Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[oldsig127]

I wonder if they have something like an Australian version of Chinese hospital ship Daishan Dao - Wikipedia or USNS Mercy (T-AH-19) - Wikipedia or RFA Argus (A135) - Wikipedia

Peace ark is the sort of capability Australia would probably want to displace regionally. Something with significant capability and presence.

The first pair don't seem to me to meet the "Large Amphibious Ship" description, though as Mercy is twice the displacement of Canberra she's certainly "Large".

Argus though (or an additional one of the ships with Enforcer bloodlines like Choules) seem to have a considerable flexibility and fit that rough description.

My only reservation with this is that would be that the new ship comes *instead* of the already planned extra RAN ship but is denavalised into uselessness in any hotter circumstance than HADR

oldsig

oldsig

 

[Pusser01]

Someone should wander over to FBW and look at the Anzacs alongside, that pergola is a disgrace, looks like third world bum boats.

There's none alongside at the moment Assail. Four are over at the CUF including 3 on the hardstand at BAE. One of the yearly tasks in an IMAV is to set up scaffolding around the cupola to enable it to be cleaned. Cheers

 

[hauritz]

I wonder if they have something like an Australian version of Chinese hospital ship Daishan Dao - Wikipedia or USNS Mercy (T-AH-19) - Wikipedia or RFA Argus (A135) - Wikipedia

Peace ark is the sort of capability Australia would probably want to displace regionally. Something with significant capability and presence.

Yep ...a lot of this is about showing the flag and creating an impression.

I found this old article which probably gives some clue as to what the government is concerned about.

China's floating hospital helping Pacific countries (as long as they don't recognise Taiwan)

It is not just HADR work the government is looking at but something to battle China's "Soft Diplomacy". The government might be willing to spend a lot of money to do this so when Chris Pyne says a big ship he may well be talking about a really big ship. At the minimum around Peace Ark size.

 

[ASSAIL]

There's none alongside at the moment Assail. Four are over at the CUF including 3 on the hardstand at BAE. One of the yearly tasks in an IMAV is to set up scaffolding around the cupola to enable it to be cleaned. Cheers

Unfortunately that annual clean doesn’t help their presentation when deployed.
When large numbers of mixed navies’ visit Darwin on exercises the Anzacs are a real standout, for all the wrong reasons, the JMSDF ships are immaculate, always, embarrassing really.

 

[Stampede]

Surprised no-one has reported on the Government's announcement of a new large amphibious vessel for Navy.
Is being purchased to improve Australia's ability to respond to events in the South Pacific, natural disasters etc.
No details on type, exact size, who is going to manufacture it etc.

So what does a new large amphibious vessel look like when we have so little detail as to size and budget.
Some speculation on a vessel to provide regional HADR.
It will need to operate, if needed as an independent unit to provide aid to a disaster zone.
This should require a ship offering long legs and persistence in the area of operation.
Assumptions of working harbours and land infrastructure can not be assumed, so the vessel will need to either have a beaching capability or alternatively connectors for ship to shore movement.
So what will the ship hold and carry.
Certainly a large logistic component, requiring lane meters, and storage for dry goods and cool rooms.
A fresh water generation facility and storage would certainly be required.
Medical services would be a priority. Full operating facilities, from low to high end and in numbers to provide assistance as a first responder.
An aviation facility would be required, as would the associated large two spot flight deck and hangar. A minimum of two helicopters would provide both availability and aircraft for redundancy.
The ship will need to be crewed to make this all work, and will need sufficient extra berths for aviation,medical,signal,construction,engineering,logistic and security personal.
If anyone has other suggestions to the list please add.
So if I'm on the correct path how large is our new large amphibious vessel.
I'd suggest it will be too big to park on a beach.
My belief is that any connectors without looking at heavy tanks and the like would need to be able to carry by weight any of army's larger trucks and engineering equipment. As such we are looking at a vessel with a docking well and large connectors.
So to do justice to the above I would assume a small Landing Ship Dock would be the the very minimum, so my guess is at least the 8 / 10000T range of vessel.
But to be realistic probably even bigger
At this size you would also want it to be able to carry out a military role as well as it HADR service.This will require at least self defence weapons and the sensors to guide them.
Therefore interoperability with existing equipment. In particular helicopters and LCM1e landing craft is a must.
So are we looking at another Bay class, or a new class of TWO LSD's; one as an additional ship to the fleet and the other to replace HMAS Choules.
Would this tie in with the additional ship mentioned in the DWP 2016.
It should be an easy sell with the help the region stuff and if built locally it should get bi partisan support.

Four large amphibious ships would provide the full range of options both military and HADR to government.

HOWEVER.

