Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Bob53]

Interesting article in today's " The Strategist "by Sam Goldsmith



Pertinent to the conversation re Sea Ram and defending our surface fleet

Staying alive in the RAN surface fleet: failure is not an option | The Strategist

The threat spectrum for surface combatants—ships that can engage air, surface, subsurface and shore targets—is rapidly expanding and increasingly lethal. Threats include mines, torpedoes, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and swarms of microdrones. This article focuses ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

Thoughts



Regards S

This presents a good argument to augment the limited VLS load out with RIM116 and Mk49 Launchers on the Hobart’s and Hunters. Freeing up the VLS for more longer range missiles at the expense of some of the ESSM load seems to make sense. This combination sounds like a good option for the LHDS also.

 

[Bob53]

ANAO reported 3 issues with the Leonardo gun.

1. Not integrated with 9LV.
2. Doesn’t meet EO handling / storage requirements or RAN’s desire for ‘commonality’.
3. A review of RAN’s threat assessment for this class has recommended against this system...

Dot point 3 most are assuming, means RAN has assessed a need for more capability, not less, but that is purely speculation at present as RAN has refused to comment on this, even though ANAO has published this information…

I spent some time reading about the BAE Bofors 57mm MK3 gun and aside from some seriously impressive capabilities, I didn’t realise how widely adopted it is. The fact alone that it’s on the USN LCS and upcoming constellation classes along with the US CG cutters suggests to me the ammo will be made in volume which should equate to lower round cost over time. Question will be whether the RAN go up, down or sideways with Gun selection on the Arafuras.
A bit more detail here 57mm Naval Gun System

 

[ngatimozart]

First of all, I will do you the courtsey of answering these charges with civility. I don't understand why this is in red, for what I would say is a badly worded sentence. It is not in the realm of malice or fantasy. I do appreciate that this is your forum and I'm just a guest. Therefore you can write in what ever colour you want. I appreciate the professional conduct of this forum so I respect your choices.

The post is about the man not politics. When Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, followed by home affairs he was a political fixer. He took the hard decisions and moved things forward. I believe he will do the same as defence minister. That is my opinion about the nature of the man not his poltics.

The message was an opinion with information fillers. That way I would not break the rule that you can't post single sentences.

He has form with subs and helicopters.
I'm guessing this sentence is what needs addressing or fixing

If I had wrote "During his time he has been decisive about helicopters and submarines". This is true and a number of articles would attribute the current decision to him. I treat members on this forum as intelligent and I don't want to bog it down with meaningless obvious information.

The second thing I appreciate members have put a lot of hard hours in to rectify the helicopter problems. To have the rug pulled out is upsetting. I can relate both in my current profession and when the RAAF retired the Orions. That was a piece of my youth slipping away. I have nothing but respect for those members and appreciation of the work they do.

What I was trying to say the MH90 has been a project of concern since 2011. The same information has been given to a number of Labour and Liberal defence ministers over that time. For whatever reason they chose collectivley to do nothing publicly. Dutton made a decision and that is reported in any number of publications as his decision. Again the man not politics. Attached is the current government report of the project and ministers statement.

Strengthening Army's helicopter capability | Defence Ministers

The Morrison Government has taken steps to strengthen the Australian Army’s helicopter capability by formally requesting advice from the United States Government on the acquisition of up to 40 UH-60 Black Hawk to potentially replace the MRH90 Taipan helicopter.Minister for Defence the Hon Peter...

www.minister.defence.gov.au

The submarine decision was announced publically under his watch. I appreciate that negotiations went on before he was the minister.
Morrison has gone nuclear — and there's no turning back
The ABC post explains that.
Technically I supose I'm wrong because the initital announcement was by Biden, Johnson and Morrison. My point is it was announced publically during his watch.

Australia signs exchange of naval nuclear propulsion information sharing agreement | Defence Ministers

The signing of the Exchange of Naval Nuclear Propulsion Information Agreement (the Agreement) with our AUKUS partners – the United Kingdom and the United States – is another important step in Australia’s pursuit of conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines.Minister for Defence the Hon...

www.minister.defence.gov.au

This statement is 2 months after the announcement. Things are ticking along.

Regards
DD

Ok, fair enough. The way it was worded made it look like it was political and so that was how it was assessed. I will remove the red warning.

