Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[StingrayOZ]

Noting this assumes the Damen offering is based on the Stanpatrol as opposed to the OPV1400 or OPV1800. So far the nature of the Damen offering has been speculation noting all three have been 'reported' as the one being offered.

We will have to wait and see.

If Damen has something based of OPV1800 I would have to think we would have seen it by now.

Everything is telling me its based off the smaller damen classes, including Damens presentation of a model based off the Arialah. They are making my expectations very low.Unless they are putting two bids in, and there is a secret one with a 1800 sea axe OPV, hangar, 10 ton capability, icecream machines, NSM launchers, 76mm gun etc.

I'll eat my hat if its based off the 1800.

In the end it doesn't really matter, if it is as I think it is the Fassmer design is likely to be the strongest. If Damen is running something with a hangar and all the trimmings, then your going to end up with similar sort of capability, regardless of the horse chosen. I'm not platform centric, I'm capability centric.

 

[alexsa]

If Damen has something based of OPV1800 I would have to think we would have seen it by now.

Everything is telling me its based off the smaller damen classes, including Damens presentation of a model based off the Arialah. They are making my expectations very low.Unless they are putting two bids in, and there is a secret one with a 1800 sea axe OPV, hangar, 10 ton capability, icecream machines, NSM launchers, 76mm gun etc.

I'll eat my hat if its based off the 1800.

In the end it doesn't really matter, if it is as I think it is the Fassmer design is likely to be the strongest. If Damen is running something with a hangar and all the trimmings, then your going to end up with similar sort of capability, regardless of the horse chosen. I'm not platform centric, I'm capability centric.

They certainly displayed a model of the STAN Patrol at Pacific 17 but journals and magazines have also referred to the OPV1400 or OPV1800 previously. I would also note the Damen have been playing their cards very close and have only really confirmed the SeaAXE bow as far as I am aware.


Not for one minute did I suggest the OPV1800 complete with a hangar, 10 ton capability, icecream machines, NSM launchers, 76mm gun etc ..... . I suspect we will not see much more than a light gun (25mm to 40mm perhaps) and HMGs on any of the offerings


Since the assumption that Damen are offering something not far from a Cape Class the Fassmer product has suddenly become popular..... primarily due to the hanger. The fact is the product the best meets the RFT and the local input requirements will win (noting the latter is a political imperative).


To be honest if Damen were offering the OPV1400 with a Sea Axe bow I would prefer that any day as they have a record for delivering. Austal have never built a steel hull of this size before.

 

[rand0m]

Noting this assumes the Damen offering is based on the Stanpatrol as opposed to the OPV1400 or OPV1800. So far the nature of the Damen offering has been speculation noting all three have been 'reported' as the one being offered.


We will have to wait and see.

I certainly hope this is wrong...

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/1490-sea-1180-a-case-of-missed-opportunity-aspi

The report notes that Damen's bid for the project offers a landing platform that can only carry the weight of UAVs, while Austal/Fassmer's and Lürssen's designs have landing platforms capable of handling helicopters the size and weight of Australia's MH-60 or MRH-90.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Since the assumption that Damen are offering something not far from a Cape Class the Fassmer product has suddenly become popular..... primarily due to the hanger. The fact is the product the best meets the RFT and the local input requirements will win (noting the latter is a political imperative).

Can you blame us? The difference between being able to hangar and operate a 10 ton class helicopter like a seahawk, and being able to only carry and operate camcopter type UAV's is pretty huge. Hence why ASPI is generally pretty pissed and putting a stream of articles about how it should have really be included in the requirements.

To be honest if Damen were offering the OPV1400 with a Sea Axe bow I would prefer that any day as they have a record for delivering. Austal have never built a steel hull of this size before.

I get that. If it was a straight up fight between an Austal OPV80 and civmec/forgacs OPV1400, well sure on paper the opv80 look a touch better with 10ton helicopter verse 6, but then the ability to deliver comes into it. Sure I could see why a opv1400 would be a very tempting offer.

