Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[old faithful]

I don't you understand where I'm coming from.
It's ok, I will try again. He said a posting to Darwin was a huge no for him, not just because it's remote, but because of the heat.
Imagine, 1 brigade, right, we need to post 45 ORs and 4 officers to 5 RAR, but so far we can only find 1 officer , and he is not a good one, and 11 ORs....oh well, we will reduce 5 RAR to 2 companies and a support company....then there is 8/12.... can't find anyone, because they all want to go to Sydney....so they can be close for Mardi gras.....etc etc. Imagine going to Katherine ffs! F18 sqn and F35s, but what a posting! Funny how so many of them love it, thank christ.....there has to be a point where the ADF , that you joined, must say, ok, I understand you don't want to go there, but you have had your 1 St preference the last 2 time, and now it's time to go where we say. So pack your bags.

Oh, and as for the jack comment, I was referring to what it means.
And looking after yourself first, is exactly what it means, I'm ok jack. And that's what I said. And that's what it is.

 

[ddxx]

Isn’t the most logical approach rotational remote and forward basing, whether for Navy or ABF?

Vessels can potentially remain at the location with crews and support flying in and out, except where vessels are due for more intensive maintenance?

This is what the RN/RFA does for more remote long-standing forward operations.

Either way, I do very much think the current de facto Coast Guard cluster of agencies needs a rethink.

A new body which absorbs the ABF Marine Unit and Navy Patrol could structurally fall under the RAN but with mixed law enforcement, civilian and navy crews?

Therefore, there would be no loss of command and training opportunities for RAN, but you wouldn’t have to crew the whole vessel with RAN personnel.

However, patrol vessels dedicated to non-Australian EEZ ops could remain fully RAN crewed. E.g. Forward operations in the South Pacific for general presence and maritime security collaboration.

 

[Volkodav]

I don't you understand where I'm coming from.
It's ok, I will try again. He said a posting to Darwin was a huge no for him, not just because it's remote, but because of the heat.
Imagine, 1 brigade, right, we need to post 45 ORs and 4 officers to 5 RAR, but so far we can only find 1 officer , and he is not a good one, and 11 ORs....oh well, we will reduce 5 RAR to 2 companies and a support company....then there is 8/12.... can't find anyone, because they all want to go to Sydney....so they can be close for Mardi gras.....etc etc. Imagine going to Katherine ffs! F18 sqn and F35s, but what a posting! Funny how so many of them love it, thank christ.....there has to be a point where the ADF , that you joined, must say, ok, I understand you don't want to go there, but you have had your 1 St preference the last 2 time, and now it's time to go where we say. So pack your bags.

I think you are missing the point. When given the choice some choose no. When given an order there is no choice.

Some people love Darwin, sometimes it's a great opportunity, often a chance to step up, do higher duties, build experience, get promoted faster, I've seen it happen for some.

Others I've seen lose everything. Their partners couldn't hack it and left, their kids struggle at school. Sometimes their boss is a tool who loves Darwin because their boss is several thousand Km away and they can get away with crap that wouldn't stand elsewhere.

Socially I came across a few SNCOs whose banter made it abundantly clear they were not good bosses, some of it was illegal. Here I would act, there I had no idea who I could approach and I learnt very quickly that in sh!thole Darwin, a dodgy SNCOs was harder to replace than a junior member, so was always going to win the popularity contest.

Basically Darwin is the problems of HMAS Success writ large. You put up with crap that wouldn't be tolerated elsewhere because certain people are seen as irreplaceable. Elitism and exceptionalism are the norm, the attitudes that is, not actual elite levels of performance.

The answer is move more up there. Better infrastructure, better support, and above all, better supervision and management. You need more real senior people in real senior roles, not token has beens and never beens promoted above their level of competence. Not just uniform, but APS and industry.

 

[ngatimozart]

Ahhh the old look after #1.....in the Army, that used be called being a "Jack C..t" , but you are right, none of my business as a tax payer that servicemen refuse to go where they are needed, because it's too hot. You joined the NAVY, the NAVY didn't join you.

That's uncalled for. You should withdraw the comments and apologise.

When I was in NZDF we understood that the requirements of the Service take priority, BUT the Service did try to take personal preference into account. However no service can afford a cohort of disaffected personnel, especially today, and it pays them to take into account individuals preferences in peace time. During my time in the RNZAF officer postings were handled differently to Other Ranks and since I was never an officer, because I worked for a living, I can only speak from my own experience.

It's past time to put this sidetrack to rest.

 

[Volkodav]

Darwin postings would be better if there was more Navy and more ADF up there. I saw the whole place go backwards as about half 1 BDE was withdrawn.

More and more roles were determined not possible to fill and moved South, this meant fewer opportunities for people who already lived there.

Transfer units up there, home port major combatants there. More, not less, give people career paths.

