Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[JulioCompactus]

The USN has been trying to retire the for years, of their current ones a few are early analog systems that struggle today to see some missile threats not counting fact they are costly to operate. So they are an aging ship falling apart many of them not so advanced and expensive to operate. Quite literally to get anything out of them you would need a new hull, machinery, replace 80% of the systems and spend more time and money trying to save a few items which probably won't turn out any cheaper then going new.

Nothing we do today will get us any ships in a short time frame that can hold their own on the line. The best we can do is aim to speed up our efforts in bringing our current plans forward as much as safely possible to do so.

Between China and Russia's actions this year no nation will be selling off their kit so even if their was once a possibility of a solid purchase at low cost requiring minimal work that has well and truly passed in the last two weeks.

As I said at the start upgrading second hand ships is a fraught path but the USN is doing it for 11 hulls and has a very good mature package for doing so after a lot of lessons learned on the early ships. Unfortunately as Volkodav said all the ideal solutions are long term and the question people keep rightly asking is how long do we actually have?
Given the Hunter design is still along way from even commencing build of ship 1, an additional AWD is gone as an option and up arming the OPV adds little combat power ex USN hulls is the only 'short' term option. A CG-47 would be the only option to get a meaningful number of Tomahawks to sea as well. We have dug ourselves a hole that has no easy way out.

 

[JulioCompactus]

If you want to look at it that way then the Type 22 and Type 82 are both Leanders. Their hull forms were a development of the Leander. Even within the Leanders there were the original form and the later Broad Beam version.

Nit pick as much as you like, I haven't even reached for my copies of Brown or Friedman to start citing references yet.

here is a great short history written by the staff officer who wrote in part the requirement for SWAN and TORRENS.

fascinating stuff. I never understood the VOYAGER connection

The Later River Class Frigates in the RAN - Naval Historical Society of Australia

The December 2007 edition of the Naval Historical Review contained a brief history of the RAN River Class Frigates. It also referred to the major differences between the six ships

www.navyhistory.org.au

Unrelated but interesting by chance in a previous job I inherited 4 x 4 draw filing cabinets that had the entire files of the DDL project office. Thousands of pages of hand written and manually typed corro. What was truly amazing was how little bureaucracy existed in the 60s and 70s

 

[vonnoobie]

As I said at the start upgrading second hand ships is a fraught path but the USN is doing it for 11 hulls and has a very good mature package for doing so after a lot of lessons learned on the early ships. Unfortunately as Volkodav said all the ideal solutions are long term and the question people keep rightly asking is how long do we actually have?
Given the Hunter design is still along way from even commencing build of ship 1, an additional AWD is gone as an option and up arming the OPV adds little combat power ex USN hulls is the only 'short' term option. A CG-47 would be the only option to get a meaningful number of Tomahawks to sea as well. We have dug ourselves a hole that has no easy way out.

Except as you apparently have decided to ignore I already pointed out that the Tico's aren't a realistic option in any world real or fantasy. The US is upgrading the best ships because Congress won't let them retire the lot of them. The USN has been having problems with the class for over a decade now and every attempt to reason they just don't cut the mustard is ignored by critters in Congress that simply look at the name 'cruiser' and the oh so many missile capacity ignoring that the ships aren't relevant anymore. So what we get second hand Tico's the lowest quality ones of the class the USN doesn't want or need anymore and you think we can make them brand new again? They will as already stated new hills, new machinery, bulk of the systems replaced etc etc. If we were to get them and not do all that and just try and fix and upgrade the existing hull then it would be a multibillion solar investment that we could field for a few years (and yes I do mean a few years, not 10 or 20 but 5 years or less) if it even works at all.

Cost to modernize Hue city and Anzio is estimated at $1.5 billion USD. So a minimum of $1 billion AUD just to get them working, the buying ships, training crew, arming the bloody things. Looking at an easy $2.5 billion just to get one in the water for a short time, add in operating costs which the CNO put at $5 billion for 5 years for the last 7 they wanted to retire is just shy of $200 million AUD a year per a ship.

Simply put NO, NOPE, NADA, NEE, NA, NEIN!

 

[ngatimozart]

I think the wild card here is Hypersonics. If you want to field them it would seem to be the only platform to field them would be a VPM solution likely a block V. Remember these boats are going to be in service long after we are mostly gone and by then UAV and Hypersonic support will be key. For that reason alone i think we would be acquiring a boat with future limitations if we go Astute.

That will change with time and there's a lot of unknowns at the moment so it's best not to put the cart before the horse so to speak.

