Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[buffy9]

I can never understand the negativity when it comes to the potential of a couple of extra PBs.

Is it because they will be built in WA by Austal? (That dirty ‘WA mafia’ statement that gets thrown around here from time to time over the years?).

I live here in NSW, so I have no axe to grind about WA one way or the other.

I could say the same thing about SA being spoon fed and all the political pork barrelling that goes on with SA shipbuilding.

In the big scheme of things, what’s wrong with a couple of extra PBs? Isn’t it a positive thing?

I'm not necessarily opposed to more of anything, though this in particular comes off as more about politicking rather than actually contributing (efficiently) to Defence - the stated cost of $124 million could have been better invested into high-end projects or otherwise. A standard for an election. It is just bitter coming straight after the cancellation of the MQ-9B and cuts to Land 400 (even if REDSPICE is worth said cuts).

That, and Australia already has a fairly significant maritime surveillance capability in ships alone.

 

[ddxx]

According to quotes from the DefMin the additional two Evolved Cape-Class would allow for the Navy's existing two first generation Cape-Class moving to the ABF. Resulting in the following:

RAN - 8 Evolved Cape-Class
ABF - 10 Cape-Class

The question remains as to where the RAN's brand-new Evolved Capes will go once the Arafura's all enter service.

On an aesthetic note - how much better would the ABF's Capes (and their other vessels) look in a livery like those delivered to Trinidad and Tobago. Same grey as the RAN, just add some stripes when in ABF service:

 

[SwingShift]

Few would object to extra destroyers or frigates, even OPVs that can be repurposed when not required for patrol and constabulary work.

As for WA verses SA, there is ASC, BAE and Civmech in WA, who do good work but you never hear about, ASC and BAE in SA who also do good work but get nothing but criticism. Then there is Austal, who no matter how often, or how badly they screw up, never get criticised and always get more work than was planned or budgeted.

My objection to more PBs is the opportunity cost. They produce crews who know how to operate patrol boats, but nothing else, and a support system, that ignores and bypasses established processes and tools to keep them operating with string and chewing gum.

Not much translates to the bigger picture. They produce an entire system within a system that breaks people through overwork and lack of support, they cost far too much for what they deliver.

They contribute nothing to war fighting capability, they contribute very little to border protection. Their contribution to training is also overrated as the small crews are overworked, lacking the critical mass to grow and mentor junior sailors and leaders. It's much more a crucible than a school room, sink or swim.

Defence is much more than war fighting, and whilst we need those capabilities and in increased numbers, not every vessel should be a high end combatant in a balanced force. Defence done right with deterrent and diplomacy well managed should include highly capable and well armed platforms that never fire a missile in anger. But they should also include presence, and these vessels in higher numbers with grey hulls and a red kangaroo manage visibility and perception.

An example of the importance of such is the Solomon Islands PM’s perception that China offers his nation better security. Had he more frequently seen visits from Australian patrol vessels would he have felt the same way? We will never know.

On the crewing churn and burn you refer to, hopefully the 50 percent increase in crew capacity for the evolved Cape’s improves this. I’d also argue that this point relates to how these vessels and their crews are managed and not to the vessels.

 

[John Newman]

Let’s talk about the cost of these proposed two additional CCPBs.

The Defence budget for the upcoming 2022-23 financial year is $48.6b (that’s billion, not million), ten percent of that is $4.86b, one percent is $486m.

Again, one percent is $486m, the proposed cost of the two CCPBs is $124m.

That is the equivalent of ‘less than’ one third of one percent, of the upcoming annual defence budget (it’s actually closer to a quarter of one percent).

That’s like having $100 in your pocket and going out and spending less than 30c.

Such extravagances......

 

[buffy9]

Defence is much more than war fighting, and whilst we need those capabilities and in increased numbers, not every vessel should be a high end combatant in a balanced force. Defence done right with deterrent and diplomacy well managed should include highly capable and well armed platforms that never fire a missile in anger. But they should also include presence, and these vessels in higher numbers with grey hulls and a red kangaroo manage visibility and perception.

I fully agree - though there are caveats towards having more grey hulls and their contribution to shaping our immediate region. Firstly, a nation has to invite you or accept your invitation to deploy naval vessels to the water. This certainly occurs, albeit less frequently due to the pandemic. Generally this has been done where security interests overlap - with the Solomon Islands there has been maritime security and recent unrest; with Indonesia there has been maritime security in general terms; with PNG there has been APEC; and with the Philippines there have been deployments over the years for various matters.

My point here is there isn't really a shortage of "grey" vessels to conduct shaping and other regional engagement. Where a RAN PB is deployed, an ABF PB is readily able to fill its place. Assuming funding is in place to do so. Which is where, perhaps, money could have been spent more efficiently...

