Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[justinterested]

Mate,

There’s an old saying “put brain in gear before putting mouth (or fingers) in motion”, you should try it.

The ADM article specifically said “approximately A$60m”, not just $60m or USD$60m.

Has Defence purchased another Offshore Support Vessel? - Australian Defence Magazine

Defence may have procured another second-hand offshore support vessel (OSV) from overseas ahead of the government's formal response to the DSR being made public.

www.australiandefence.com.au

Just to add to that is this article:

Sale of vessel - Normand Jarl - Solstad

Skudeneshavn, Norway, 12 December 2022 – Normand Ships AS, a wholly owned subsidiary of Solstad Offshore ASA (Solstad Offshore, OSE: SOFF), have sold the CSV Normand Jarl to a Buyer outside of the offshore industry.

www.solstad.com

That article mentions the sale price as NOK 420m. If you do an NOK to AUD exchange rate, it end up as approx A$60m.

And by the way, the ‘due diligence inspection’ was reported to be $100,000.

As for Greene, I’ll say what I like, he has been called out here on DT many times over the years, and not just by me either.

Anyway, just remember the bit about putting brain in gear first, ok?

The site you quoted actually stated "a gain of NOK 420 million", not the sale price.
The Australian Govt website states the sale price of $110 million.

https://www.defence.gov.au/news-events/releases/2023-04-08/undersea-support-vessel-deliver-enhanced-capability

 

[IHFP]

This photo shows how useful that crane is.
View attachment 50417

I can only imagine the useage that this thing is going to get in peace time, not to speak of its utility during conflict. I wish I could borrow it to get all my fishing tackle that I've lost in the ocean, but I doubt the boat is big enough.

 

[Volkodav]

I just had a chuckle to myself at the thought of there eventually being more ADVs than HMAS vessels in service.

Anything to avoid a seperate coast guard or RFA.

I think we need to see the details of the review, because this is getting frustrating and concerning. Every change of PM and or government in the last 30 years I've hoped for improvement but seen the opposite.

We haven't had a cohesive plan aligned with strategy since the late 80s early 90s. Too bad the associated force structure didn't actually eventuate.

Prior to this the post WWII RAN was basically designed for trade protection / ASW on RN advice. Attempts to orient for counter insurgency and limited wars (corvettes/DDLs) leading nowhere.

Now we are hearing rumours if corvettes, cuts to Hunter, more Hobart's, even actual proper destroyers for the first time since the Adams/Perth's. We just need to know, what, when and how many.

I can't help but notice many talking heads proposing three of this or six of that, existing legacy (out dated) design, that can't possibly be delivered any quicker than the Hunters.

I hope the review us honest about what is needed as well as what can be afforded.

 

[Morgo]

I just had a chuckle to myself at the thought of there eventually being more ADVs than HMAS vessels in service.

Anything to avoid a seperate coast guard or RFA.

I think we need to see the details of the review, because this is getting frustrating and concerning. Every change of PM and or government in the last 30 years I've hoped for improvement but seen the opposite.

We haven't had a cohesive plan aligned with strategy since the late 80s early 90s. Too bad the associated force structure didn't actually eventuate.

Prior to this the post WWII RAN was basically designed for trade protection / ASW on RN advice. Attempts to orient for counter insurgency and limited wars (corvettes/DDLs) leading nowhere.

Now we are hearing rumours if corvettes, cuts to Hunter, more Hobart's, even actual proper destroyers for the first time since the Adams/Perth's. We just need to know, what, when and how many.

I can't help but notice many talking heads proposing three of this or six of that, existing legacy (out dated) design, that can't possibly be delivered any quicker than the Hunters.

I hope the review us honest about what is needed as well as what can be afforded.

Serious question - where has the rumour about cuts to Hunters come from? A reputable source?

 

[Volkodav]

Serious question - where has the rumour about cuts to Hunters come from? A reputable source?

Just general media reports. The only concrete information relates to submarines.