If Austal wins I wonder if civmec/forgacs might just buy that part of Austal out. Making steel ships isn't a core part of Austal, and competing in that business, I think is unnatural for them.

But I've become skeptical. If you aren't showing it, then you don't have it. Until evidence shows Damen have something wildly different from what everyone is thinking or talking about, I am skeptical.

 

[Joe Black]

I certainly hope this is wrong...

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/1490-sea-1180-a-case-of-missed-opportunity-aspi

Just wondering why Damen can't simply offer 2 or 3 different options and provide the price for each of them as part of their bid. OPV 1800 with the Sea Axe2 could be one of the option.

Since they know how much each option will cost, it all comes down to present all these as part of the tender and let defence choose.

Damen SeaAxe is my preference, follow by Fassmer. I also think ASC preferred partner is Forgacs rather than Austal. I would love to see Civmec build this in WA than ASC as the recent tone from ASC about moving work to the Philippines sounds like a threat to the govt to me.

 

[aussienscale]

Just wondering why Damen can't simply offer 2 or 3 different options and provide the price for each of them as part of their bid. OPV 1800 with the Sea Axe2 could be one of the option.

Since they know how much each option will cost, it all comes down to present all these as part of the tender and let defence choose.

Damen SeaAxe is my preference, follow by Fassmer. I also think ASC preferred partner is Forgacs rather than Austal. I would love to see Civmec build this in WA than ASC as the recent tone from ASC about moving work to the Philippines sounds like a threat to the govt to me.

People please !! Once again to make it crystal clear !!

None of these people know what the requirements are in the RFT, NO ONE !

Only the basics that are available in the public domain !

None of these people know what has been submitted by any of the participants, none of them !

Not ASPI, not The Australian, or any other hack who thinks they are a Defence reporter !

Fairy land, assumptive commentary is not what this forum is about, it is about fact based discussion, this is seriously doing my head in !!

If you want to discuss capabilities, go for it, based on fact and perceived requirements, but stop making up crap based on reporters stories and extrapolating companies tenders based on a bloody model at a convention !!

Seriously

 

[ngatimozart]

How about people taking a step back and bring some reality back to the thread. No one on here knows what and what not is in the OPV RFT and what has been submitted to the CofA by tender submitters.

 

[Muar River]

Bath Iron Works has selected Navantia as the "parent design" for the FFG(X) programme.

The USN wants to build up to 20 frigates with a ceiling of just under US $1bn per ship. Total cost of the programmed is $19bn US.

“Bath Iron Works evaluated many U.S. and foreign designs suited to the FFG (X) requirements and found that the family of frigates designed and built by Navantia is an ideal match,” BIW President Dirk Lesko said in a statement issued Wednesday. “We look forward to continuing the productive relationship we have had with Navantia for nearly 40 years.”


BIW pursuing contract to build 20 guided-missile frigates for Navy - Portland Press Herald

 

[PeterM]

Bath Iron Works has selected Navantia as the "parent design" for the FFG(X) programme.

The USN wants to build up to 20 frigates with a ceiling of just under US $1bn per ship. Total cost of the programmed is $19bn US.

“Bath Iron Works evaluated many U.S. and foreign designs suited to the FFG (X) requirements and found that the family of frigates designed and built by Navantia is an ideal match,” BIW President Dirk Lesko said in a statement issued Wednesday. “We look forward to continuing the productive relationship we have had with Navantia for nearly 40 years.”


BIW pursuing contract to build 20 guided-missile frigates for Navy - Portland Press Herald

This is quite interesting. It sounds like the parent design might be the F110.

I am curious to see how close the intended design might be to the Navantia proposal for SEA5000.

This may have follow on implications for SEA 5000. It does give an advantage for the Navantia proposal that may come into consideration.

Commonality with the USN is desirable and potentially opens up development paths and supply chain options which we could leverage with the larger USN class.

Perhaps there is potential for export opportunities with the CEA phased array?

Another thought, with the future frigates, F110 and FFG(x) all under development at the same time, there is potential to share development learnings and costs with Bath Iron Works as well as Navantia.