An example of the importance of such is the Solomon Islands PM’s perception that China offers his nation better security. Had he more frequently seen visits from Australian patrol vessels would he have felt the same way? We will never know.

The quality of those visits also matters. Or doesn't - Sogavare has never really been keen on Australia's security dominance in Melanesia. Regardless, our methods went significantly deeper than regular ship visits. This included OP Render Safe, the handover of soverign maritime security assets and, more broadly, a direct commitment to their stability. The reality for them is that they are diversifying their security partners and more ship visits would likely not have changed this POV.

 

[buffy9]

Let’s talk about the cost of these proposed two additional CCPBs.

The Defence budget for the upcoming 2022-23 financial year is $48.6b (that’s billion, not million), ten percent of that is $4.86b, one percent is $486m.

Again, one percent is $486m, the proposed cost of the two CCPBs is $124m.

That is the equivalent of ‘less than’ one third of one percent, of the upcoming annual defence budget (it’s actually closer to a quarter of one percent).

That’s like having $100 in your pocket and going out and spending less than 30c.

Such extravagances......

As minute as it is, it could arguably have been spent on better things and these things add up over time. Training budgets for any particular unit or units comes to mind, particularly following recent DACC taskings where training or competencies may have fallen short. Efficient use of resources, considering these resources could now go into PBs we arguably do not need - even if the cost to build the vessels is small.

 

[Volkodav]

Defence is much more than war fighting, and whilst we need those capabilities and in increased numbers, not every vessel should be a high end combatant in a balanced force. Defence done right with deterrent and diplomacy well managed should include highly capable and well armed platforms that never fire a missile in anger. But they should also include presence, and these vessels in higher numbers with grey hulls and a red kangaroo manage visibility and perception.

An example of the importance of such is the Solomon Islands PM’s perception that China offers his nation better security. Had he more frequently seen visits from Australian patrol vessels would he have felt the same way? We will never know.

On the crewing churn and burn you refer to, hopefully the 50 percent increase in crew capacity for the evolved Cape’s improves this. I’d also argue that this point relates to how these vessels and their crews are managed and not to the vessels.

The Armidales are crap, the Capes are crap, the evolved capes are still crap. There were much better options at the time the Armidales were selected but Austal were awarded the contract and despite continual issues with everything they have built, they keep getting more work. RAN, CIVMEC and Lurssen specifically kept Austal out of the OPV build for very good reasons, despite considerable political pressure to include them. For some reason Austal are golden, can't be touched, and come out on top while every other player is being trash talked in the media and parliament.

While not every ship in the RAN needs to be a warship the PBs are specifically called and classed as combatants, the thing is they are not. They are also useless for pretty much any other role as well, they are even of limited use during the monsoon season, too fragile, needing to be supplemented by already over worked major fleet units as well as MCMVs, under their classification, the Armidales should actually seek safe harbour at or above sea state 5. The Arafuras on the other hand are not only more durable, more seaworthy, they can also be used for a variety of other roles.

 

[Volkodav]

Let’s talk about the cost of these proposed two additional CCPBs.

The Defence budget for the upcoming 2022-23 financial year is $48.6b (that’s billion, not million), ten percent of that is $4.86b, one percent is $486m.

Again, one percent is $486m, the proposed cost of the two CCPBs is $124m.

That is the equivalent of ‘less than’ one third of one percent, of the upcoming annual defence budget (it’s actually closer to a quarter of one percent).

That’s like having $100 in your pocket and going out and spending less than 30c.

Such extravagances......

Its not just the unit cost, its the sustainment and the opportunity cost of what the people working on the PBs could be doing as well. The Capes, like the Armidales are maintenance hogs.

Its not just the normal stuff that needs regular work, its their structure, even their hull plating, and I wont even go into the endless issues with their stern tubes. The really bad thing is the problems with the evolved Capes are basically the same core issues that the Armidales and original Capes suffered.

Successive governments make a big deal about fixing or cancelling poorly performing projects, fixing or replacing sub par capabilities, even at a cost of billions, but PBs, nup, they just keep buying more and more of them, while saying how great Austal are.

