Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Redlands18]

The term fool is lack of respect, the term rubbish is also offensive, you should be corrected by the moderators, receive a warning and delete your message, otherwise this site will show lack of justice and personality.

You will notice that @Volkodav has the blue Defence Pro tag against his name, that means he has proven to the @webmaster and the mods he knows what he is talking about, you have not. You continue to make claims without producing credible evidence, which is against the rules of this forum. There are members of this forum who are currently serving members of the RAN or ex members or are currently or have been involved in RAN projects, to sit in Spain and completely disregard their opinion and write rubbish posts would be foolish in the extreme.

 

[John Fedup]

No problem. Spy 7 , according to Lockheed Martin has range 3,3 times the Spy 1, which we know has 185 kms range, so Spy7 has 610 kms range. Have a look to the reason why australian navy wants 3 new Hobarts.

Aegis Combat System | Lockheed Martin
SPY-7 | Lockheed Martin

Who exactly wants SPY1 now with all the newer systems available? As per my previous post, SPY7 for naval use hasn’t been deployed by Spain, Canada, or Japan, the latter which will likely be first.

 

[swerve]

No problem. Spy 7 , according to Lockheed Martin has range 3,3 times the Spy 1, which we know has 185 kms range, so Spy7 has 610 kms range. Have a look to the reason why australian navy wants 3 new Hobarts.

Aegis Combat System | Lockheed Martin
SPY-7 | Lockheed Martin

SMART-L MM/N (in service on the Dutch De Zeven Provinciën class) has a range of 2000 km according to Thales. And which version of SPY-1 are you referring to? They don't all have the same range. SPY-1F has much shorter range than SPY-1D, for example. And where did you get 185 km from?

 

[WaveWalker]

Sorry but he is a fool.

This say a lot about your command suitability and attitude to others.
It’s also bullying.
If he is a kid, you’ve probably deterred him from wanting to be in an organisation that is apparently so backward and toxic.
If he is an adult, he’s one of the people paying your wage.
No wonder defence can’t attract enough people. My organisation would be pulling you offline for assessment, quite frankly.

I hope you appreciate you should be apologising to him, along with everyone who upvoted you, and reflect on your attitude to others.

@WaveWalker You have reported multiple Volkodav posts and this shows that you have personal enmity towards him and it appears that you are conducting a personal vendetta. You are NOT a Moderator and it is not your in your job description to do so. We don't care one iota about your organisation and what it does and doesn't do, especially WRT what people say and do because it doesn't have anything to do with us. On here you are just another poster; nothing more nothing less. Remember that.

You WILL cease this forthwith OR you will be permanently banned immediately. The choice is yours.

Ngatimozart

 

[el Cid]

This say a lot about your command suitability and attitude to others.
It’s also bullying.
If he is a kid, you’ve probably deterred him from wanting to be in an organisation that is apparently so backward and toxic.
If he is an adult, he’s one of the people paying your wage.
No wonder defence can’t attract enough people. My organisation would be pulling you offline for assessment, quite frankly.

I hope you appreciate you should be apologising to him, along with everyone who upvoted you, and reflected on your attitude to others.

Thank you very much. Very well said, i could say other things but dont waste our time in polemics.

 

[Volkodav]

Aside from details about particular capabilities, the number of ships that the review recommends Australia should have wouldn’t be classified. It would just be embarrassing that the Gov conducts the review then ignores it. That’s the only reason Recommended fleet numbers will be classified.

Every serious review is based on geography as well as perceived strategic threat.

The geography drives how many ships we need and the environmental conditions they need to operate in. The strategic threat dictates the defensive and offensive capability the ships require.

Australia needs a minimum number of ships to provide the required presence in our local waters, through our region and globally as required. They need a minimum level of endurance and seaworthiness to reach and operate where they are needed.

We have always had around 25 or 30 combatants. Ideally they would have been, depending era, battlecruisers, cruisers and sloops; heavy cruisers, light cruisers and sloops; DLGs, DDGs and DEs; CGs/DDGs, FFGs, light frigates/corvettes.

What we have had this century is FFGs, FFHs, and patrol boats.