APS is so light on up there that merit pools don't function. There are so few senior roles that the merit pools expire before anyone ever gets recruited from them. They appoint a southerner transfering at level to get the allowances, meaning the local misses out on promotion. They get merit pooled but no other suitable jobs come up so they move south.

Why is the APS important for the ADF, well it's the logical employer for ADF partners, just doesn't work that way.

Same with WA, more not less.

 

[Lolcake]

Never knew posting would cause such an issue within the ADF. I worked in Darwin for the better part of two years on the Icthys LNG project. Loved the place. The bay runs are awesome and the markets are blessed with best south east asian foods you can possibly imagine. The Darwin and Aviation museum were absolutely amazing and they have a full sized B-52 there.

They bussed us to the site every morning from 5am, it was 40 mins out. As for the heat, you get used to it. I remember when a cat 2 cyclone was about to land and i was fizzing at the bumhole for it to hit so i could tell the grand kids a decent story one day, the bloody thing veered off at literally last second and i was absolutely spewing.

The only bad thing i recall was the walk to the loo that was litterred with sweat dripping long sleeves hanging off the guard from the concretors working in 33 degree heat 90% humidity, would say that wasnt the best experience day in day out and you could smell it through the aircon in your demountable. (no t-shirts or shirts allowed due to UV etc). Never got used to it i have to say.

 

[Volkodav]

Never knew posting would cause such an issue within the ADF. I worked in Darwin for the better part of two years on the Icthys LNG project. Loved the place. The bay runs are awesome and the markets are blessed with best south east asian foods you can possibly imagine. The Darwin and Aviation museum were absolutely amazing and they have a full sized B-52 there.

They bussed us to the site every morning from 5am, it was 40 mins out. As for the heat, you get used to it. I remember when a cat 2 cyclone was about to land and i was fizzing at the bumhole for it to hit so i could tell the grand kids a decent story one day, the bloody thing veered off at literally last second and i was absolutely spewing.

The only bad thing i recall was the walk to the loo that was litterred with sweat dripping long sleeves hanging off the guard from the concretors working in 33 degree heat 90% humidity, would say that wasnt the best experience day in day out and you could smell it through the aircon in your demountable. (no t-shirts or shirts allowed due to UV etc). Never got used to it i have to say.

Icthys was the boom times, there was nothing to follow it, then to add insult to injury the government moved half of 1 BDE south, about 1000 families. Then the APS presence was cut, by about a third if I recall, but 80% of that were senior roles, i.e. EL1 and above. 1 AVN is due to go next, another couple of hundred families. Support work for defence, if you don't have any project officers there, let alone any complex engineering work, you will suffer a brain drain. Why would a competent techo or engineer bother staying if the only work is so low level your manger, who doesn't even understand what you do, is a failed E7 or O-3/4 that defence didn't feel was worth retaining and industry didn't want.

The north was meant to be the key to our prosperity and to our defence, the gateway to Asia but government after government, PM after PM it got worse. Its a signal throughout the region, if you dont live in greater Sydney you don't count.

Like I said before, if we want to defence the north, we need to ensure there is a critical mass of units and their supporting elements stationed there. Their presence will show commitment to the region, aclimitise them to the conditions, and ensure there are enough people going through on posting rotations that enough of them will love it and want to go back. I bitch about Darwin, but truth be known, if I had the opportunity to do what I love doing up there, and the schools were better I would have stayed.

The thing that shits me the most is it was so close to being great, but wasn't. The pond was too small and most of the big fish were incompetent southerners who moved there because they couldnt cut it down south. I was never insubordinate before living there but dealing with idiot after idiot, I eventually lost it, then realised the twits were all bluster and no balls. Didnt change the fact they had the titles and pay cheques, but I was able to tell them to get out of the way and let me do my job, still sucked though, because if you know more and can do more than your boss, who are you supposed to learn from to do your job better and further your career?

 

[old faithful]

Well Volk, I agree with you on moving more ADF to the top end.
And also agree with your reasoning.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience here, personally, I love it, warts and all.
Politically, the NT really struggles to self govern, which does not help. I pointed out some reasons in an earlier post, mainly people coming up here to make their mark, tick off a position on their resume and leave asap for a promotion back down south, leaving a trail of half done jobs behind, with no real understanding of how it works here in the first place.
There is real potential for the NT to be THAT gate way to Asia.
As for postings here, it seems that once again the RAAF have got it right, they seem to love Tindal.

 

[ASSAIL]

On the topic of Exmouth, the proposed Gascoyne Gateway deep water jetty looks interesting for those that weren’t aware of its development.

https://gascoynegateway.com.au/design/

Clear reference to RAN/ABF as the primary users and significant marine diesel and aviation fuel capacity planned. Full capacity by 2025.