 

[Milne Bay]

So the Pacific Support Vessel has been purchased second hand.
Previously Horizon Star, now re-named Australian Defence Vessel (ADV) Reliant
Link to story:

Industry anger after Defence spends $90 million on second-hand vessel in Canary Islands

Defence officials have quietly travelled to the Canary Islands and bought a five-year-old ship for Pacific Ocean operations, angering the local industry which was expecting the ship to be built in Western Australia.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Rock the kasbah]

Australia's Pacific Support Vessel Unveiled

Details have finally emerged about the Royal Australian Navy's Pacific Support Vessel. ADV Reliant was bought for USD $67m from a commercial operator.

www.overtdefense.com

Bit more on the story here
It seems very similar to hull the navy gave to the ABF
I guess that crane looks like it could pick up an Abrams ( trying to look for a positive).
This guy has some good digital work done

https://www.artstation.com/artwork/OmGloe

I can't see how a stretcher would get from the helideck to the hospital very easily
I hope you pro's have an idea on the good and the bad of this purchase

 

[DDG38]

Australia's Pacific Support Vessel Unveiled

Details have finally emerged about the Royal Australian Navy's Pacific Support Vessel. ADV Reliant was bought for USD $67m from a commercial operator.

www.overtdefense.com

Bit more on the story here
It seems very similar to hull the navy gave to the ABF
I guess that crane looks like it could pick up an Abrams ( trying to look for a positive).
This guy has some good digital work done

https://www.artstation.com/artwork/OmGloe

I can't see how a stretcher would get from the helideck to the hospital very easily
I hope you pro's have an idea on the good and the bad of this purchase

The Pacific Support Vessel is being purchased for HADR missions so it's never going to be tasked with carrying tanks. Personally I think this is a "cheap and cheerful" purchase designed to quickly tick a box on something that was promised years ago. I also think it displays a lack of imagination but that's just me.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Personally I don't think the ship is exactly the problem. It is a ship, it can do, things. They have something now, which is good, and they will get a chance to use it and see where its short comings are, and if in 5 years, it gets sold on, the ship itself may have cost tax payers, very little, just some depreciation of a few million.

The pacific ship concept was sort of a magical ship that was going to address all things. It wasn't really clear what those things were, but it was going to be magical.

TBH the inspirational HDAR assets are the Canberras. Their presence will get pacific Prime ministers running to the top of a hill texting about manifestation of policy. Because they are impressive overkill for that mission. Its that positive type of boat diplomacy, that impressive flex of capability. The one that as you are distributing aid and landing tractors, everyone can see how this is dual use capability for the region, the power, capability and wealth of Australia. That we are the local regional power, that we can get global attention.

Its the same locally within Australia, you want to impress a community during a crisis, get Canberra to turn up. Its the strategic projection of national power. So anything trying to follow that is going to be less impressive.

The Pacific ship may be different things at different times, right now, maybe its this, in 5 years time, maybe its something more amphibious, 5 years after that maybe its more of a medical ship, 5 years after that maybe its something else. If this frees up other ships, and can do some good, great. If not, move it along and we will find something else.

 

[vonnoobie]

All depends how well it will perform in the HADR role. Biggest issue I can see with it is lack of well dock (hard to land any machinery if the local port out of action) and airlift (very minimal capacity that would provide minimal aid which may not be enough). Could work well in bringing in extra resources but would still require it to work with either the choules or one of the Canberra's.

That said if it's just a stop gap solution (which said stop gap was needed years ago) then it's fine for now. Maybe when we build replacement for choules and the 2nd AOR/Logistics support ship we could tack on a realistic HADR ship to that build which would make more sense for local builds (do as many of the big ships as possible one after another).

 

[Volkodav]

The Pacific Support Vessel is being purchased for HADR missions so it's never going to be tasked with carrying tanks. Personally I think this is a "cheap and cheerful" purchase designed to quickly tick a box on something that was promised years ago. I also think it displays a lack of imagination but that's just me.

My suspicion as well, "we promised a ship, you got a ship, nothing to see here, move along now."

 

[alexsa]

All the news from the federal election campaign as a new week on the hustings begins — as it happened

Get up to speed with all the latest updates from the campaign as the federal election enters its second week.

www.abc.net.au

There is a pledge* by the Coalition to build two additional evolved CCPB in WA, noted about an hour ago. Keeping in mind it is all politics atm, it is still interesting that they are deciding to bring that fleet to eight boats.

Has there been any consideration to what will happen to the CCPB fleet in the long-term? If ABF and RAN fleets are combined (and the pledge included) then the fleet is brought to eighteen boats - eight ABF, ten RAN. This is in addition to twelve OPV and possibly Ocean Shield and Ocean Protector.

I'm apolitical - just trying to pass on information from either side if I see it.

That would be 10 RAN ADV vessels noting two (Cape Inscription and Cape Fourcroy) and were ordered and delivered over the 2015 to 2017 period. These are Navy manned but not commissioned like the current evolved Cape’s. These were leased from NAB who own them.

I suspect the additional hulls are being bought to ensure a minimum number of available hulls pending the OPV’s coming on line. It is also worth remembering that the ABF Capes are getting older with construction commencing in 2012. The ADV Capes make transition as replacements for the original Capes as they age (noting the ACPB lifespan appears to be a decade and a bit with Port Pirie paid off after 15 years)

 

[ngatimozart]

Hmm, I see a lot of potential for that ship because of its unique capabilities. It's very similar to HMNZS Manawanui IV and if it was painted haze grey with an A pennant number it would be a good asset for the RAN littoral warfare capabilities, amongst other things. IIRC the main crane on Manawanui has a 100 tonne lift capability and the main work deck is wooden. The main moon pool is quite large as well.

