngatimozart]

It's a lot more attractive than paper bag ugly Bay Class. What is it with the Brits? They turn a perfectly reasonable looking ship into A mother in law.

Shouldn't insult the mother in law like that.

 

[Redlands18]

LHD docks as Navy continues "Voyage of Discovery"
A close up picture of a Azimuth pod on the HMAS Canberra as real doubts about either Ship being able to attend Talisman Sabre are raised. Metal particulate has been found in Adelaides oil.

 

[pussertas]

Azimuth Pods

A close up picture of a Azimuth pod on the HMAS Canberra as real doubts about either Ship being able to attend Talisman Sabre are raised. Metal particulate has been found in Adelaide's oil.

Thank you indeed Redlands18. Highly informative.

Chris

 

[pussertas]

LPD Damian 1300

It's a lot more attractive than paper bag ugly Bay Class. What is it with the Brits? They turn a perfectly reasonable looking ship into A mother in law.

The slim design abutting the hanger would seem to indicate space for a wider hanger could be incorporated with a revised design. Possibly sufficient to house the RAN's new helicopters?

:flash

 

[Joe Black]

LHD docks as Navy continues "Voyage of Discovery"
A close up picture of a Azimuth pod on the HMAS Canberra as real doubts about either Ship being able to attend Talisman Sabre are raised. Metal particulate has been found in Adelaides oil.

Is it me or does the top propeller blade on the left side looked bent? Did it hit something?

 

[vonnoobie]

Bit of a twist in the story around the LHD's.

Came across a Spanish article and with a little google translating apperantly some in navantia are thinking BAE has purposly sabotaged them to get an upper hand on the future frigate deal.

https://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.elconfidencialdigital.com/defensa/Navantia-sospecha-macrocontrato-fragatas-Asutralia_0_2925307452.html&prev=search

Spain plays the 21,000 million euros - which entails the supply plus maintenance - with two other competitors: the British BAE and the Italian Ficantieri . Next to Navantia, are the three companies that have reached the last phase of the contest.

Spain has, according to some analysts, a certain favoritism in this short list of the program SEA 5000, as it has denominated Australia. Mainly for the strength of the bet: the F-100 frigates are very competitive with regard to Ficantieri FREMM and Type 26 of BAE Systems.

Nevertheless, in the last weeks have been seeded in the Australian press certain doubts on the reliability of the Spanish products. Specifically that of the two amphibious assault ships, which are currently paralyzed at a naval base in Sydney after encountering more than a month ago a problem in the azipod propellers manufactured by Siemenes that are equipped.

The fault was found at HMAS Canberra, but also caused the halt of HMAS Adelaide. After a thorough review, other defects were also being analyzed.

It has been speculated that the source of the problem is the use of a fuel type not stipulated in the ship manuals , although the Australian navy has denied having used an unacceptable model.

As ECD has learned from internal and unofficial sources of Navantia, in the Spanish company it is suspected that there may be " bad arts " by some competitor in the frigate contract . They speak, in particular , of BAE, company that carries the contract of maintenance of the two twin ships of the 'Juan Carlos I'.

As they explain, the multinational would have pointed to the manufacturer - Navantia - as responsible for the failures in propulsion, although both they and Siemens also participated in the design and maintenance of the two ships.

" This is not the first time that something similar happens when there is a contract of this magnitude by means" explain these voices. More and more suspects of the existence of an English 'boycott' of Spanish aspirations. However, they admit that they already had "the pressure they are exerting to get the contract."

While it wouldn't be the first time a competitor has sabotaged another companies product logically thinking has BAE really had the chance in recent times to do this or have a crystal ball two and a half years ago when the Canberra was first commissioned to implement a long term strategy?

To me sounds likes business exec's either blind to an issue inside the company (Considering the issues we have had I wouldnt rule that out) or the are scrambling to off set the blame and poorly at that I might add.

Blaming the RAN for fuel/oil's used, blaming BAE now.. Seems to be every one else at fault except Navantia which is stupid as they could have saved them seles all the drama by pointing ou the propulsion systems are not Navantia built.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Bit of a twist in the story around the LHD's.

Came across a Spanish article and with a little google translating apperantly some in navantia are thinking BAE has purposly sabotaged them to get an upper hand on the future frigate deal.

well, ASC gets blamed for all their contractors dodgy work - so all's fair

 

[SteveR]

Bit of a twist in the story around the LHD's.

Came across a Spanish article and with a little google translating apperantly some in navantia are thinking BAE has purposly sabotaged them to get an upper hand on the future frigate deal.

https://translate.google.com.au/translate?hl=en&sl=es&u=http://www.elconfidencialdigital.com/defensa/Navantia-sospecha-macrocontrato-fragatas-Asutralia_0_2925307452.html&prev=search



Blaming the RAN for fuel/oil's used, blaming BAE now.. Seems to be every one else at fault except Navantia which is stupid as they could have saved them seles all the drama by pointing ou the propulsion systems are not Navantia built.

Since Brexit, Spain has been ramping up rhetoric and even air and sea incursions to push for the return of Gibraltar - so there is some anti-UK sentiment in Spain of late and maybe a enthusiastic and patriotic reporter has let this go to his head.