Since the late 60s the lower end has been inadequate PBs, with no combat capability to mention, culminating in the basically useless Armidale and Cape class constabulary patrol boats. These craft are so pathetic they need to be supplemented by frigates during the monsoon because they are too fragile and unseaworthy to be operated during monsoonal weather conditions. That is their class rules, specifically prevent them from going to sea in certain conditions because they are too fragile by design.

These make up just over half of our combatant numbers and they are incapable of actually doing the job they were acquired to do throughout the year. As such, they need to be supplemented by major surface combatants.

This is why we ordered the arafuras. Ships that were large enough and seaworthy enough to do the limited constabulary job the PBs were never good enough for. But because they are bigger, more durable and more seaworthy there is pressure to turn them into pocket battleships.

Yep, we finally get a constabulary vessel that is large enough, durable enough and seaworthy enough to do the bare minimum, close to zero threat level job required, and it gets recast as a replacement for the ANZACs and Hunters.

 

[el Cid]

SMART-L MM/N (in service on the Dutch De Zeven Provinciën class) has a range of 2000 km according to Thales. And which version of SPY-1 are you referring to? They don't all have the same range. SPY-1F has much shorter range than SPY-1D, for example. And where did you get 185 km from?

I am referring to the Spy 1d used in F100, the figure 185 kms comes from a newspaper in Spain, when presenting the F110, they say that, but i dont trust it, it can referred to an specification, in reality is 500 kms at big height, wiki, so Spy 7 1500 kms. LockheedMartin says the Spy 7 is the most powerful radar in the world.

 

[Volkodav]

This say a lot about your command suitability and attitude to others.
It’s also bullying.
If he is a kid, you’ve probably deterred him from wanting to be in an organisation that is apparently so backward and toxic.
If he is an adult, he’s one of the people paying your wage.
No wonder defence can’t attract enough people. My organisation would be pulling you offline for assessment, quite frankly.

I hope you appreciate you should be apologising to him, along with everyone who upvoted you, and reflect on your attitude to others.

You are being condescending and elitist, what you are exhibiting is DARVO, one of the worst, and most narsacistic forms of bullying. I truely feel sorry for anyone who has to work with, let alone for you.

Fortunately I can choose to ignore you, your colleagues and subordinates can't. If you keep on the way you are going the mods will give you an official warning, if you percist after that they will likely ban you.

What you have said to me and about me is offensive, insulting, condescending, judgemental, immature and totally out of line as it has no bearing on reality, fact or what has passed on these pages. You may get away with it in your personal and professional life but such behaviour is not tolerated here.

I expect if you have not already been contacted my a mod you will be in short order. Your behaviour and attitude already has already been discussed, insulting other members will simply ensure it is escalated.

 

[Tasman]

Every serious review is based on geography as well as perceived strategic threat.

The geography drives how many ships we need and the environmental conditions they need to operate in. The strategic threat dictates the defensive and offensive capability the ships require.

Australia needs a minimum number of ships to provide the required presence in our local waters, through our region and globally as required. They need a minimum level of endurance and seaworthiness to reach and operate where they are needed.

We have always had around 25 or 30 combatants. Ideally they would have been, depending era, battlecruisers, cruisers and sloops; heavy cruisers, light cruisers and sloops; DLGs, DDGs and DEs; CGs/DDGs, FFGs, light frigates/corvettes.

What we have had this century is FFGs, FFHs, and patrol boats.

Since the late 60s the lower end has been inadequate PBs, with no combat capability to mention, culminating in the basically useless Armidale and Cape class constabulary patrol boats. These craft are so pathetic they need to be supplemented by frigates during the monsoon because they are too fragile and unseaworthy to be operated during monsoonal weather conditions. That is their class rules, specifically prevent them from going to sea in certain conditions because they are too fragile by design.

These make up just over half of our combatant numbers and they are incapable of actually doing the job they were acquired to do throughout the year. As such, they need to be supplemented by major surface combatants.

This is why we ordered the arafuras. Ships that were large enough and see worthy enough to do the limited constabulary job the PBs were never good enough for. But because they are bigger, more durable and more seaworthy there is pressure to turn them into pocket battleships.