 

[StingrayOZ]

All depends how well it will perform in the HADR role.

Its more than just HDAR.

This could be used for supporting various civilian projects, commercial projects etc. If there is a significant HDAR event, the Canberra's or Choules will be fired up and sent out. If Fiji gets flattened by a Storm, its cities in rubble, it won't just be this and nothing else.

For all we know this ship may be in support for internet/power cable laying/inspection and purposes akin to that. It is beyond the normal military effort in HDAR, but also beyond normal contracted capabilities. In that weird middle ground, acting as a contingency, acting in support, acting as overflow/backup. It can do some HDAR, but that is not the only mission it will likely have. More importantly, we won't have to use Chinese contractors and a Chinese ship (or for that matter any other nations ship) to do all the work in the region.

IMO I believe the intention is to use normal commercial ports and facilities when ever possible. For example, say the Australian government and a Pacific Government (eg Fiji) agree we should pay for a generator or sewer processor for one of the islands. But no contractor is able or bids on the installation contract or has all the capabilities to move such large objects, or more commonly booked out for the next 24 months. DFAT AusGov can fly it in, stick it on this ship with equipment to move/install it.

Or say with cable laying, this ship can scout out, ahead, provide support when things get stuck/bad/don't work out, without having to start a whole tender process to do something unique that was unexpected, while wasting a million a day (and political cost) to fix it. If you have your own asset in the region, you can use that.

But like I said, the pacific ship concept is magical. Much like the music man, Pyne kinda sold the concept of it doing possibly anything and everything in the pacific, and the ship size and budget grew. But perhaps the better idea is many smaller ships, purchased at different times, with unique capabilities. Doing that, it probably looks less like a military ship and more like different types of specialist commercial ships.

If in 5 years we choose to go another direction, its not particularly difficult to arrange something else and move this on.

 

[hauritz]

Just for the conspiracy theorists.

ADV Reliant has a moon pool that could secretly launch and recover UUVs and a crane capable of lifting and placing objects to a depth of up to 3kms, which would be ideal for laying Australia's proposed Integrated Undersea Surveillance System.

 

[Milne Bay]

Its more than just HDAR.

This could be used for supporting various civilian projects, commercial projects etc. If there is a significant HDAR event, the Canberra's or Choules will be fired up and sent out. If Fiji gets flattened by a Storm, its cities in rubble, it won't just be this and nothing else.

For all we know this ship may be in support for internet/power cable laying/inspection and purposes akin to that. It is beyond the normal military effort in HDAR, but also beyond normal contracted capabilities. In that weird middle ground, acting as a contingency, acting in support, acting as overflow/backup. It can do some HDAR, but that is not the only mission it will likely have. More importantly, we won't have to use Chinese contractors and a Chinese ship (or for that matter any other nations ship) to do all the work in the region.

IMO I believe the intention is to use normal commercial ports and facilities when ever possible. For example, say the Australian government and a Pacific Government (eg Fiji) agree we should pay for a generator or sewer processor for one of the islands. But no contractor is able or bids on the installation contract or has all the capabilities to move such large objects, or more commonly booked out for the next 24 months. DFAT AusGov can fly it in, stick it on this ship with equipment to move/install it.

Or say with cable laying, this ship can scout out, ahead, provide support when things get stuck/bad/don't work out, without having to start a whole tender process to do something unique that was unexpected, while wasting a million a day (and political cost) to fix it. If you have your own asset in the region, you can use that.

But like I said, the pacific ship concept is magical. Much like the music man, Pyne kinda sold the concept of it doing possibly anything and everything in the pacific, and the ship size and budget grew. But perhaps the better idea is many smaller ships, purchased at different times, with unique capabilities. Doing that, it probably looks less like a military ship and more like different types of specialist commercial ships.

If in 5 years we choose to go another direction, its not particularly difficult to arrange something else and move this on.

Yes, those are good points.
One ship may not be enough to meet demand in the Pacific, and a small fleet of support ships may also become necessary if Australia is to take Pacific support seriously.
Particularly if this shows our Pacific neighbours that we - not China - are to be the preferred supporting nation.
MB

 

[hauritz]

Reasonable points. A wide area disaster could effect the entire region. It would make sense to deploy a larger number of vessels.

By early next decade Australia won't only have the Pacific Support Vessel and the LHDs but also a couple of Logistic Support Ships. The Arafuras might also be able to make useful contributions to disaster relief.