Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Todjaeger]

Not an alternative, I get that, but it's being marketed by Marle's as a measure we can take while we are waiting for the Hunters and while the Hobart's are being upgraded.
Basically, we will be down to the 8 Anzac and 1 or 2 Hobart's, with only about 5 Anzac available at any one time, 2 Collins available and maybe a Hobart.
The corvettes are being planned to fill that gap, AND do the job of the Arafuras.

IMO it would be unlikely that any suggested corvettes would really be able to plug gaps in vessel available, or at least not before the first Hunter-class FFG is entering service.

If the AusGov does decide to go down the corvette path as a replacement programme for some of the planned later production OPV's, one has to remember just how long it would take to get such a programme underway. There would be some sort of RFI, RFP or RFT, but after AusGov, the ADF and RAN had some idea of what they were looking for in terms of capabilities and costs, all of which would need to be done prior to any competition between offerings, never mind contracts signed and orders placed. Speaking of orders getting placed, orders would also need to get placed for various ship systems so that they can be available to be fitted to corvettes once under construction. In order for ship systems to be ordered, the onboard systems would need to be set and known. In order for any RAN corvette to be potentially more useful than the OPV's, some sort of air defence capability would be needed, for self-defence at a minimum. This in turn would mean that both missiles and launchers/VLS would need to be ordered. Again, it would likely take some time, potentially even a few years, between the time an order is placed and delivery of the completed system. With the order also not able to be placed before the system being order has been settled upon.

If the RAN already knew now what systems they wanted in a corvette, and also already had a pretty good idea of just what design they wanted, then selection and contract signing might be able to be expedited, which in turn might permit a late 2020's delivery of the first in class. Consider this, the contract with Lürssen Australia for the Arafura-class design was signed in 31 Jan 2018 and then laid down on 10 May 2019 and launched 16 December 2021, with entry into service currently expected later on this year. Four plus years between contract signing and lead vessel entering service for an OPV.

Something I believe people who are considering various bits of kit always need to keep in mind is that time required to actually get major capabilities and systems into place.

 

[ngatimozart]

Long held the view the RAN needs a couple [ Two ] appropriate ships for the southern Ocean.
Correct they will not look like the OPV's / Corvettes in the current conversation.
But they will be big and robust for the challenges and distance required to do the job.
Helicopter / flight deck and hanger.
Large multi mission bays for "stuff" with accommodation for additional numbers of personnel when needed.
Constabulary ships with commensurate weapon / sensor fit out but with margin for growth.
A promising NZ / RAN joint project.


Cheers S

The current RNZN OPVs were built to frequent the Southern Ocean but they did suffer damage and the assumptions that design was based on, have subsequently been found to be in error. Up until very recently it has always been assumed that the wave climate of the higher latitude North Atlantic Ocean was a sufficient template for Southern Ocean conditions, but recent research has found that significant wave heights in the Southern Ocean can be up to 1/3 higher than those in the equivalent latitude in the North Atlantic. That's a lot and means that ships being built for the Southern Ocean have to be built to a higher degree of strength. The RNZN took an Anzac frigate down there once on the 2000s. Never again because of the damage caused to the ship. Both navies actually require combatants that can handle those waters and that should've been built into the Hunter Class for the RAN and into future RAN & RNZN combatants. Australian defence appears to be somewhat blind to the geostrategic attractiveness of very resource rich Antarctica to resource hungry nations and the Treaty is after all only a piece of paper. We already have evidence of how some countries honour treaties and other agreements that they have signed and ratified. Some of those countries are currently active in Antarctica.

 

[spoz]

I don’t know I wrote a staff college paper on its importance to Australia in 1982. Mind you,it was a topical subject at the time

Nuyina (when serviceable), Ocean Protector and Ocean Shield are capable of operating in the far south, and have done so. Limited or no armament, but there is little or no armed threat. SSNs will also be to operate there.