Yep, we finally get a constabulary vessel that is large enough, durable enough and seaworthy enough to do the bare minimum, close to zero threat level job required, and it gets recast as a replacement for the ANZACs and Hunters.

Thinking of the Arafuras, do any of our serving RAN members (or anyone else for that matter) have non classified info as to when the first ship will begin sea trials, if it has not already done so? It seems like ages since it was fitted out but I have heard nothing since apart from the fact that there were issues.

The Arafura class certainly offers a huge increase in capability over the Armidales and Capes, including crew comfort, seakeeping and the ability to operate an unmanned helicopter, but whilst I do not advocate for them to be turned into frigate or corvette substitutes, the armament, whilst it waits for selection of a main gun to replace the abandoned 40mm, is the same as that of the the Armidales. It seems to me that some of the areas where the class is likely to patrol in future, are increasingly likely to be 'visited' by vessels with a much better armament than a 25mm and a couple of 0.5" Brownings. Is anyone aware of progress re selection of a new gun or is this item in limbo pending the outcome of the government's reaction to the surface fleet review?

And now we have the cancellation of the S-100 Camcopter. Hopefully the navy will expedite a replacement as the extra capability provided by the S-100 is one of the main improvements over that offered by the Capes and Armidales. Unfortunately, offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition. Consequently it seems as though the RAN may be starting from scratch re a replacement!

Tas

 

[Stampede]

I went back through to check a few things to confirm my understanding of what has been offered or suggested. So far, per reporting by the Australian, SMH and a few other sources, Australia has not asked Navantia for any more/new vessels. What was reported as having happened, is that Navantia made an unsolicited offer to build more warships for Australia, claiming that such builds could be done with varying costs and delivery timeframes depending on what was being built as well as where.

To date, there is nothing I am aware of which would indicate any part of a formal acquisition process is ongoing in response to the unsolicited offer since no formal RFI's were issued, or RFT's, all of which would need to happen before any contracts could be signed.

More importantly, I would also expect Australia to stand up some sort of programme office and issue such an acquisition programme with a Project number. With no programme officer having been stood up, it does not yet appear that Australia is looking at adding three additional destroyers. Once the Naval review is completed and gone through by gov't, that could change.

It also worth noting that other international shipbuilding outfits aside from just Navantia have also started making unsolicited offers, since there is anticipation that the RAN needs more vessels/designs.

Thinking of the Arafuras, do any of our serving RAN members (or anyone else for that matter) have non classified info as to when the first ship will begin sea trials, if it has not already done so? It seems like ages since it was fitted out but I have heard nothing since apart from the fact that there were issues.

The Arafura class certainly offers a huge increase in capability over the Armidales and Capes, including crew comfort, seakeeping and the ability to operate an unmanned helicopter, but whilst I do not advocate for them to be turned into frigate or corvette substitutes, the armament, whilst it waits for selection of a main gun to replace the abandoned 40mm, is the same as that of the the Armidales. It seems to me that some of the areas where the class is likely to patrol in future, are increasingly likely to be 'visited' by vessels with a much better armament than a 25mm and a couple of 0.5" Brownings. Is anyone aware of progress re selection of a new gun or is this item in limbo pending the outcome of the government's reaction to the surface fleet review?

And now we have the cancellation of the S-100 Camcopter. Hopefully the navy will expedite a replacement as the extra capability provided by the S-100 is one of the main improvements over that offered by the Capes and Armidales. Unfortunately, offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition. Consequently it seems as though the RAN may be starting from scratch re a replacement!

Tas

Yes an update would be appreciated.

Regardless of the review, there are at least six OPVs in various states if construction. I make the assumption they will get to serve the Commonwealth in whatever capacity is seen fit.
So is construction still continuing at a normal pace?
Any update on NUSHIP Arafuras trials.

Thanks S

 

[spoz]

I believe that is not information which has been released publicly.

 

[Stampede]

I believe that is not information which has been released publicly.

I take it, this relates to the Arafura Class?
Or another subject!


Regards S

 

[Volkodav]

The term fool is lack of respect, the term rubbish is also offensive, you should be corrected by the moderators, receive a warning and delete your message, otherwise this site will show lack of justice and personality.

