Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[spoz]

Skippy in its current form was invented in one of the destroyers, Tobruk I think, in the Korean War at a time when Australian ships wore the White Ensign, so that in a USN dominated environment but with a strong RN presence they would know we were not Brits. It remained a symbol of the three destroyer/frigate squadrons through the 70s and only started appearing on non combatants with Success in the 80s

 

[alexsa]

To be honest I was gonna say stores, she is sitting pretty high in the water. No doubt it will be painted on soonish.

Fuel more than stores as this is the greatest volume and mass of the supplies the ship will carry. Unlike the combat vessels the AOR's will have a much great range loaded conditions (hence drafts) to deal with in normal usage. The LHD are similar but the weight impact is less (mind you the aft draft changes pretty dramatically when they are flooded down.

 

[StingrayOZ]

There are some countries that might want a pair of used LPDs, e.g. in South America, where they could replace older used LPDs.

Chile and Brazil took the French LPD's. Argentina has been after some sort of amphibious ship for a while which the UK always tends to block (USS Ponce LPD circa 1970 was the most recent). TBH I think China is more of a threat to the Falkland's than Argentina is.

Peru just acquired a LPD from Indonesia as did the Philippines.
Thailand just signed a deal to acquire a large amphibious ship from China.

Malaysia has a project for an amphibious ship. Vietnam has just started construction of a 57m LST and is looking at larger amphibious ships. South Africa was looking at amphibious capability and logistics. SAS Drakensberg is from the 1980's. There would be some middle east countries looking at acquiring some amphibious and sealift capability. Poland is another country that may be looking for something. Greece is rumored to be looking at something as well.

Just an observation. I would have thought that Skippy would have graced all RAN ships, regardless of classification, because they are commissioned ships in the RAN. I really don't see the reasoning for such discrimination. After all a commissioned ship is warship regardless of its employment.

Its one of those wackier things. It really came out of Australia trying to clearly identify itself separately from the British. It then also then used it to try to identify itself separately from the Americans. So typically it is on ships that work internationally alongside other navies.

The Origin of RAN Squadron and National Insignia | Royal Australian Navy

Royal Australian Navy

www.navy.gov.au

Ships and boats like patrol boats have run all sorts of wacky insignia. The Collins and Oberon's have their o-merangs and c-mergangs. The amphibs run the red roo and the amphibious squadron symbol.

The presented a red roo for the SPS Cantabria when she deployed with the RAN. So I would presume the AOR would feature them.

The LPDs could be refitted to be sold, and if another country (say Australia for a third LHD) hops in, getting a one for one replacement could go from hard to feasible. The amount of work and national investment may justify that growth in the view of the taxpayers.

I wouldn't hold your breath. Its not in current planning for the ADF. Lining up any sort of multinational build is always extremely difficult even if both participants are willing. Budgets, needs, and capabilities rarely align. The design is still pretty fresh, with the Turks nearing completition of TCG Anadolu.. If the relationship between Turkey and the west was better, a bare hull Turkish build could have been possible. MITKA meetings are still occurring..

 

[John Newman]

One JC1 for the two of them wouldn't be so bad. The LPDs could be refitted to be sold, and if another country (say Australia for a third LHD) hops in, getting a one for one replacement could go from hard to feasible. The amount of work and national investment may justify that growth in the view of the taxpayers.

Hmmm..... the semi annual “let’s get a 3rd LHD” which usually includes “get rid of Choules and replace it with that 3rd LHD”. Neither is going to happen, not today, not at all.

I feel pretty confident that when both of the two new AORs are completed they will be the last major overseas built ships for the RAN we’ll see for the next 25-30 years, and maybe never again.

The 2020 Strategic Defence Update made it clear that the Choules replacement will be two ‘local’ built JSS ships:

PACIFIC 2019: Navantia Australia Unveils Joint Support Ship Design - Naval News

At PACIFIC 2019, the naval defense exposition held last week in Sydney, Australia, Navantia Australia, the local branch of Spanish shipbuilding group Navantia, unveiled a new Joint Support Ship (JSS) design for both the domestic and export market.

www.navalnews.com

Probably something similar in size to the proposed Navantia Australia JSS design.

With all of the infrastructure upgrades planned for Henderson, including a large dry dock, being able to build those two JSS shouldn’t be a problem.

And if the infrastructure is built large enough, with growth potential in mind, then the logical next step would be to build the next AORs locally and maybe LHD replacements too.

As long as future Federal Governments don’t start dicking around with the Naval Shipbuilding Plan, we are likely to see continuous builds of submarines, destroyers and frigates at Osborne and everything else at Henderson.

Anyway, time will tell, but that’s my prediction.