Exmouth Gulf is not an ideal place for a jetty.
There was/is ? a jetty servicing the comms station, useable when there’s no swell but quite unusable when a large swell enters the gulf which is often for half the year.
This makes any jetty exposed to the gulf totally unsuitable for patrol size vessels.
There is however a marina closer to the township, protected by extensive breakwaters which can be used. I have berthed a 3.6 mtr draft pearling vessel there.

 

[Volkodav]

Well Volk, I agree with you on moving more ADF to the top end.
And also agree with your reasoning.
I'm sorry you had a bad experience here, personally, I love it, warts and all.
Politically, the NT really struggles to self govern, which does not help. I pointed out some reasons in an earlier post, mainly people coming up here to make their mark, tick off a position on their resume and leave asap for a promotion back down south, leaving a trail of half done jobs behind, with no real understanding of how it works here in the first place.
There is real potential for the NT to be THAT gate way to Asia.
As for postings here, it seems that once again the RAAF have got it right, they seem to love Tindal.

One of the big problems is the small population means many employers have to take what they can get. There are some fantastic people there, some professionals and trades etc. are as good as you will find anywhere. Quite a few were born there, moved interstate for their early careers then came home for family reasons, others married locals, some went there for work and loved it.

They aren't the problem, the issue is the unsupervised, fake it till you make it "blow ins". Then there is a cohort of of old school bigots. I'm not talking about racists or sexist per say, rather low achievers going to Darwin, thinking they know it all and recasting everything they touch into their version of good, which it is not. When you're a techo with over two decades experience who provides advice to execs on major complex projects without fear or favour, it's a shock getting to Darwin, finding out your boss is a failed ex SNCO or ex mid-level officer, or a newly promoted serving one, with no idea but lots of opinions. You encounter them everywhere, but in Darwin there are no grownups to coach and mentor them.

Well, there are, it's you and a handful of people like you, but no one actually thought to give you the authority to make them listen. Actually, it's the opposite, you and the other knowledgeable and experienced people are made subordinate to them. You get told how to suck eggs, you get sidelined, then they bring in people they like, usually someone with a similar background to themselves, and make them your boss so they don't need to deal with you directly. I have seen it happen down south in two places, but both times they were similar to Darwin in that they were a small team, with an unaccountable incompetent manager, reporting to a boss in another state.

Thats why I am saying they need more capability in Darwin, they need more grownups, more experienced people who are doing more complex work to higher standards. This alone will filter out the dead wood, delusionals (who don't realise they are incompetent) and the fakers.

 

[diggumsbang]

Exmouth Gulf is not an ideal place for a jetty.
There was/is ? a jetty servicing the comms station, useable when there’s no swell but quite unusable when a large swell enters the gulf which is often for half the year.
This makes any jetty exposed to the gulf totally unsuitable for patrol size vessels.
There is however a marina closer to the township, protected by extensive breakwaters which can be used. I have berthed a 3.6 mtr draft pearling vessel there.

Yes there is a ‘navy pier’ on the north end of the peninsula, which might already be used for naval operations although not sure to what extent. This project, which appears to be about 15km further south of the marina (and 25km from the pier) might be a bit more protected than the pier.

Just seems like it’s clearly identified the RAN as a primary user (states submarines too) and commercial cruise ships as well so maybe it’s location or construction does make it more suitable than the existing pier which may bring new opportunities. Presumably would have gone through State and Federal Government approvals or at least consultation for the Feds during design development so one would think that the discussion was had and it certainly looked at what it may mean for naval operations and how that would look like.

of interest nonetheless!

 

[Volkodav]

Maybe the DSR should dust off the old pre-WWI Henderson report. It looked at geography, population distribution, sea lanes, trade, rising regional powers etc. Basically, just swap PRC for China and it would all still mostly apply.

Instead of Battlecruisers/Armoured Cruisers, SSNs, instead of Cruisers, Destroyers, instead of Destroyers, GP frigates or corvettes.

 

[spoz]

Yes there is a ‘navy pier’ on the north end of the peninsula, which might already be used for naval operations although not sure to what extent. This project, which appears to be about 15km further south of the marina (and 25km from the pier) might be a bit more protected than the pier.

Just seems like it’s clearly identified the RAN as a primary user (states submarines too) and commercial cruise ships as well so maybe it’s location or construction does make it more suitable than the existing pier which may bring new opportunities. Presumably would have gone through State and Federal Government approvals or at least consultation for the Feds during design development so one would think that the discussion was had and it certainly looked at what it may mean for naval operations and how that would look like.

of interest nonetheless!

It was/is used to offload supplies, mostly fuel oil, for Harold E Holt. I’m with Assail, it’s an uncomfortable berth even for a frigate.

 

[devo99]

Maybe the DSR should dust off the old pre-WWI Henderson report. It looked at geography, population distribution, sea lanes, trade, rising regional powers etc. Basically, just swap PRC for China and it would all still mostly apply.