 

[MickB]

The current RNZN OPVs were built to frequent the Southern Ocean but they did suffer damage and the assumptions that design was based on, have subsequently been found to be in error. Up until very recently it has always been assumed that the wave climate of the higher latitude North Atlantic Ocean was a sufficient template for Southern Ocean conditions, but recent research has found that significant wave heights in the Southern Ocean can be up to 1/3 higher than those in the equivalent latitude in the North Atlantic. That's a lot and means that ships being built for the Southern Ocean have to be built to a higher degree of strength. The RNZN took an Anzac frigate down there once on the 2000s. Never again because of the damage caused to the ship. Both navies actually require combatants that can handle those waters and that should've been built into the Hunter Class for the RAN and into future RAN & RNZN combatants. Australian defence appears to be somewhat blind to the geostrategic attractiveness of very resource rich Antarctica to resource hungry nations and the Treaty is after all only a piece of paper. We already have evidence of how some countries honour treaties and other agreements that they have signed and ratified. Some of those countries are currently active in Antarctica.

With the exception of submarines, does any likely threat have warships that can operate in such conditions?
If not then lightly armed constabulary ships should be enough to deal with most contingencies.
Let the future SSNs deal with possible sub threats in southern waters rather than build a whole new class of ship.

 

[Volkodav]

What makes a K130 derivative attractive for the RAN is it ticks many of the boxes as well as Lurssens involvement in the project, as well as crew size.

They have developed high end derivatives for export customers, including features we would need. This includes facilities for a Seahawk helicopter as well as enhanced air defence capability with a VLS.

K130 is not the only option, nor likely the best option, but it is an available option with a lot of advantages as well as potentially a streamlined acquisition path.

 

[Redlands18]

What makes a K130 derivative attractive for the RAN is it ticks many of the boxes as well as Lurssens involvement in the project, as well as crew size.

They have developed high end derivatives for export customers, including features we would need. This includes facilities for a Seahawk helicopter as well as enhanced air defence capability with a VLS.

K130 is not the only option, nor likely the best option, but it is an available option with a lot of advantages as well as potentially a streamlined acquisition path.

I think if Australia is looking at something like a K-130 it would be as an alternative to later build Arafura's, a K-130 can certainly do anything an Arafura can do and of course both being a Lurssen product should in theory speed up a build.

 

[Todjaeger]

What makes a K130 derivative attractive for the RAN is it ticks many of the boxes as well as Lurssens involvement in the project, as well as crew size.

They have developed high end derivatives for export customers, including features we would need. This includes facilities for a Seahawk helicopter as well as enhanced air defence capability with a VLS.

K130 is not the only option, nor likely the best option, but it is an available option with a lot of advantages as well as potentially a streamlined acquisition path.

From my POV, any corvette potentially selected is going to be automatically limited or compromised by the limited size and displacement available in a corvette. The more space and displacement allocated to consumables like fuel and victuals would come at the expense of space and displacement available for weapons, systems, and power gensets. Given the reporting of possible issues with the Hunter-class FFG and why it has grown so large so that the desired systems, gensets, and margins for future growth can be fitted, going with a significantly smaller vessel could be a problem.

It is also worth mentioning that the RAN would likely have to increase the type and variety of systems being fielded, in order to have certain capabilities fitted aboard potential corvettes. If a missile-based air defence capability for corvettes were to be included (a necessity IMO if combat capability is desired) then either VLS and illuminators suitable for ESSM would be needed, or a smaller missile like Sea Ceptor or RAM, and their associated launchers would need to added to the RAN inventory as well as training and support programmes.

I remain skeptical of there being real worth in the RAN commissioning corvettes in lieu of some of the later Arafura-class OPV's or as a combat capable adjunct to the RAN. Whilst a corvette should be able to perform the same roles as an Arafura-class OPV, in order to achieve the same range and at sea endurance with weapons and mission systems fitted is going to require a larger displacement vessel and also a significantly more expensive one. All to provide a vessel on EEZ/constab patrolling with an armament package well beyond what is required for constabulary needs.

