Just thinking out loud, I wonder if a NASSCO TAKE would be a good basis for a JSS. They are literally laid out internally like warehouses with lanes for forklifts, the have substantial fuel bunkerage that they can transfer to other ships, and they have a maritime prepositioning version, and amphibious warfare support versions as well.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Im very Much aware of whats on order for Pacific Ship but theres a few more years for JSS to be planned and for this to work
Rock the kasbah
Active Member
Has anyone noticed that the arafura looks awfully like a JSS only smaller?
I'm just mentioning as an interested and i am sure about to be mentioned amateur
I'm just mentioning as an interested and i am sure about to be mentioned amateur
The challenge of the Pacific support ship conversation is that so little is know about the vessel in the public domain.
Any acceptable enlightenment would be most welcomed.
I assume it's bigger than a 12 foot tinnie with integral medical kit containing a ready supply of band aids.
Cheers S
I would imagine a lot of work shopping of ideas in defence at the moment.Choules was meant to be medium term replacement while LHD was being built after LPA's were parked on North Head
Tonga assist 2022 is a good example of the type of work JSS can provide If we pick the right ship.
At the moment HMAS Supply and Adelaide are deployed. With JSS, only 1 ship would need to be there on station with LHD (When working) able to be a ferry for resources or even next gen LCH. JSS would be command ship, provide Water to the community and racks for troops on ground cleaning up.
Pacific support ship would be better if rolled into 3 JSS. At any one time, JSS ship would be "Pacific ship" and allow for rotations where the ship would spend most of its time in the region operating out of Townsville for resupply and rotate with other JSS over a time period.
Crew experience and training would be regular, interactions with Pacific region would grow and if any situation evolved like Volcanos or Tsunamis, your ship is already force assigned.
The DWP16 is looking dated, as is the later Strategic Review.
For the maritime realm, probably no major decisions till after the next Federal election.
Which ever party gets the gig, they will be under a lot of pressure to make very good choices in a timely manner.
Personal opinion only, but I would anticipate some big changes to the existing build / buy maritime script.
Regards S
It is a 40,000 tonne ship though.
Suspect something more in the 20,000-30,000 tonne range will be preferred.
Regards,
Massive
Today's too big is tomorrow's too small. I recall Dibb complaining the ANZACs were too big and too capable for the role. I bet no one is of the opinion we should have gone smaller and lighter on the Hobart's either.
Last edited:
Agreed - it’ll do more harm than good if it’s a token effort.
Aus Navy League suggested Choules once the JSS arrive. I’m actually quite impressed with their ability to break down and consider options through a broader diplomacy and influence lens alongside defence.
Last edited:
Rock the kasbah
Active Member
I agree with everyone
However time does seem to be of the essence here
As long as it is clearly referred to as a provisional platform - I totally agree.
Aus politicians need to get better at focusing on the grand strategy and putting less effort into worrying about minor domestic political upsets. They blow over, the other doesn’t.
Last edited:
John Newman
The Bunker Group
HMAS Choules (ex RFA Largs Bay) was laid down in 2002, entered RFA service in 2006.
The project for 2 x JSS runs from 2026-2034.
Choules won’t ever become the PSV, by the time she is replaced by one of the JSS, she’ll be too old and off for scrapping or sold to a 2nd tier navy.
Dutton on Insiders this morning when posed a question about a 2040 in service date for the SSN replied with “we will be acquiring the capability much sooner than that and will make an announcement in the coming months.” (Not verbatim)
Presumably they will be rushing to make an announcement pre election given the flavour the campaign is likely to take.
Presumably they will be rushing to make an announcement pre election given the flavour the campaign is likely to take.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The problem is, we are now in the pre Election mode, so any such announcement has to be taken with a grain of salt. Dutton has at most a few weeks left to make the announcement or it becomes an Election promise and meaningless if the LNP lose the Election.
It seems like it is. Penny Wong was on the week before talking AUKUS and the SSNs up and criticising the government for not delivering it sooner / allowing a capability gap to develop.
The ALP has certainly shifted to the right on defence matters in recent years, which is no bad thing given the environment.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Peter Dutton flags Australia sending weapons to Taiwan, acquiring nuclear submarines before 2040
The Defence Minister says Australia may send weapons to Taiwan in response to any future Chinese military aggression, while revealing Canberra may acquire nuclear submarines earlier than 2040.
www.abc.net.au
God the ABC is hopeless though, they did not include the part about Dutton talking about the Subs in the Video. There is a summary however in the above article.
Defence and security will be big issues going into the election. To be honest I would be surprised if there wasn't some sort of decision made before the next election. There have been stories floating around for a while now that the submarine consultation process would be cut back from the originally planned 18 months.
Also mentions VLS. That is got to be a hint that the Virginia might get the nod. No easy task to whack a VLS on the Astute.
Also mentions VLS. That is got to be a hint that the Virginia might get the nod. No easy task to whack a VLS on the Astute.
IMO other than the slightly larger crew size, the Virginia Class has always appeared to be the more 'straight forward' option.
That being said, quoted crew sizes and actual crew size required can be two very different things - especially when comparing between two different navies.
VLS is certainly a no-brainer both for through-life flexibility and considering the billions being invested in hypersonic and long range strike missiles. Examples of which can't fit in a standard torpedo tube like TLAM, and that's exactly why the US has gone down the VLS path.