 

[Stampede]

Landing Platform Dock 13000
A more up to date version from Damen.

Ship creep

I think eight ships of the BAY Galacia and Rotterdam vintage are of their era.
Once you get to this size you may as well have a through deck with island to Starboard and use this space for aviation or even logistics.( yes we know Army hates having its vehicles exposed to the elements )
The way forward I believe is for vessels in the size and weight range above with through decks and docking wells with the smaller end around 10000t mark like Indonesias Makassar sized ships.
This later group of LPD's are relatively cheap and good for a reinforced company sized force of Pax and vehicles.Another example is Singapore's Endurance class, 5 of which are in South East Asia.

Would another Bay be good for Australia? Well at a good price and second hand it has merit. However if we were starting for scratch I would suggest other options and that will depend on the existing mix of LHD's and supply ships.
Its all about how we are to do business.
Suggest a class of amphibious vessels in between an LHD and an LCM1e is probably missing.

Regards S

 

[Volkodav]

well, ASC gets blamed for all their contractors dodgy work - so all's fair

Some very experienced and competent people, including seconded BIW staff and Raytheon people, were very wary of contracting the losing yard (both for the AWD and then for block work) to take over the block work from NQEA when they hit contractual problems. The comments included, "would you trust a company that has everything to gain from your failure to provide critical fabrications in a timely fashion and of sufficient quality". They didn't predict what would happen precisely but they fully expected ASC to be screwed in some way and basically said we told you so when the problems with the keel blocks arose.

It wasn't just the dimensional errors in the early blocks at issue, it was the further, brain numbingly (apparently) incompetent, attempts at rework, after the contractor concerned had lobbied very hard to start them from scratch (at a premium). Instead of fixing the dimensional issues by gouging the welds to remove the shell plating to weld new plating correctly, they cut them with cutting tips damaging the framing beneath and then demanded to be allowed to start from scratch at ASCs expense. They basically more than doubled the cost of the rework and the amount of schedule slip.

Then there was the condition of the blocks when delivered. Directional valves installed back to front, manual actuators for the valves installed in inaccessible orientations, weld spatter inside valves, spatter, slag, blasting aggregate, rags, gloves, welding rods, foods rappers and scraps inside pipe segments in the blocks that had supposedly (and ASC had paid to be) tested and preserved.

Some suggested deliberate sabotage, personally I opted for the "never assume malice when stupidity is a perfectly adequate explanation" that gf used to have as his signature. Then again as more and more happened, including the backgrounding of the then Defmin and his subsequent comments about canoes, moves to install the contractor concerned to run the entire AWD project (ignoring the fact that the contractor caused most of the problems), now the issues with the LHDs that appear to show Navantia in a bad light, I am starting to wonder.

 

[swerve]

Ship creep

I think eight ships of the BAY Galacia and Rotterdam vintage are of their era.
Once you get to this size you may as well have a through deck with island to Starboard and use this space for aviation or even logistics.( yes we know Army hates having its vehicles exposed to the elements )
The way forward I believe is for vessels in the size and weight range above with through decks and docking wells with the smaller end around 10000t mark like Indonesias Makassar sized ships.
This later group of LPD's are relatively cheap and good for a reinforced company sized force of Pax and vehicles.Another example is Singapore's Endurance class, 5 of which are in South East Asia.

Regards S

The Endurance class LPDs are the same vintage as Rotterdam/Galicia, & are rather small. They have just over half the tonnage of HMAS Choules.

The Makassar-class is a smaller version of Tanjung Dalpele, & I think is very basic. For Indonesia & the Philippines, relatively poor countries which want transports which don't need ports for shipping anything & everything around their archipelagos, they look ideal, but I'm not sure if they're up to the RAN's standards.

 

[Massive]

The Endurance class LPDs ... are rather small

That is true but it is arguable whether the Canberras are best supported by a ship the size of Choules or three smaller ships similar to the Endurance class.

Regards,

Massive

 

[gf0012-aust]

.......... it is arguable whether the Canberras are best supported by a ship the size of Choules or three smaller ships similar to the Endurance class.

Regards,

Massive

which will also get down to the mission - and ultimately any threat on station

in our case it will also get down to whats not on blocks on the day

 

[t68]

That is true but it is arguable whether the Canberras are best supported by a ship the size of Choules or three smaller ships similar to the Endurance class.

Regards,

Massive

Actually I quite like the Endurance class, think they would be ideal as a mix of extra shipping for troop and heav equipment for the ARG, but also stand alone platform for the ARE and mobile floating base for SOCOMD for riverine patrol craft or something like CB90, so if the amphiboius warfare vessels could in theroy be something similar to the RAAF orbat,

Amphibious Warfare Vessels
6x Damen LST 80/120
3x Endurance class
2x Canberra class

Stratgic sealift
1x Choules
2x Cantibria AOR
Come 2030 replace Choules with Karel Doorman type vessel

 

[swerve]

That's a very ambitious amphibious fleet for a country with Australia's population & economy. Are you suggesting a big increase in defence spending?