In some respects this gets into the idea of why OPV-type vessels were developed in the first place. My personal hot take on this is that the RAN's warships should be large enough and capable enough to operate well away from Australia and friendly bases for long enough to keep fighting away from Australian ports as well as to cover as much of Australia's SLOC as possible. I would much rather have decisions be made for the RAN's surface major warship to be expanded by another half-dozen or more GP frigates that equal or exceed the upgraded ANZAC-class frigates in capability and leave most or all the EEZ and constab patrolling for the OPV's.

 

[Aussie optimist]

All this talk of corvettes is quite interesting, however I think people need to take a breath and firstly wait for further details other than rumours or “leaks”.
If a corvette were to be utilised, I think it would be essentially a bulked up OPV. Not necessarily a warship expecting to head into a war zone. A ship with the sea keeping and range of the Arafura class, but with a few additional toys to make a vessel with hostile intent think carefully. This would be what I believe we should expect, not an alternative to a hunter or Hobart but maybe replacement of the Arafura class. Something that could potentially in a war do convoy duty and be able to complicate enemy planning. Not every ship we send to sea needs to be able to take on an enemy fleet with lasers and rail guns.

Anyways we are surely in interesting times, I just hope that all these new toys, don’t ever need to be used in anger.

 

[south]

All this talk of corvettes is quite interesting, however I think people need to take a breath and firstly wait for further details other than rumours or “leaks”.
If a corvette were to be utilised, I think it would be essentially a bulked up OPV. Not necessarily a warship expecting to head into a war zone. A ship with the sea keeping and range of the Arafura class, but with a few additional toys to make a vessel with hostile intent think carefully. This would be what I believe we should expect, not an alternative to a hunter or Hobart but maybe replacement of the Arafura class. Something that could potentially in a war do convoy duty and be able to complicate enemy planning. Not every ship we send to sea needs to be able to take on an enemy fleet with lasers and rail guns.

Anyways we are surely in interesting times, I just hope that all these new toys, don’t ever need to be used in anger.

Surely the first question that should be asked is why the RAN can be trusted to spec a corvette when as recently as 5 years ago they couldn’t read the deteriorating security situation/select an appropriate class or armed vessel….

 

[ngatimozart]

With the exception of submarines, does any likely threat have warships that can operate in such conditions?
If not then lightly armed constabulary ships should be enough to deal with most contingencies.
Let the future SSNs deal with possible sub threats in southern waters rather than build a whole new class of ship.

Russians, Chinese. The Chinese are the ones who will want the resources the most out of the two. But Antarctica has its geostrategic importance as well, with the Russians operating SSBNs down there because they can launch SLBM over the pole towards the US giving the US less warning time. This is because the US has most of it's terrestrial ICBM warning systems facing NW, N, & NE; definitely not to the south. There are others as well who will be vying for the resources down there as well. Australia, like NZ faces a choice; either back your Antarctic territorial claims with combat capable assets, or lose them because others with far less scruples will stake territorial claims, backed up by military force, when the Antarctic Treaty expires in 20 odd years time. BTW, the Antarctic Treaty has no penalty provisions for naughty countries.

 

[Redlands18]

Surely the first question that should be asked is why the RAN can be trusted to spec a corvette when as recently as 5 years ago they couldn’t read the deteriorating security situation/select an appropriate class or armed vessel….

Well for starters the money hasn't been provided to spec 10-12 Corvettes, the budget for Sea 1180 is $4-5B for the Arafura's, a RAN Corvette would need to be 10-15m longer and 500-700t greater displacement at bare minimum and be fitted with better sensors as well as the weapons, so probably looking at a 100% funding increase, minimum.

 

[Aussie optimist]

Surely the first question that should be asked is why the RAN can be trusted to spec a corvette when as recently as 5 years ago they couldn’t read the deteriorating security situation/select an appropriate class or armed vessel….

