Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
Totally. Which is in many cases we weren't up to full strength crews anyway. But it hard to hold on to crews when platforms are being cycled out and there may not be a future, people will grab opportunities if they think there isn't much of a future or progression in their current role.
But when platforms and ships evaporate, it gets even harder to hold onto people for frontline operating positions. We were still doing that right up until 2019. Of course, we had been doing it long before, right back as Volk points out to Melbourne and earlier. Even with an understrength crew, you still have the basic mix and the basis of working upto a full strength crew, once that platform is decommissioned it all quickly unravels as talented key people disappear and building up the right mix of people with no experience is going to be very very hard. Senior skilled people don't just grow on trees. Who is going to train and develop all these newbies? Even if you are moving to a new platform, experience matters. VR simulations aren't the same as 5 years on the job doing the job.
I guess that is the question, someone asked about trading Anzacs for corvette/light frigate.
Trading OPV for actual surface combatants is IMO a no brainer given the current situation. OPV burden can be put on the civilian arms, which may not be ideal, but certainly doable. While the crew for an OPV is not 1:1 for a light frigate, my point above is that you have the basic skeleton mix of crew you need to grow, where if DFR can find an extra 20-30 newbies, that can fill our your ship. At least that is how I understand it IMO.
I think 76mm is fine for a corvette or light frigate. We have experience with this, its doable.
76mm and ESSM are suitable. CIWS brings up questions.. 35mm millennium gun?
Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
www.afr.com
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
Last edited:
Some see the 35 to 40 mm rapid, fire shorter range gun as the CIWS solution
Others see the advantage of range and heavier shot in the 57 to 76 mm as the way forward.
Different navy's with different approach's.
I hope that the RAN consolidates on the one caliber for a gun base CIWS across the fleet.
This important opportunity exists as we transition from or in service 20 / 25 mm systems to something else.
With all the talk of new vessels we will have to make these decisions asap.
Time to make that call
Cheers S
This would be an interesting development, if indeed the Brits do identify some flexibility in their own strategic capability - enough to supply 2 boats as an urgent capability to Australia.Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
Perhaps they do, it would I imagine provide extra work for their industry. So it’d be a win-win?
Obtaining two boats in quick order would also be an astonishing boost to the RAN.
My concern tho, from an ignorant observer POV is the combat system and weaponry in a stock Astute.
IMHO, I’m always massively grateful and thankful we use USN CMS & Mk48 ADCAP torpedoes.
My understanding is these are not fitted in Astutes, an Aust version of a home built Astute was theoretically to have the shared US systems installed. - so therefor, the two possible Astutes would be orphaned/unique in Australian service.
In trying to rationalise this, I’m thinking that the imperative is to get boats in RAN service ASAP!
From my ignorant understandings, I hope the RAN continues in the longer term to furnish its future submarine fleet with the present USN systems as the basis for the CMS and Mk48 ADCAP, and if there is no ‘simple’ workaround actually does regard the UK fit out as a ‘necessary time-justified anomaly‘.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Several questions in regards to this proposal.Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
1/ Where is the qualified crew coming from?
2/ How does the RN operate with just 5 SSNs?
3/ How can we be ready to maintain SSNs at Osborn and Henderson in that time frame?
There is a mountain of work to be done before the RAN can operate SSNs, no point getting them until we are ready for them.
Base a carrier out of Perth? The ship and its escorts including 2 ssns.
Not sure how they continue the production line, they have 3 SSBN's under construction in the halls where the astutes were built. And another to go.
Army is in the process of introducing nearly 300x 30mm gun systems into the start of their service (Boxer, IFV and Apache - different rounds but same calibre) and the Mk.30c 30mm Typhoon mount has just been selected as the future secondary gun system for the Hunter class and proposed for the Arafuras…
25mm has long been in use by Army and RAN and we manufacture the ammunition for it here. Additionally F-35 uses a 25mm round (different round from Army and RAN though but same calibre). 25mm Typhoon mounts were brought brand new for the secondary gun system on our newest ships, the Supply class.
25mm and 30mm‘s future in Australia seems pretty much assured to me…
Unfortunately I think your correct.
That said, I do get minimizing the types of rounds across the ADF has it appeal on many levels.
I'm also mindful what Army needs and what Navy needs are can be very different.
For Navy any CIWS must cater for the full range of threats including a capacity to offer some ability to engage incoming missiles.
The Mk.30c 30mm Typhoon mount class of systems fall short in this regard, unless they have a complimentary short range SAM with the unit.
When space and weight are limited on any vessel you need to maximize your options.
Millennium gun I get.