 

[John Newman]

CG-47 class cruisers for the RAN?

Hmmm...

Navy offers a new argument for decommissioning cruisers: They’re not safe.

Congress hasn't been swayed to let the Navy decommission its cruisers early after money- and readiness-focused arguments. Now, the Navy is saying those old ships aren't safe.

www.defensenews.com

It appears the USN is now saying the ships it wants to retire are ‘no longer safe’, see the paragraphs below:

“Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro said March 9 the service does not want to continue to operate some of its worst-off cruisers because it’s no longer safe.

“ “The wear and tear is significant, and the safety of our people in the United States Navy always has to come first in times of peace, without question. And so it would be irresponsible to continue to upgrade some of those platforms today at great risk to personnel safety,” he said at the McAleese Defense Programs Conference.

“Del Toro said those who question the Navy’s desire to retire these old and worn-out ships haven’t experienced for themselves “the challenge of having to repair ships of that age.”

“ “If we tried to repair those ships at a cost that far exceeds the investment to go buy something else that’s new, why would you do that?” he said, likening the situation to someone who won’t give up their beloved 20-year-old car, even though it needs $1,000 in repairs every time it’s taken in for an oil change and it lacks all the latest safety features and technologies of new cars.

“ “At some point, you gotta let it go,” he said.”


So let’s assume the USN gets its way and is allowed to retire some of those CG-47 ships, would Australia be interested? I don’t think so.

The Australian media would latch onto reports such as above, the media would also latch onto the two ‘rust bucket’ LPAs too. Would become a political hot potato.

Ex USN CG-47s for the RAN? Never going to happen.

 

[Redlands18]

The only type of Exercise RAN CG-47s would be useful for is a SINKEX. Would be interesting to see what a MK 48 would do to one.

 

[ngatimozart]

As I said at the start upgrading second hand ships is a fraught path but the USN is doing it for 11 hulls and has a very good mature package for doing so after a lot of lessons learned on the early ships. Unfortunately as Volkodav said all the ideal solutions are long term and the question people keep rightly asking is how long do we actually have?
Given the Hunter design is still along way from even commencing build of ship 1, an additional AWD is gone as an option and up arming the OPV adds little combat power ex USN hulls is the only 'short' term option. A CG-47 would be the only option to get a meaningful number of Tomahawks to sea as well. We have dug ourselves a hole that has no easy way out.

As others have said ain't never going to happen. Why don't you research the hulls, their length of service etc., and that should give you an idea of why the USN are trying real hard to scrap them. Have a look at the history of the USN trying to retire them. For some of them the only reason they are still floating is that the rust is holding hands. The older a ship the more expensive it is to operate, maintain and keep running. Spare parts are harder to come by, if not impossible. Systems aboard the ship are outdated and in some cases probably predate Admiral Noah's first voyage in the Ark - well not quite. For what it would cost the RAN to acquire a USN CG, refit it, train crews to operate it and achieve IOC on it, they could probably acquire at least to Hunter Class FFG. It's just not fiscally sound.

 

[Volkodav]

here is a great short history written by the staff officer who wrote in part the requirement for SWAN and TORRENS.

fascinating stuff. I never understood the VOYAGER connection

The Later River Class Frigates in the RAN - Naval Historical Society of Australia

The December 2007 edition of the Naval Historical Review contained a brief history of the RAN River Class Frigates. It also referred to the major differences between the six ships

www.navyhistory.org.au

Unrelated but interesting by chance in a previous job I inherited 4 x 4 draw filing cabinets that had the entire files of the DDL project office. Thousands of pages of hand written and manually typed corro. What was truly amazing was how little bureaucracy existed in the 60s and 70s

The Rivers started as a class of twelve and ended up as three pairs, the last pair being ordered as replacements for Voyager. Duchess had been acquired as an interim replacement and then, if I recall correctly, converted to a training ship when the DEs were delivered.

 

[Gryphinator]

Given the public's heightened awareness of defence issues, if properly explained I think the need for ships being built overseas would be an easy sell relative to even 2 years ago.
Reconditioning old/flogged US Navy ships would be a mistake (Kanimbla/Manoora??)
What to build and who/where has capacity to do it would be the questions IMHO...

 

[vonnoobie]

Given the public's heightened awareness of defence issues, if properly explained I think the need for ships being built overseas would be an easy sell relative to even 2 years ago.
Reconditioning old/flogged US Navy ships would be a mistake (Kanimbla/Manoora??)
What to build and who/where has capacity to do it would be the questions IMHO...