Cheers,

 

[magicbandit7]

Hi, I've just been wondering, does it make sense to bring back destroyer squadrons in the RAN. What are the advantages and disadvantages of having DESRONs for today's navy? I understand that WW2 DESRONs were fighting units meant to train and fight together and my point of view is, with increasingly assertive China whose navy now boasts a the Type 055 'not a cruiser' destroyer with 112 VLS cells, it make sense to copy that WW2 pattern and have say 1 Hobart class DDG leading 3 Hunter class FFGs for a total missile load-out of 144 VLS cells and 24 canister anti-ship missiles assigned permanently to a squadron training and operating together so when SHTF, they could protect an Amphibious Task Group or a merchant convoy.

 

[ngatimozart]

Video of Supply coming alongside in Sydney.

Edited to correct naming error. Blardy kiwis

 

[DDG38]

Video of Success coming alongside in Sydney.

Wow that's impressive, didn't know they'd recommissioned her.

 

[ngatimozart]

Wow that's impressive, didn't know they'd recommissioned her.

You've got the cart before the horse. She hasn't been commissioned yet. She was wearing the red duster.

 

[oldsig127]

You've got the cart before the horse. She hasn't been commissioned yet. She was wearing the red duster.

Read your original post.....
oldsig

 

[Julian 82]

You've got the cart before the horse. She hasn't been commissioned yet. She was wearing the red duster.

She will be HMAS Supply

 

[ngatimozart]

Read your original post.....
oldsig

Bugger. Old age and senility on my part. I shall correct my error.

 

[John Newman]

Bugger. Old age and senility on my part. I shall correct my error.

Silly old Kiwi!! Maybe one too many Rums tonight hey? Ha ha!

 

[John Fedup]

Silly old Kiwi!! Maybe one too many Rums tonight hey? Ha ha!

“Too many” is such a vague number.

 

[Flexson]

Video of Supply coming alongside in Sydney.

Edited to correct naming error. Blardy kiwis

Damn I've been slabbed! Or surely would have been if that was really still a thing, but no, that could be construed as promoting irresponsible drinking behaviours etc etc.

@alexsa Second Phalanx will supposedly be fitted in a refit a couple years down the track according to the DWEO. What is harder to spot in the captured imagery is the 6 x Chaff Launcher clusters and Nixie. And yep, we were travelling pretty light, about 5000cz of salt water ballast but less than 1000cz of fuel, including bunkers.

 

[ngatimozart]

Damn I've been slabbed! Or surely would have been if that was really still a thing, but no, that could be construed as promoting irresponsible drinking behaviours etc etc.

At least you're still a wet navy. Not so the RNZN We called a slab a "2 and a 4" and when I was in the list for fines for those could be long and varied, always changing

 

[Gryphinator]

With regards to the Attack Class armament, a quick search states Mk48's and Harpoons. Surely the harpoons will be replaced by JSM or LRASM?

Anyone have a preference or indeed insider knowledge on what will be deployed?

Apologies if previously discussed (ad nauseum).

 

[DDG38]

With regards to the Attack Class armament, a quick search states Mk48's and Harpoons. Surely the harpoons will be replaced by JSM or LRASM?
Anyone have a preference or indeed insider knowledge on what will be deployed?

If anyone has insider knowledge of current and future weapon capabilities of a new class of submarine the last place they'll be discussing it is on an open source internet forum.

 

[Gryphinator]

If anyone has insider knowledge of current and future weapon capabilities of a new class of submarine the last place they'll be discussing it is on an open source internet forum.

By that logic how does any information exist on it? Or any other defence projects for that matter?

It's a simple question buddy and the tone isn't necessary.

 

[John Newman]

By that logic how does any information exist on it? Or any other defence projects for that matter?

It's a simple question buddy and the tone isn't necessary.

Mate, you need to have a think about your tone.

What DDG38 said was completely accurate, anything that is not in the public domain won’t be discussed by anyone who does have ‘insider knowledge’ as you put it.

Anyone who does claim to have ‘insider knowledge’ and discusses such information in public is either lying or an idiot, there are consequences.

On the other side of the coin anything that is in the public domain is clearly open for discussion.

 

[Gryphinator]

Mate, you need to have a think about your tone.

What DDG38 said was completely accurate, anything that is not in the public domain won’t be discussed by anyone who does have ‘insider knowledge’ as you put it.

Anyone who does claim to have ‘insider knowledge’ and discusses such information in public is either lying or an idiot, there are consequences.

On the other side of the coin anything that is in the public domain is clearly open for discussion.

Again, simple question which I led with what is in the public domain. No "tone" in my question or reply. Didn't ask anyone to breach OPSEC.

Mate, you need to have a think about your tone.

What DDG38 said was completely accurate, anything that is not in the public domain won’t be discussed by anyone who does have ‘insider knowledge’ as you put it.

Anyone who does claim to have ‘insider knowledge’ and discusses such information in public is either lying or an idiot, there are consequences.

On the other side of the coin anything that is in the public domain is clearly open for discussion.

What tone? I was responding to a rather condescending reply.
I led with what's in the public domain-maybe I should have left it at that.
Cheers