 

[Stampede]

Meanwhile, shall we just celebrate a new grey messenger of death has hit the water ?
"Arafura Class Offshore Patrol Vessel, NUSHIP Arafura, at Osborne Naval Shipyard in South Australia." Image Source : ADF Image Library
View attachment 48723

When is a davit a crane?

Not sure of the answer, but the two big " lifty things" for the ships boats and containers look like a big bit of kit.
Would these together with the ships boats add significant top weight to the ship compared to Brunei's equivalent, the Darussalam Class?

It is still a good looking vessel

Regards S

 

[spoz]

They are supposed to be able to lift containers as well as the boats; although I don’t know what their MSWL is.

Everything on board adds weight of course and when it is above the CofG it’s top weight. Does that add up to more than the larger gun and SSMs on the Bruneian ship? Unknown.

 

[Shanesworld]

I spent some time reading about the BAE Bofors 57mm MK3 gun and aside from some seriously impressive capabilities, I didn’t realise how widely adopted it is. The fact alone that it’s on the USN LCS and upcoming constellation classes along with the US CG cutters suggests to me the ammo will be made in volume which should equate to lower round cost over time. Question will be whether the RAN go up, down or sideways with Gun selection on the Arafuras.
A bit more detail here 57mm Naval Gun System

How does the 57mm handle the gunfire support role? I remember a comment on this forum from someone who witnessed the 76mm on an excercise and that 76mm was disappointing. I assume ngfs is outside 57mm abilities but dont know.

 

[Stampede]

They are supposed to be able to lift containers as well as the boats; although I don’t know what their MSWL is.

Everything on board adds weight of course and when it is above the CofG it’s top weight. Does that add up to more than the larger gun and SSMs on the Bruneian ship? Unknown.

That was kind of where I was going.
The 8.5 m boats are getting up to two tonnes in weight with fuel and engines.
Add the two cranes and your probably around the same weight as the four Exocets and launcher on the Darussalam Class.

the Arafura Class could probably still do the 57mm gun which would be a plus.

Regarding NGFS and the 57mm, it's a bit academic.

The 57 mm caliber and rate of fire give a lot of options against a range of scenarios.
Larger guns will do a better job in NGRS but they will not perform roles as well as a 57mm in other areas.
They also by their weight belong on larger ships.

So if your a soldier defending a beach with only a helmet and rifle and your within 17 km of incoming 2.4 kg rounds of incoming hostility then you will make prudent choices!!!!!!!

Micro scale NGFS.

Cheers



Regards S

 

[StingrayOZ]

How does the 57mm handle the gunfire support role? I remember a comment on this forum from someone who witnessed the 76mm on an exercise and that 76mm was disappointing. I assume ngfs is outside 57mm abilities but dont know.

Better than 40mm I presume.

76mm is perhaps explosive wise disappointing if you have seen the damage 155mm makes. Or a 2000lb JDAM.
57mm key benefit is its rate of fire. 220 rounds per minute.

It maybe more sensible to have some fitted with 2 boats and a 25mm, and others fitted differently. If they are just working in our waters and EEZ, then a light fitout is probably preferred.

If we are talking about having some forward deployed to operate in and around Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, as part of joint patrols to fend of the great Chinese white fleet or in areas where there are serious pirate issues, then a 57mm fit out is probably useful.

Guess we will have to wait for future announcements.

 

[ddxx]

They are supposed to be able to lift containers as well as the boats; although I don’t know what their MSWL is.

Zooming in on the image from Defence appears to show they’re rated for 10 tonnes each.

On a side note, it's worth noting they have some margin for growth - expected FLD was 1,640t, with ability to grow to around 1,800t.

 

[alexsa]

Zooming in on the image from Defence appears to show they’re rated for 10 tonnes each.

On a side note, it's worth noting they have some margin for growth - expected FLD was 1,640t, with ability to grow to around 1,800t.

View attachment 48727

How that growth margin can be used with be determined by the vessels stability characteristics and the nature of the 'weight' (location and whether it is dynamic or not) to be added to the vessel. I only mention this as some may assume this can be applied anywhere on the vessel.

 

[ddxx]

How that growth margin can be used with be determined by the vessels stability characteristics and the nature of the 'weight' (location and whether it is dynamic or not) to be added to the vessel. I only mention this as some may assume this can be applied anywhere on the vessel.

Absolutely, I was just giving rough context as to why the ‘cranes’ aren’t necessarily a deal breaker for any changes or additions through life. That would depend on what and where.

 

[John Newman]

Some photos to compare Arafura at launch and the model of Arafura at the time of selection.