Do you prefer opinionated clown?

Yes it is true, I do not respect you. It has to do with how you have been incessantly lecturing everyone here, not discussing, lecturing.

Respect is a two way street, it is shown to all who join this site, until that is, they disrespect others.

Take a long hard look at your attitude and behaviour before you lecture others. Most on this site are capable of assertively disagreeing without getting condescending, preachy or personal, it's called being an adult.

 

[el Cid]

A good video showing inside the Hobart destroyer, worth to watch.

(2) HMAS Hobart - YouTube

 

[swerve]

...
And now we have the cancellation of the S-100 Camcopter. Hopefully the navy will expedite a replacement as the extra capability provided by the S-100 is one of the main improvements over that offered by the Capes and Armidales. Unfortunately, offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition. Consequently it seems as though the RAN may be starting from scratch re a replacement!

Tas

Interesting. The S-100 is quite popular. Can you point me to anything saying why it was cancelled?

Well, there are plenty of competitors.

 

[OldTex]

Interesting. The S-100 is quite popular. Can you point me to anything saying why it was cancelled?

Well, there are plenty of competitors.

I suspect that the acquisition of the S-100s was cancelled because of how the sole source decision was made. Your own comments, "offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition", would support my suspicion. Also take into account that the sole source decision was made just prior to the previous government entering the election caretaker period and there is a suggestion of 'undue haste' involved. This detail is reported by Naval News. I have no concrete evidence just my gut feel. More than happy to be corrected by those with more information.

 

[swerve]

That makes sense.

But -

... Your own comments, "offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition", ...

Not my comments. That's from the original post, by Tasman.

 

[Volkodav]

Interesting. The S-100 is quite popular. Can you point me to anything saying why it was cancelled?

Well, there are plenty of competitors.

There has been some suggestion it has to do with who the other major users are.

Out of my area of expertise, I did ask at work but no one had a clue, apparently I'm the one they rely to stay abreast of developments outside our project.

 

[OldTex]

That makes sense.

But -

Not my comments. That's from the original post, by Tasman.

I stand corrected as to the original quote, which I notice bears remarkable similarity to the wording in the Naval News article I just added to my post.
In the end it seems there are several activities underway that are diminishing the value of the Arafura OPVs to the RAN.

 

[Volkodav]

Thinking of the Arafuras, do any of our serving RAN members (or anyone else for that matter) have non classified info as to when the first ship will begin sea trials, if it has not already done so? It seems like ages since it was fitted out but I have heard nothing since apart from the fact that there were issues.

The Arafura class certainly offers a huge increase in capability over the Armidales and Capes, including crew comfort, seakeeping and the ability to operate an unmanned helicopter, but whilst I do not advocate for them to be turned into frigate or corvette substitutes, the armament, whilst it waits for selection of a main gun to replace the abandoned 40mm, is the same as that of the the Armidales. It seems to me that some of the areas where the class is likely to patrol in future, are increasingly likely to be 'visited' by vessels with a much better armament than a 25mm and a couple of 0.5" Brownings. Is anyone aware of progress re selection of a new gun or is this item in limbo pending the outcome of the government's reaction to the surface fleet review?

And now we have the cancellation of the S-100 Camcopter. Hopefully the navy will expedite a replacement as the extra capability provided by the S-100 is one of the main improvements over that offered by the Capes and Armidales. Unfortunately, offerings from Textron Systems, Insitu Pacific, BAE Systems and Leonardo, that were originally shortlisted, were not pursued after the S-100 was chosen under a sole source acquisition. Consequently it seems as though the RAN may be starting from scratch re a replacement!

Tas

I believe the Arafuras have a long and useful life ahead of them, whether they are corvettised or not.

Unlike the Armidales and Capes, many of their systems are common to major fleet units, making them ideal school houses for new operators and maintainers. That is of course assuming they can find enough old and bold members to serve as school masters.

They will be infinitely better at the constabulary role and able to adapt to various other duties. It would be interesting, for instance, to see if they could be adapted to a littoral support role. Nemo 120mm mortar turret anyone