That's why I am getting frustrated, too much speculation, too much backgrounding by concerned parties. The danger zone is when those concerned their pet project will miss out or be cut, start feeding damaging stories to the media and pet politicians to undermine other capabilities.

A narrative kicks off that we can get 50 Type 212As for the cost of 8 AUKUS SSNs, this potentially kills the SSNs. Then someone else points out we can't crew 50 small SSGs, so we order twelve, this gets cut to eight, then six when someone else proves ship based helicopters from FFGs can cover more area than twelve SSGs.

Eventually to the ADF, industry, APS and politicians manage to justify doing nothing as they have so successfully undermined everyone else's pet projects than no one has any faith in anything.

 

[knightrider4]

Just general media reports. The only concrete information relates to submarines.

That's why I am getting frustrated, too much speculation, too much backgrounding by concerned parties. The danger zone is when those concerned their pet project will miss out or be cut, start feeding damaging stories to the media and pet politicians to undermine other capabilities.

A narrative kicks off that we can get 50 Type 212As for the cost of 8 AUKUS SSNs, this potentially kills the SSNs. Then someone else points out we can't crew 50 small SSGs, so we order twelve, this gets cut to eight, then six when someone else proves ship based helicopters from FFGs can cover more area than twelve SSGs.

Eventually to the ADF, industry, APS and politicians manage to justify doing nothing as they have so successfully undermined everyone else's pet projects than no one has any faith in anything.

Just spitballing here but I'm feeling quite pessimistic regarding the DSR. The current Government so far has not announced anything new, everything is just a continuation of the previous administrations announcements. There will have to be a substantial increase in funding in the May budget otherwise its simply going to be a bit of a fizzer. As far as I can see, with apotential drop in Hunters and cuts to Land 400 it looks like a net capability loss.

 

[Morgo]

Just spitballing here but I'm feeling quite pessimistic regarding the DSR. The current Government so far has not announced anything new, everything is just a continuation of the previous administrations announcements. There will have to be a substantial increase in funding in the May budget otherwise its simply going to be a bit of a fizzer. As far as I can see, with apotential drop in Hunters and cuts to Land 400 it looks like a net capability loss.

I’m in two minds. They’re about to go into a budget where they will likely be making some really unpopular decisions to undertake fiscal repair. If they’re doing big revenue raisin/ spending cuts in other parts of the budget, it will help their messaging if they’ve got a report which says “here’s all the non optional Defence stuff we need to acquire” that’s fresh in public memory.

They’ve also been quite clear on multiple occasions that Defence spending must rise, and having the Deputy PM in the portfolio means Defence should be a net winner in Cabinet discussions.

So I am cautiously optimistic, but time will tell. Any day now presumably….

 

[seaspear]

An interesting article going into some details of the possible usage of the "Ghost shark" uuv in operating with the future AUKUS submarines it speculates on new communications technologies for submarines operating at depths .
AUKUS Nuclear Sub Deal Opens Door to Advanced Undersea Operations (maritime-executive.com)

 

[Volkodav]

Just spitballing here but I'm feeling quite pessimistic regarding the DSR. The current Government so far has not announced anything new, everything is just a continuation of the previous administrations announcements. There will have to be a substantial increase in funding in the May budget otherwise its simply going to be a bit of a fizzer. As far as I can see, with apotential drop in Hunters and cuts to Land 400 it looks like a net capability loss.

There will not likely be any capability loss as such, there will be new and improved capability replacing old, just likely not what was previously planned, nor in the numbers.

Some capabilities will increase, some reduce, one for one, like for like will not be guaranteed.

I hope there is an avoidance of panic buys of legacy gear at the end of its development cycle. As I also hope we can avoid handing cash to overseas interests to do what we could do just as well or better here, or to local rent seekers to produce more of what we don't need.

 

[Stampede]

There will not likely be any capability loss as such, there will be new and improved capability replacing old, just likely not what was previously planned, nor in the numbers.