If I really had my way,
It would be a third Canberra class and replace the LCH's with three modern units, such as the General Frank S Besson Class.
Probably a similar price to Two LSD's.

Regards S

PS - would it be an easier sell if we painted the LHD white ?

 

[StingrayOZ]

What about this..

Replace Choules with a new LHD.
Use Choules as a civilian manned soft diplomacy/HDAR ship. Originally being a civi RFA ship it has lower manning requirements (~<60 odd under RFA), it also allows the RAN to commonise its amphibious capability, while extensively expanding it. Having it still available for Australia's use and could be managed. Hard to see it as any loss of capability. There was money originally to acquire something LHD size and cost. Crewing would be a bit short at current numbers, but perhaps not insurmountable, training, logistics, upgrade and crewing can be shared across all three. Because of this, the additional demands aren't quite the as significant as it may at first seem. The LHD design is still fresh, Turkey currently building. Spain I would imagine would give an amazing price. With 3 LHD Australia's amphibious capability would be next level and open options previously ruled out.

Choules I think would make an ideal ship for this type of role. It is currently fitted out quite well with its current capabilities. It has already performed missions assisting Manus and across the pacific. Choules really wouldn't lose anything in this role, and could be re-incorporated if say the LHD's were out of action for upgrades or some larger conflict was to develop. Its bigger than the Chinese ship, and arguably more capable. Could it be supported with DFATs budget (if boosted?). It might also be useful if there are concerns further than just the pacific. It could certainly operation in conjunction of the LHD if needed.

I think smaller amphibious ships are possible within that, but that will likely happen with the plan to coalesce the many different ship classes into more unified OPV type ships. They might even be shared across like minded nations like NZ, Singapore, Vietnam, etc.

I also wonder in the winter time if the new icebreaker gets a job driving around the Pacific, When its iced out of the AAT.

 

[swerve]

"Choules.... Its bigger than the Chinese ship"

Daishan Dao/Peace Ark is almost identical in length & similar beam to HMAS Choules, as far as the published estimates go.

 

[StingrayOZ]

True, but the displacement could be beefed up enough, it could be quoted as bigger.
Purely about marketing value. Choules is a known entity. A half baked attempt could back fire. They really need to do this properly. X-ray machine on a small old ferry won't work. They are talking about boosting health in the Pacific to match the level in Australia. Big job.

 

[pussertas]

Barracuda Class

Somewhere, somewhere, I saw an article by a senior RAN officer that the new Barracuda class submarine would take 3 years post launch to work out most of the problems. Cannot find a reference to this statement by 'googling' it. Have yet to look at the RAN site!

IMHO this was an excellent statement. The RAN will be the 'parent navy' and as was learnt from the Collins Class any mishap creates headlines for the more irresponsible media.

As first of class it is normal for defects to arise.

 

[hairyman]

It was not only the media that was irresponsible when it came to the Collins. The "Opposition " were ruthless in their condemnation of the Collins, picking up any supposed fault. This even continued when they came to govern.

 

[hauritz]

Barracuda Class

Somewhere, somewhere, I saw an article by a senior RAN officer that the new Barracuda class submarine would take 3 years post launch to work out most of the problems. Cannot find a reference to this statement by 'googling' it. Have yet to look at the RAN site!

IMHO this was an excellent statement. The RAN will be the 'parent navy' and as was learnt from the Collins Class any mishap creates headlines for the more irresponsible media.

As first of class it is normal for defects to arise.

Is this it?
Future submarines will need lengthy trials: Navy chief

 

[pussertas]

Is this it?
Future submarines will need lengthy trials: Navy chief

Yes. Thank you Hauritz

 

[StingrayOZ]

I think it is inevitable that all 6 collins will be life extended. A new class will take some time to get sorted and even then, we might want some additional anyway.. I don't think there is a huge difference between upgrading 4 and upgrading all 6.

 

[hauritz]

Yes. Thank you Hauritz

Any way you look at it introducing new submarines into service will be a long drawn out process.

The HMAS Collins was commissioned in 1996 but wasn't really operational until around 2000.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...ves_committees?url=jcpaa/submarine/chap10.pdf

The problem is that the replacement program is already running about 10 years late IMHO. Having the first of the new subs operational by the mid 30s night just about be a best-case scenario.

 

[Redlands18]

http://news.navy.gov.au
Talking of the RAN supporting the Pacific Islands the Adelaide is in Port Moresby Harbour for APEC support. This is the type of Mission we got these Ships for.

 

[Stampede]

Any way you look at it introducing new submarines into service will be a long drawn out process.

The HMAS Collins was commissioned in 1996 but wasn't really operational until around 2000.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentar...ves_committees?url=jcpaa/submarine/chap10.pdf

The problem is that the replacement program is already running about 10 years late IMHO. Having the first of the new subs operational by the mid 30s night just about be a best-case scenario.