Instead of Battlecruisers/Armoured Cruisers, SSNs, instead of Cruisers, Destroyers, instead of Destroyers, GP frigates or corvettes.

It'd be funny to see them pull out the 1919 Jellicoe reports also.

 

[Pusser01]

It was/is used to offload supplies, mostly fuel oil, for Harold E Holt. I’m with Assail, it’s an uncomfortable berth even for a frigate.

I remember reading in Navy News that Sirius had conducted a fill up of the Harold E Holt tanks a few years ago. It would have been during her last couple of years in commission. Cheers.

 

[Going Boeing]

Exmouth Gulf is not an ideal place for a jetty.
There was/is ? a jetty servicing the comms station, useable when there’s no swell but quite unusable when a large swell enters the gulf which is often for half the year.
This makes any jetty exposed to the gulf totally unsuitable for patrol size vessels.
There is however a marina closer to the township, protected by extensive breakwaters which can be used. I have berthed a 3.6 mtr draft pearling vessel there.

The artist drawing of the proposed facility indicates that it will be a breakwater type structure except for the first section - item 7 in this screenshot from the site will be a pylon structure. Thus any vessels moored on the Southern side should be protected from swells entering the gulf.



@Going Boeing What is the source for this image and why haven't you provided it.

Ngatimozart.

You will have noted that in my text, I stated “item 7 in this screenshot from the site” - the site being the link in diggumsbang’s original post (#4,336) on this particular subject. GB

 

[diggumsbang]

The artist drawing of the proposed facility indicates that it will be a breakwater type structure except for the first section - item 7 in this screenshot from the site will be a pylon structure. Thus any vessels moored on the Southern side should be protected from swells entering the gulf.

View attachment 50430

Good observation. Which is why it makes it very interesting if they can make it work to RAN requirements. Takes out 2,600km return journey to and from HMAS Stirling to refuel and re-provision. In terms of dedicated port facilities it’s about a 1,500km gap between Geraldton and Port Hedland although there is Dampier/Onslow etc which is primarily used for mining/oil and gas. It could make it easier to justify any new ship class that may have shorter legs than the ANZAC class such as the Alfa 3000 if that’s where things land. Absent of infrastructure like this, I agree that the distance of tyranny would make such ships may be less likely.

Might be something to watch in DSR announcement…

 

[Volkodav]

Good observation. Which is why it makes it very interesting if they can make it work to RAN requirements. Takes out 2,600km return journey to and from HMAS Stirling to refuel and re-provision. In terms of dedicated port facilities it’s about a 1,500km gap between Geraldton and Port Hedland although there is Dampier/Onslow etc which is primarily used for mining/oil and gas. It could make it easier to justify any new ship class that may have shorter legs than the ANZAC class such as the Alfa 3000 if that’s where things land. Absent of infrastructure like this, I agree that the distance of tyranny would make such ships may be less likely.

Might be something to watch in DSR announcement…

The ranges are were the reduction in major surface combatant numbers really impacted.

It doesn't matter that your PBs, FACs, Corvettes, OPVs have short legs when you have a sufficient number of major combatants. Conversely, when range/endurance is the driver, short legs mean your majors have to back fill for the minors.

In sufficient numbers of destroyers and frigates has been an issue for decades. The reason eight patrol frigates were acquired (the ANZACs) to replace six ASW frigates, was to increase the number of large, long range combatants. The fact we then whittled down the number of DDGs and FFGs from nine to three completely stuffed this up.

 

[hauritz]

Range and endurance are crucial and this is one of the issues I have with any new corvette/frigate/OPV design that maybe adopted by the RAN. Adapting a short legged European design might be counterproductive. Really our circumstances are unique. We may have to base ships thousands of kilometres away from their operational area.

We might have to get a little more creative and start looking into coastal tankers and support vessels to get the best endurance we can out of these ships. Possibly even look at keeping these ships at sea for months and swap out entire crews.

 

[Volkodav]

Range and endurance are crucial and this is one of the issues I have with any new corvette/frigate/OPV design that maybe adopted by the RAN. Adapting a short legged European design might be counterproductive. Really our circumstances are unique. We may have to base ships thousands of kilometres away from their operational area.

We might have to get a little more creative and start looking into coastal tankers and support vessels to get the best endurance we can out of these ships. Possibly even look at keeping these ships at sea for months and swap out entire crews.

Conversely it could be argued that had a smaller, less capable, shorter ranged design been adopted instead of the MEKO 200 ANZ as the ANZAC frigate, then future governments would not have been able to justify reducing DDG and FFG numbers.

Three Burke's plus six modified (SPY-1F) Type 124 or similar, as well as eight smaller PFs would be much better than what we have.

It's because the ANZACs could be upgraded that government were able to do so instead of maintaining both high and mid levels.