I agree the government poorly read the situation. The government was not replacing a warship however, they merely wanted a cheap and cheerful OPV they were never looking for a corvette. The two types are very different in use. The situation we are in now is challenging, but at least this is recognised and being addressed as best as possible.

 

[ddxx]

I can't see any logic in going down the corvette path when not dissimilar crewing and fiscal resources could deliver us proper GP Frigates much more suited to our region, with the flexibility to adapt to future challenges.

I'm hopeful Babcock is already pushing the Arrowhead option behind the scenes. I'd be shocked if they weren't chasing every possible lead.

 

[vonnoobie]

Well for starters the money hasn't been provided to spec 10-12 Corvettes, the budget for Sea 1180 is $4-5B for the Arafura's, a RAN Corvette would need to be 10-15m longer and 500-700t greater displacement at bare minimum and be fitted with better sensors as well as the weapons, so probably looking at a 100% funding increase, minimum.

Which is why better to go with a bessel with much larger tonnage, ie Type 31 or similar. We have shown in the past onmce we have ironed out issues that we can match and even beat other nations in production costs (ie: The last Anzac with the initial CEAFAR upgrades was still cheaper then the Valour class delivered from Germany to South Africa). I have no doubt if "properly" set up we could match the UK on Type 31 or similar on pricing. Difference is compared to a vessel in the 2-3,000 ton range we will retain much more options with a hull in the 5-6,000 ton tange. Cost for cost you might spend hypothetically $200m on a corvette and get 2x the capability or an Arafura or you could spend $500m on a Type 31 (or similar) and get 6x or more the capability.

Simple matter is if they want to achieve anything close to the Anzac and be future proofed in capability then they need a hull tonnage larger then the Anzac that is able to handle our worst conditions.

 

[ngatimozart]

Which is why better to go with a bessel with much larger tonnage, ie Type 31 or similar. We have shown in the past onmce we have ironed out issues that we can match and even beat other nations in production costs (ie: The last Anzac with the initial CEAFAR upgrades was still cheaper then the Valour class delivered from Germany to South Africa). I have no doubt if "properly" set up we could match the UK on Type 31 or similar on pricing. Difference is compared to a vessel in the 2-3,000 ton range we will retain much more options with a hull in the 5-6,000 ton tange. Cost for cost you might spend hypothetically $200m on a corvette and get 2x the capability or an Arafura or you could spend $500m on a Type 31 (or similar) and get 6x or more the capability.

Simple matter is if they want to achieve anything close to the Anzac and be future proofed in capability then they need a hull tonnage larger then the Anzac that is able to handle our worst conditions.

Well, you don't need something the size of the Type 31. IF you were to acquire corvettes, something around the size of the Anzac Class frigates is fine. You aren't going to put CEFAR ASM radar or 32 VLS etc on them. They aren't going to be battle cruisers. All they require is a 57mm gun on the foc'sle, a 30mm autocannon on top of the hangar, 8 Mk-41 VLS, a decent radar and I/O sensors, four say NSM, a hangar & flight deck for a helo and a UAV, a couple of mission bays, a couple of good diesels as power packs and that's basically it. FFBNW 2 x Phalanx. Build the hulls strong to handle big bad seas and weather, and get the crewing down to about 60 - 80 plus say 80 - 100 sea riders. Make 'em diesel electric if you want to.

 

[vonnoobie]

Well, you don't need something the size of the Type 31. IF you were to acquire corvettes, something around the size of the Anzac Class frigates is fine. You aren't going to put CEFAR ASM radar or 32 VLS etc on them. They aren't going to be battle cruisers. All they require is a 57mm gun on the foc'sle, a 30mm autocannon on top of the hangar, 8 Mk-41 VLS, a decent radar and I/O sensors, four say NSM, a hangar & flight deck for a helo and a UAV, a couple of mission bays, a couple of good diesels as power packs and that's basically it. FFBNW 2 x Phalanx. Build the hulls strong to handle big bad seas and weather, and get the crewing down to about 60 - 80 plus say 80 - 100 sea riders. Make 'em diesel electric if you want to.