Mk.30c 30mm Typhoon type systems belong to the past or patrol boats.
Cheers S
They are different capabilities. The MK.30C isn’t a CIWS. It’s an anti-surface weapon, that will have a bit of secondary counter-UAS / anti-air capability. So far it has only been chosen by RAN for the secondary medium calibre gun system role on the Hunters, operating at levels below that which call for 127mm fire. However there is some fairly strong goss that this weapon will also comprise the replacement main gun system on the Arafuras.
RAN’s choice of CIWS is clearly the Phalanx Block 1B Baseline 2, around which it is (slowly) standardising across the fleet.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
I know that would solve the capability gap but getting 2 Astutes would leave the RAN with two orphan subs with reactors that don’t meet modern safety standards, only have a 25 year life reactor core, aren’t fitted with US combat systems and weapons and don’t have a vertical launch capability for future hypersonic weapons - it doesn’t add up to being a good long term fit for the RAN.Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
braddmlewis
New Member
I think the issue is if you have zero options that meet both short and long term needs, in the current threat environment which do you prioritize ? This gives you a near term option admittedly with sub optimal long term impacts but perhaps that’s a compromise the government feels as appropriate.
That said the CMS, PWR2 EOL are immediate issues that need solving even if the other long term issues are acceptable
Scott Elaurant
Well-Known Member
I do not know the details here but if this option occurred couldn’t the RAN operate the first two UK built Astutes as is for a few years with Type 2076 Sonar, UK CS and Spearfish, then refit US combat system at first scheduled long term maintenance? RAN crew training on the Anson now will be getting exposed to these systems. By 2024/25 they should be capable on them.
In the end if we have two sub bases with SSN maintenance capability, a stock of UK as well as US and even French SSN weapons might be very useful.
Here is another possibility:Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
Lease the ...........
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
........................until such time as the first and second of the new build submarines (with US combat system etc) come online for the RAN, then
Astute 6 Agamemnon and Astute 7 Agincourt go back to re-join the RN
This provides the stop gap needed, as well as the training required for RAN submariners.
It also allows the new RAN build submarines time to become established as a sovereign programme without loss of capability.
MB
Given Pommyland's current economic and leadership (or, lack-thereof) situation, why not buy the entire class and see if we can get a Carrier thrown in for free?Interesting article seems to suggest we might purchase
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
purchase of 7 and 8 or 8 and 9 astute would seem more realistic If they are to continue the production line.
Could Australia jump the AUKUS submarine queue?
It’s the Brits and not the Yanks that could help Defence Minister Richard Marles pull a nuclear rabbit out of the hat.
Just a couple of questions and observations about any potential build of three additional destroyers and perhaps half a dozen corvettes.
First of all could Australia risk building these ships overseas?
Lets say we were to take up the Spanish offer to build or even share construction of these ships with Australia. Lets say that sometime before these ships are delivered we are drawn into a conflict with China. Could we really rely on the Spanish or any other foreign power to deliver those ships?
I am reminded of what happened to the Mistrals that France built for Russia. For that and other reasons I think these ships would need to be built entirely in Australia.
That would raise the second question of whether the spare capacity exists to build these ships in Australia. I admit I have no idea of what capacity exists and how quickly extra capacity could be added.
First of all could Australia risk building these ships overseas?
Lets say we were to take up the Spanish offer to build or even share construction of these ships with Australia. Lets say that sometime before these ships are delivered we are drawn into a conflict with China. Could we really rely on the Spanish or any other foreign power to deliver those ships?
I am reminded of what happened to the Mistrals that France built for Russia. For that and other reasons I think these ships would need to be built entirely in Australia.
That would raise the second question of whether the spare capacity exists to build these ships in Australia. I admit I have no idea of what capacity exists and how quickly extra capacity could be added.
Your correct
This is the current approach.
I obviously have a different view going forward.
Cheers S
RAN didn’t have much issue adapting to the combat system fitted to Choules. Didn’t seem to have too much trouble adapting to AEGIS when the Hobarts were introduced, seemingly has little issue with SAAB 9LV and pivoted quite easily from the Rockwell Collins system on Collins originally to the AN/BYG-1 now on Collins.
RAN may prefer to use the US system, but I suspect the need to pivot to an SSN would be too good an opportunity to pass up and the the lack of the preferred US combat system would be unlikely to over-ride that, if they were available…
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
After 25 years of service it doesn’t make sense to replace a reactor which has a 25 year lifetime into a sub that already has 25 years of service, simply not value for money. As I understand, the boats under consideration are new or just about. The same would apply to Virginia reactor replacement as well. I believe their lifetime is 30+ years.