 

[weegee]

According to Marise Payne's twitter post a few hours ago, She states that Success and Sirius replacements will be named Supply and Stalwart.
I thought some people would like to know.

 

[Muar River]

This is quite interesting. It sounds like the parent design might be the F110.

I am curious to see how close the intended design might be to the Navantia proposal for SEA5000.

This may have follow on implications for SEA 5000. It does give an advantage for the Navantia proposal that may come into consideration.

Commonality with the USN is desirable and potentially opens up development paths and supply chain options which we could leverage with the larger USN class.

Perhaps there is potential for export opportunities with the CEA phased array?

Another thought, with the future frigates, F110 and FFG(x) all under development at the same time, there is potential to share development learnings and costs with Bath Iron Works as well as Navantia.

Good post.

Navantia is also competing for the RCN CSC programme, so there is the potential for commonalities across three nations?

Perhaps the USN intends to select a larger design to provide room for growth over the life of the ship to avoid what happened with the FFG7 class?

 

[Redlands18]

According to Marise Payne's twitter post a few hours ago, She states that Success and Sirius replacements will be named Supply and Stalwart.
I thought some people would like to know.

Exactly the names i thought they would go with.

 

[Muar River]

According to Marise Payne's twitter post a few hours ago, She states that Success and Sirius replacements will be named Supply and Stalwart.
I thought some people would like to know.

Thanks. The use of older names is great but I had hoped Stalwart may be used for a future frigate in recognition of the old Anzac Class destroyer. I would like to see Encounter and Pysche names used on the future frigates in remembrance of two fine old cruisers which served with the early RAN.

 

[alexsa]

This is quite interesting. It sounds like the parent design might be the F110.

I am curious to see how close the intended design might be to the Navantia proposal for SEA5000.

This may have follow on implications for SEA 5000. It does give an advantage for the Navantia proposal that may come into consideration.

Commonality with the USN is desirable and potentially opens up development paths and supply chain options which we could leverage with the larger USN class.

Perhaps there is potential for export opportunities with the CEA phased array?

Another thought, with the future frigates, F110 and FFG(x) all under development at the same time, there is potential to share development learnings and costs with Bath Iron Works as well as Navantia.

Why does it sound like it could be the F110? It does not say that anywhere in the release and this is a conceptual design that is not in production yet.


Les face it given the reference to a family of hulls could also be a derivative of the F100-F105/AWD family noting this carries the AEGIS system and there is a lot of US DNA in this vessel. It might also be based on the evolved F100 (F5000) frigate as part of the F100 'family'.


The fact is the media release tells us nothing and we are once again we are speculating.

 

[hauritz]

This is quite interesting. It sounds like the parent design might be the F110.

I am curious to see how close the intended design might be to the Navantia proposal for SEA5000.

This may have follow on implications for SEA 5000. It does give an advantage for the Navantia proposal that may come into consideration.

Commonality with the USN is desirable and potentially opens up development paths and supply chain options which we could leverage with the larger USN class.

Perhaps there is potential for export opportunities with the CEA phased array?

Another thought, with the future frigates, F110 and FFG(x) all under development at the same time, there is potential to share development learnings and costs with Bath Iron Works as well as Navantia.

I am pretty sure someone posted earlier that the US was limiting selection to ships that were already in service.

If that is the case it is more likely a modified F105 or perhaps even something like the Fridtjof Nansen-class frigates.

 

[alexsa]

Thanks. The use of older names is great but I had hoped Stalwart may be used for a future frigate in recognition of the old Anzac Class destroyer. I would like to see Encounter and Pysche names used on the future frigates in remembrance of two fine old cruisers which served with the early RAN.

Except that support ships have taken "S" names for some time and both Supply and Stalwart have history in this area.


Interesting to see what happens to Sirius noting she was purchased new in 2004 and is only 13 years old. She would still be useful and aux tanker (noting the flight deck has proved less that successful) so I wonder if she may be on-sold.