Perhaps but for the costs involved when a corvette realistically will cost about the same price as a Type 31 or similar why would you bother limiting your self to a smaller vessel that wouldn't at least give you options in the future to adjust your force if needed? If we where 100% confident that we would never potentially have to upgrade them with better radar, sensors, weapons etcetc then sure something the size of an Anzac would be perfect but in our environment would it not be better off spending the exact same cost to acquire a corvette to acquire a larger vessel that would give us future options. Yes we are getting the Hunters, getting the Hobarts upgraded and such a sized fleet done well for us in the past but back then we didnt face the situation we do today which is only going to get worse so at least IMHO getting a vessel that leaves us options and at little to no extra cost is simple logic.

 

[hauritz]

The ANZAC class filled, and is still filling the requirement for a low to medium end combat ship intended for operations in the EEZ. The Hunter class is a far more capable ship but really the requirement for a tier two warship hasn't gone away. If Australia goes on and replaces the ANZACs with Hunters then its combat fleet will consist entirely of Tier one vessels. I can't think of any other nation that is doing this.

It really does impact on the flexibility of the navy. In the event of a full scale war it would be hard to justify operating sophisticated, highly capable warships in the Southern oceans when those ships would be better deployed defending the Northern approaches. On the other hand it would fool hardy to try to defend the southern approaches with upgunned Arafuras.

 

[John Fedup]

The ANZAC class filled, and is still filling the requirement for a low to medium end combat ship intended for operations in the EEZ. The Hunter class is a far more capable ship but really the requirement for a tier two warship hasn't gone away. If Australia goes on and replaces the ANZACs with Hunters then its combat fleet will consist entirely of Tier one vessels. I can't think of any other nation that is doing this.

It really does impact on the flexibility of the navy. In the event of a full scale war it would be hard to justify operating sophisticated, highly capable warships in the Southern oceans when those ships would be better deployed defending the Northern approaches. On the other hand it would fool hardy to try to defend the southern approaches with upgunned Arafuras.

The RCN will eventually have a Tier 1 fleet only with its CSC ships. The DeWolfe Arctic patrol ships, very limited.

 

[Redlands18]

Well, you don't need something the size of the Type 31. IF you were to acquire corvettes, something around the size of the Anzac Class frigates is fine. You aren't going to put CEFAR ASM radar or 32 VLS etc on them. They aren't going to be battle cruisers. All they require is a 57mm gun on the foc'sle, a 30mm autocannon on top of the hangar, 8 Mk-41 VLS, a decent radar and I/O sensors, four say NSM, a hangar & flight deck for a helo and a UAV, a couple of mission bays, a couple of good diesels as power packs and that's basically it. FFBNW 2 x Phalanx. Build the hulls strong to handle big bad seas and weather, and get the crewing down to about 60 - 80 plus say 80 - 100 sea riders. Make 'em diesel electric if you want to.

MEKO® (globalsecurity.org)
Something like the latest version of the MEKO 200 design. They are proven Southern Ocean operators to with the RSA Navy.

 

[Volkodav]

Surely the first question that should be asked is why the RAN can be trusted to spec a corvette when as recently as 5 years ago they couldn’t read the deteriorating security situation/select an appropriate class or armed vessel….

It's was a government decision not a navy one.

Navy wanted 10000 tonne purpose designed multi role ships, they are getting Hunters, the navy wanted G&C International Frigates or modified Burke's, they got F-100s, navy wanted M class or Type 23 frigates, the got MEKOs, navy wanted Australian designed DDLs, the got FFGs. Navy wanted to replace the carrier, they got nothing.

The government decides, not the navy. The navy can recommend but the government decides based on many things in addition to the actual navy recommendation. When governments change, what the navy gets often changes as well.