My understanding is Indonesia will have 8 submarines in service by 2024/25.
I wonder when the RAN will have eight subs in it's inventory ????? 2040's maybe!!!!!!!!

Regards S

PS - They had better be worth the wait / weight.

 

[Stampede]

RAAF have

http://news.navy.gov.au
Talking of the RAN supporting the Pacific Islands the Adelaide is in Port Moresby Harbour for APEC support. This is the type of Mission we got these Ships for.

RAAF have Hornets in Port Moresby.
What other flying things could Adelaide accommodate that we don't have.
Type of mission and all that.


Regards S

 

[Redlands18]

RAAF have



RAAF have Hornets in Port Moresby.
What other flying things could Adelaide accommodate that we don't have.
Type of mission and all that.


Regards S

At this stage looks like they are carrying MH-60s & MRH-90s at least.

 

[t68]

And @Christopher Pyne promises new ship in 'pivot' to the south Pacific
I wonder if this means a commissioned ship in the RAN or something like a MV Sycamore operated vessel?

I like the idea of perhaps a HMAS Jervis Bay III a HMAS Jervis Bay (GT203) replacement using some like the MS Sprit of Tasmania II in role like HMS Argus and used in a mixture of used a mixture of PCRS/troop/vehicle/training ship.

Considering the capacity of a fast RO/PAX ferry such as Sprit of Tasmania, 1,400 passengers, 750 berths, 1,000 cars and a 1,852 lane meters,

• Decks 1 to 6 are used to hold cars and trucks. The for-end of Decks 1 and 2 are accessed via a ramp from deck 3 (The Aft-end space of the two decks houses the ships machinery). Deck 6 holds cars using a hoistable platform.

• Deck 7 has cabins, a reception area, small movie theater, lounge bar, gaming lounge, gift shop, tourism bureau, main bar, two restaurants and a children's playroom.

• Deck 8 has cabins and an ocean recliner area.

• Deck 9 is mainly crew area.

• Deck 10 has a bar and disco area.

• Deck 11 has a helicopter landing pad.

I wonder what a new build would cost modified for PCRS/troops etc

On a side note HMS Argus is due for replacement soon wonder if the RAN/RN have the same needs if building newe could there be scoop for a joint programme to make it cheaper for both nations?

 

[alexsa]

And @Christopher Pyne promises new ship in 'pivot' to the south Pacific
I wonder if this means a commissioned ship in the RAN or something like a MV Sycamore operated vessel?

I like the idea of perhaps a HMAS Jervis Bay III a HMAS Jervis Bay (GT203) replacement using some like the MS Sprit of Tasmania II in role like HMS Argus and used in a mixture of used a mixture of PCRS/troop/vehicle/training ship.

Considering the capacity of a fast RO/PAX ferry such as Sprit of Tasmania, 1,400 passengers, 750 berths, 1,000 cars and a 1,852 lane meters,

• Decks 1 to 6 are used to hold cars and trucks. The for-end of Decks 1 and 2 are accessed via a ramp from deck 3 (The Aft-end space of the two decks houses the ships machinery). Deck 6 holds cars using a hoistable platform.

• Deck 7 has cabins, a reception area, small movie theater, lounge bar, gaming lounge, gift shop, tourism bureau, main bar, two restaurants and a children's playroom.

• Deck 8 has cabins and an ocean recliner area.

• Deck 9 is mainly crew area.

• Deck 10 has a bar and disco area.

• Deck 11 has a helicopter landing pad.

I wonder what a new build would cost modified for PCRS/troops etc

On a side note HMS Argus is due for replacement soon wonder if the RAN/RN have the same needs if building newe could there be scoop for a joint programme to make it cheaper for both nations?

Why a SPOT and why a conversion noting conversions are quite expensive..... They are designed for short haul high speed RO PAX operations and rely on dedicated infrastructure to load and unload. They are very expensive to run but admittedly can operate in worse conditions than the HSC craft some are mooting.

From a HADR perspective they:
1. Cannot operate helos on an ongoing basis and the helo spot is only design for passenger medical evacuation.
2. Cannot operate in areas without port infrastructure (noting a natural disaster normally has an impact on this and most pacific islands have a paucity of such infrastructure in any case)
3. Have no comprehensive medical facilities nor the connective structures to allow casualties to be dealt with.
4. They are bloody old and do not comply with upcoming MARPOL air emission requirements (and making them comply will not be simple) and have been very hard run.

All in all a conversion of SPOT I and II would give you a very compromised vessels with very limited life..... and the conversion would be very expensive ... so a purpose built ... or more suitable base vessel would be a better option.