Post Script ..... Hey John, may be another interim solution for Canada along with some Classic Hornets .............. Sorry the devil made me say it.

 

[Flexson]

Thanks. The use of older names is great but I had hoped Stalwart may be used for a future frigate in recognition of the old Anzac Class destroyer. I would like to see Encounter and Pysche names used on the future frigates in remembrance of two fine old cruisers which served with the early RAN.

There hasn't been an ANZAC Class destroyer. There was a Parker Class destroyer and a Battle Class destroyer named ANZAC.

Stalwart was an S-Class destroyer. Stalwart, Success, Swordsman, Tasmania and Tattoo.

I too expected Supply and Stalwart but was hoping for Swordsman and Stalwart as I'll probably end up serving on the Sydney based one considering I've spent the last couple years on Success.

For the Frigates I'm hoping for HMAS Derwent, HMAS Swan, HMAS Torrens, HMAS Werrego, HMAS Bataan, HMAS Melbourne, HMAS Darwin, HMAS Newcastle and the lead ship and class name being HMAS Tobruk. Tobruk (I) being a battle class destroyer and her sister ship being HMAS ANZAC (II). ANZAC has had a class of frigate bearing its name I believe its replacement class should bear the name Tobruk.

 

[Redlands18]

Except that support ships have taken "S" names for some time and both Supply and Stalwart have history in this area.


Interesting to see what happens to Sirius noting she was purchased new in 2004 and is only 13 years old. She would still be useful and aux tanker (noting the flight deck has proved less that successful) so I wonder if she may be on-sold.

Post Script ..... Hey John, may be another interim solution for Canada along with some Classic Hornets .............. Sorry the devil made me say it.

Poland might be interested in a package deal, buy the 3 FFGs and well throw in the Sirius.

 

[Muar River]

There hasn't been an ANZAC Class destroyer. There was a Parker Class destroyer and a Battle Class destroyer named ANZAC.

Stalwart was an S-Class destroyer. Stalwart, Success, Swordsman, Tasmania and Tattoo.

I too expected Supply and Stalwart but was hoping for Swordsman and Stalwart as I'll probably end up serving on the Sydney based one considering I've spent the last couple years on Success.

For the Frigates I'm hoping for HMAS Derwent, HMAS Swan, HMAS Torrens, HMAS Werrego, HMAS Bataan, HMAS Melbourne, HMAS Darwin, HMAS Newcastle and the lead ship and class name being HMAS Tobruk. Tobruk (I) being a battle class destroyer and her sister ship being HMAS ANZAC (II). ANZAC has had a class of frigate bearing its name I believe its replacement class should bear the name Tobruk.

Yes, my error. Anzac was the destroyer leader with the five S class.

 

[spoz]

There hasn't been an ANZAC Class destroyer. There was a Parker Class destroyer and a Battle Class destroyer named ANZAC.

Stalwart was an S-Class destroyer. Stalwart, Success, Swordsman, Tasmania and Tattoo.

I too expected Supply and Stalwart but was hoping for Swordsman and Stalwart as I'll probably end up serving on the Sydney based one considering I've spent the last couple years on Success

For the Frigates I'm hoping for HMAS Derwent, HMAS Swan, HMAS Torrens, HMAS Werrego, HMAS Bataan, HMAS Melbourne, HMAS Darwin, HMAS Newcastle and the lead ship and class name being HMAS Tobruk. Tobruk (I) being a battle class destroyer and her sister ship being HMAS ANZAC (II). ANZAC has had a class of frigate bearing its name I believe its replacement class should bear the name Tobruk.

The Baron of the Han (Murchison) deserves a resurrection as well as might some of the other Rivers (Culgoa?) plus of course there are the Ns or the Qs, not to forget Vamps, VD and probably Voyager. The fact that the latter was lost should not matter, in fact it should be all the more reason to commemorate her, and after all it will be at least 60 years... There are actually better choices for both the OPVs and the FFs than to go down the big city/country town route yet again.

And as a PS I’m a former tough, tenacious tanker man so I’m very happy with Supply, building 215 now, that’s something else!