Some capabilities will increase, some reduce, one for one, like for like will not be guaranteed.

I hope there is an avoidance of panic buys of legacy gear at the end of its development cycle. As I also hope we can avoid handing cash to overseas interests to do what we could do just as well or better here, or to local rent seekers to produce more of what we don't need.

Until the release of the DSR we just don't know.
Lets not try and read to much into it all until we actually have some detail.
The only info we really have is through AUKUS and the future submarine plans.
Even this ambitious program may have many twists and turns in the decades ahead.

The DSR should not be to far away.
Be patent and hopefully hold some optimism they get it right.

Cheers S

 

[Volkodav]

Until the release of the DSR we just don't know.
Lets not try and read to much into it all until we actually have some detail.
The only info we really have is through AUKUS and the future submarine plans.
Even this ambitious program may have many twists and turns in the decades ahead.

The DSR should not be to far away.
Be patent and hopefully hold some optimism they get it right.

Cheers S

Ah huh, the only thing we do know is there will be change.

The key is growing sovereign capability, once we are building things we can increase numbers if required. What are are building however has to be useful.

The DSR is necessary, I have no real idea what it will include, nor what it will exclude, I just hope, and to a degree believe, it will factor in being better able to adapt to changing strategic circumstances.

The future is systems of systems, the commonalities and economies of scale will not be platforms but the systems they carry.

On the acquisition of these various support ships as ADVs I wonder if we would have been better off building something akin to the expeditionary support ships the USN is adapting for many of the roles we use and intend for these ships.

Perhaps we will see a local build of a suitable design to replace these ships. Maybe we could even come up with something better looking for Spozs sake.

 

[Stampede]

Ah huh, the only thing we do know is there will be change.

The key is growing sovereign capability, once we are building things we can increase numbers if required. What are are building however has to be useful.

The DSR is necessary, I have no real idea what it will include, nor what it will exclude, I just hope, and to a degree believe, it will factor in being better able to adapt to changing strategic circumstances.

The future is systems of systems, the commonalities and economies of scale will not be platforms but the systems they carry.

On the acquisition of these various support ships as ADVs I wonder if we would have been better off building something akin to the expeditionary support ships the USN is adapting for many of the roles we use and intend for these ships.

Perhaps we will see a local build of a suitable design to replace these ships. Maybe we could even come up with something better looking for Spozs sake.

All of us on this forum have played fantasy fleets, myself includes.
If you , myself or any others on this forum were entrusted to write the DSR we would no doubt get many different versions of a defence force going forward.
Whatever we may think of the two authors of the DSR, they have a tonne of responsibility on their shoulders to get it right.
Hats off to them.

In the maritime context your overview does hold true.
It will be very interesting to see what is planned.

Talking ADV / Support ships. ADF and Border force.

Ocean Shield, Reliant, Ocean Protector, and Guidance are all in" broad terms" of a similar size and configuration.
They are also second hand plus have some mileage and as such will need replacing down the track.
What replaces them I cannot say, but a quantity class of four vessels of similar size is probably a need and not out of question.

So should we start planning now for a class of four such replacement vessels.
Maybe 5 or 6 if NZ is interested.
Do we build here or overseas?

I'd suggest a build of 4 to 6 10000t vessels would be an appealing and efficient project in the 2030's leading into a time frame of the 2040's plus for the Supply Class / LHD replacements.

Will the DSR spread light on this evolving area of defence / security.

Cheers S

 

[icelord]

There is still the Joint Support Ship decision which has been postponed for the last 3 years.

With any luck, DSR will give clarity on these vessels. I believe a large delay has been the desire to have the vessels be built in the West Coast Dry dock which is to be built by 2028 with construction of vessel to commence then. Looking at the ADV, it would make sense to have these vessels for 10years and replace with the JSS
Henderson large vessel dry-dock announced - Australian Defence Magazine

 

[Bob53]

Looks like there will be no other countries added to AUKUS submarine program. After AUKUS announcement, the US slams shut nuclear propulsion door

Sorry NZ and Canada back to pedal power for u guys. Hamsters might come in handy.