I imagine several have the capacity that said it's not so much capacity but rather a hot production line being in place. As we would like something for either the upper or lower end of town it rules out the Europe IMO as their stuff for the lower end isn't really armed enough to be worth it while what is well armed is comparable in role to the Hunters and pointless 2 classes of ships to fill the exact same role. It leaves mostly the US with the AB (or one of its Asian derivatives from Japan or South Korea) and Japan with the mogami currently in production to a sizeable scale. If they could build extra I don't know but overall for the types of ships we could make use of and nation's with the potential capacity to supply them these are the two IMO.

 

[Stampede]

Looking at some of the defence images and this one stood out.

Defence Imagery: 20220302ran8611078_0305.jpg

images.defence.gov.au

Just wondering as to why all .50 cal's on out major fleet units are not on remote weapon stations.
Is it just cost?
Certainly there are a few Mini Typhoon's to be shared around, mainly for the Anzacs.
I'd bet they are much more accurate system in a greater variety of sea conditions than a crew serviced weapon on an unstabilized mount.

A stabilized mount can also accommodate a ATGM or Small SAM.[Stinger / mistral]




Thought S

 

[Pusser01]

Looking at some of the defence images and this one stood out.

Defence Imagery: 20220302ran8611078_0305.jpg

images.defence.gov.au

Just wondering as to why all .50 cal's on out major fleet units are not on remote weapon stations.
Is it just cost?
Certainly there are a few Mini Typhoon's to be shared around, mainly for the Anzacs.
I'd bet they are much more accurate system in a greater variety of sea conditions than a crew serviced weapon on an unstabilized mount.

A stabilized mount can also accommodate a ATGM or Small SAM.[Stinger / mistral]




Thought S

Generally cost but also space. Each min-typhoon mount is linked to an individual console in the ops room. On the Anzac's that's 2 consoles to fit in. Noting an Anzac has 6x .50 cal mounts (2x Harpoon deck, 2x GDP, 2x Aft 02 Deck), that would require 6x consoles in the ops room. Cheers

 

[spoz]

And weight; adding the mounts and consoles would not do the weight and stability calculation any favours, when there is not seen to be a need.

 

[DDG38]

Meanwhile in the real world of RAN Ops :
"HMAS Arunta conducts a replenishment at sea with Indian Navy Ship INS Shakti (left) during Exercise Milan 2022." Image Source : ADF Image Library

And HMAS Supply has returned to a muddy FBE after providing disaster relief in Tonga (Image : ADF Image Library)

 

[Stampede]

Generally cost but also space. Each min-typhoon mount is linked to an individual console in the ops room. On the Anzac's that's 2 consoles to fit in. Noting an Anzac has 6x .50 cal mounts (2x Harpoon deck, 2x GDP, 2x Aft 02 Deck), that would require 6x consoles in the ops room. Cheers

Thanks for the reply.
I probably take a different view but appreciate the input.

Cheers S

 

[Lolcake]

Hoping the recruitment investment hopefully puts to bed the need to cater for crew requirements with regards to the Virginia vs Astute. If we are talking future proofing for hypersonics and deterrence surely the virginia's fit the bill here.

 

[icelord]

The only type of Exercise RAN CG-47s would be useful for is a SINKEX. Would be interesting to see what a MK 48 would do to one.

Probably miss the first shot like last LiveEx sinking

Mini-T is nice lil add on but has a limit on rounds in the system and alot of maintenance compared with 50. on a Mount. Having worked on both, id rather spend 30mins cleaning 50. Then Mini T. Plus, a 50. Is a hell of a fun shoot!

 

[Rock the kasbah]

Wrt the Arafuras does anyone know why they need so many boats ?
3 apparently can fit up the stern ramp and we put another 2 on davits.

 

[Volkodav]

Wrt the Arafuras does anyone know why they need so many boats ?
3 apparently can fit up the stern ramp and we put another 2 on davits.

We love our davits, they keep maintainers skills up having to fix them all the time and also keep engineers busy designing fixes. Without davits we wouldn't need near as many engineers and maintainers

 

[Stampede]

Probably miss the first shot like last LiveEx sinking

Mini-T is nice lil add on but has a limit on rounds in the system and alot of maintenance compared with 50. on a Mount. Having worked on both, id rather spend 30mins cleaning 50. Then Mini T. Plus, a 50. Is a hell of a fun shoot!

I'm sure they would be a hoot to fire.
Cleaning anything is never much fun.

Cheers S