The layout of the model looks pretty close to the real thing:

 

[Gryphinator]

Not quite RAN but....Anyone here know how comfortable the ABF Cape class are for crew please? Someone may take up a position based on answers here. Cheers

 

[DDG38]

Not quite RAN but....Anyone here know how comfortable the ABF Cape class are for crew please? Someone may take up a position based on answers here. Cheers

Someone should maybe take 1 minute to do a simple Google search and they'll find this : Tour of ABF Cape class

 

[Gryphinator]

Someone should maybe take 1 minute to do a simple Google search and they'll find this : Tour of ABF Cape class

Yeah nah, a puff piece online isn't quite what I was after but thank you. 1st hand experience would be good, these guys won't say it like it is...

 

[Bob53]

Better than 40mm I presume.

76mm is perhaps explosive wise disappointing if you have seen the damage 155mm makes. Or a 2000lb JDAM.
57mm key benefit is its rate of fire. 220 rounds per minute.

It maybe more sensible to have some fitted with 2 boats and a 25mm, and others fitted differently. If they are just working in our waters and EEZ, then a light fitout is probably preferred.

If we are talking about having some forward deployed to operate in and around Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, as part of joint patrols to fend of the great Chinese white fleet or in areas where there are serious pirate issues, then a 57mm fit out is probably useful.

Guess we will have to wait for future announcements.

Would a patrol boat have a fire support role for troops ashore?

 

[ddxx]

Someone should maybe take 1 minute to do a simple Google search and they'll find this : Tour of ABF Cape class

No disrespect intended, but as a Defence Pro, simply replying with a PR feel good piece not only doesn’t answer the question, but perpetuates an unhealthy group think mentality. That’s not in anyone’s interest let alone the ADF as a whole.

It’s not academic, it’s not verifiable, it’s just plain puff.

Encouraging fair questions, encouraging potential problem solving and encouraging intelligent *thinking* should always be the goal on this forum.

And if it isn’t, I’d be happy to take on a permanent absence. In that case, I honestly couldn’t care less.

Edit: I’ve got to say, just because Defence has or has not said something does not somehow magically make it correct. Actively discouraging independent and well thought out thinking should never be an issue on a forum which values quality above all.

 

[DDG38]

Yeah nah, a puff piece online isn't quite what I was after but thank you. 1st hand experience would be good, these guys won't say it like it is...

Then please articulate that in your original question, as I interpreted "Anyone here know how comfortable the ABF Cape class are for crew please?" as asking what the accommodation was like, and the article showed a photo of one of the crew cabins. Perhaps you could have asked "what are living and working conditions like while serving on board an ABF Cape class boat and does anyone have first hand experience?" which would have been more clear.
I have never served on one but going by the images they're obviously pretty well equipped for short range patrols, and the accommodation looks better than a large mess deck on a warrie.

 

[DDG38]

No disrespect intended, but as a Defence Pro, simply replying with a PR feel good piece not only doesn’t answer the question, but perpetuates an unhealthy group think mentality. That’s not in anyone’s interest let alone the ADF as a whole.

It’s not academic, it’s not verifiable, it’s just plain puff.
Encouraging fair questions, encouraging potential problem solving and encouraging intelligent *thinking* should always be the goal on this forum.
And if it isn’t, I’d be happy to take on a permanent absence. In that case, I honestly couldn’t care less.

Edit: I’ve got to say, just because Defence has or has not said something does not somehow magically make it correct. Actively discouraging independent and well thought out thinking should never be an issue on a forum which values quality above all.

If I thought a generic and non-specific question warranted a well researched and peer reviewed paper I would have attempted to find one. I didn't realise that I have to comply with your set ideals on how a Defence Pro should answer every question asked on this forum. Some forum members here have academic backgrounds, and some, like me, have real life operational backgrounds and will answer through that lens.

 

[Gryphinator]

Then please articulate that in your original question, as I interpreted "Anyone here know how comfortable the ABF Cape class are for crew please?" as asking what the accommodation was like, and the article showed a photo of one of the crew cabins. Perhaps you could have asked "what are living and working conditions like while serving on board an ABF Cape class boat and does anyone have first hand experience?" which would have been more clear.
I have never served on one but going by the images they're obviously pretty well equipped for short range patrols, and the accommodation looks better than a large mess deck on a warrie.

My question was pretty clear and specific. Responses like your initial one and defensive follow ups suggest that maybe if you don't know, keep quiet. Cheers