 

[Bob53]

A significant increase of production on LRASM, JASSM and TomAhawks will assist The RAN and RAAF build up war stocks. Mention of Australia also possibly producing some of these missiles here.

US Navy Looks to Drastically Increase Missile Production - Naval News

It was revealed on Monday that the service desired to ramp up procurement of missiles at a NAVAIR briefing during Sea Air Space 2023.

www.navalnews.com

Lockheed Martin Looks to Boost LRASM Production as US Rushes to Buy Anti-Ship Weapons | Air & Space Forces Magazine

Lockheed Martin has opened a second production line to produce two of the Pentagon’s most in-demand needed weapons: the LRASM and the JASSM-ER

www.airandspaceforces.com

 

[Redlands18]

Looks like there will be no other countries added to AUKUS submarine program. After AUKUS announcement, the US slams shut nuclear propulsion door

Sorry NZ and Canada back to pedal power for u guys. Hamsters might come in handy.

Possibly built around the Perth area , apparently Adelaide is an outer suburb of Perth, hard to take an article too serious when, they can't even get something like the construction site correct.

 

[Stampede]

There is still the Joint Support Ship decision which has been postponed for the last 3 years.

With any luck, DSR will give clarity on these vessels. I believe a large delay has been the desire to have the vessels be built in the West Coast Dry dock which is to be built by 2028 with construction of vessel to commence then. Looking at the ADV, it would make sense to have these vessels for 10years and replace with the JSS
Henderson large vessel dry-dock announced - Australian Defence Magazine

Spot on, I neglected the JSS which should be a 2030's acquisition.
Currently we have nine large vessels comprising our supply / support / amphibious fleet.
Two LHD's and AOR's plus Choules, Ocean Shield, Reliant, Ocean Protector, and Guidance.
Add the JSS concept and we have some considerable tonnage that needs servicing and in time replacing.

A lot to play with and plan for down the track.

Will Henderson be a tourist attraction or a busy functioning dock !!!!!!!

DSR ????????????????????????????

Cheers S

 

[Bob53]

Possibly built around the Perth area , apparently Adelaide is an outer suburb of Perth, hard to take an article too serious when, they can't even get something like the construction site correct.

@redlans You are a harsher marker ….. avoiding your classes…

 

[hauritz]

There is still the Joint Support Ship decision which has been postponed for the last 3 years.

With any luck, DSR will give clarity on these vessels. I believe a large delay has been the desire to have the vessels be built in the West Coast Dry dock which is to be built by 2028 with construction of vessel to commence then. Looking at the ADV, it would make sense to have these vessels for 10years and replace with the JSS
Henderson large vessel dry-dock announced - Australian Defence Magazine

I think this might signal a fourth ongoing build program for Australian shipbuilders along with frigates, submarines and minor vessels. You have the two JSS that would go from the late twenties to mid thirties followed by LHD replacements due by the mid forties and then AORs going into the fifties. Add a few ADV, border force, fishery and other non-military vessels and you might have enough to keep the yard in work indefinitely.

 

[ADMk2]

A significant increase of production on LRASM, JASSM and TomAhawks will assist The RAN and RAAF build up war stocks. Mention of Australia also possibly producing some of these missiles here.

US Navy Looks to Drastically Increase Missile Production - Naval News

It was revealed on Monday that the service desired to ramp up procurement of missiles at a NAVAIR briefing during Sea Air Space 2023.

www.navalnews.com

Lockheed Martin Looks to Boost LRASM Production as US Rushes to Buy Anti-Ship Weapons | Air & Space Forces Magazine

Lockheed Martin has opened a second production line to produce two of the Pentagon’s most in-demand needed weapons: the LRASM and the JASSM-ER

www.airandspaceforces.com

It would if we had actually placed contracts for any these weapons. But to date, we have not...