Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Meriv90]

Connecting for a bit to the Sunday discussion on defense armament on the GP I would like to remind you that if you want a cheap solution the Tamir missile is out there.

Surely Zucchini can give us more info. Pardon if I got the username wrong.

It won't have amazing performance but if I remember correctly it should be just 50k$ per missile.

 

[Going Boeing]

ABC News 24 is reporting that the Hunter Frigate project officially moves into the production phase today - a very welcome milestone.

Also, from what this article is saying, I don’t understand why the Federal Government hasn’t rushed in to assist DefendTex in acquiring Avibras as quickly as possible because we’re at risk of allowing high technology missile manufacturing to be transferred to China instead of to Australia.

 

[SammyC]

The same reason theres no Major base north of Brisbane is why no Amphibs will be based up there, Cyclones.

Apparently some chick named Tracey was not fun for the Navy in the 70s so they will never base a Major unit in the pathway due to the need to crash sail. I'll be interested to learn if OPV can crash sail during Cyclone season.

Nothing better then a 2am phone call "Cyclone inbound, we sailing now get your arse on the boat!" Heres hoping you have a partner thats reliable or your house is ratchet strapped to something big

https://www.defence.gov.au/news-events/news/2024-04-19/preparing-army-deny-adversaries

I agree with majors not being in the tropical bases, and had forgotten about Tracy.

I had however assumed the basing for the medium and heavy landing craft on the information in the link, which is near word for word out of the IIR.

Of note it refers to Darwin, north QLD and SE QLD, which would suggest Brisbane and Townsville rather than Cairns (which is typically referred to in far north QLD). Makes sense to be co-located with the relevant army units, however I didn't think there was much dedicated Naval Infrastructure in Brisbane or Townsville, and there has not been much on the news about upgraded facilities in either.

The link does say there is between $5-7B in addition to the landing craft vessels for supporting infrastructure, coming online between 2026 and 2037. Perhaps this includes some dedicated wharfage in Brisbane and Townsville.

 

[Reptilia]

ABC News 24 is reporting that the Hunter Frigate project officially moves into the production phase today - a very welcome milestone.

Also, from what this article is saying, I don’t understand why the Federal Government hasn’t rushed in to assist DefendTex in acquiring Avibras as quickly as possible because we’re at risk of allowing high technology missile manufacturing to be transferred to China instead of to Australia.

Not sure why the government would want to put in $70 million for a piece of Avibras.
Kongsberg/Raytheon/Lockheed Martin and maybe Hanwha is where any investment will go.
Hopefully Defendtex can find the funds elsewhere.

 

[devo99]

Don't think this has been mentioned here yet but the Hanwha acquisition offer for Austal is dead and buried.

South Korean Shipbuilder Hanwha Makes $100M Bid to Buy Philly Shipyard, SECNAV Del Toro Praises Deal - USNI News

An American shipyard that builds domestic cargo vessels and training ships for U.S. maritime colleges has agreed to a deal, in which it would be bought by a major South Korean shipbuilder. Pending regulatory approvals, Philly Shipyard is set to be acquired by Hanwha Systems and Hanwha Ocean for...

news.usni.org

Previous to the current deal, Hanwha had made an offer to buy the Australian-owned Austal USA yard in Mobile, Ala., for $662 million. That deal was scuttled, in part, due to national security concerns over Korean ownership of the yard that is becoming more involved in U.S. submarine construction. “Austal is a national asset and thus can only be sold to companies within the AUKUS alliance countries,” a Hanwha spokesperson told newswire Reuters in April.

 

[CJR]

Not sure why the government would want to put in $70 million for a piece of Avibras.
Kongsberg/Raytheon/Lockheed Martin and maybe Hanwha is where any investment will go.
Hopefully Defendtex can find the funds elsewhere.

I mean if Australia was interested in a serious fully home-grown missile program it might make sense, but given we're already enmeshed in US supply chains and similar it's understandable the government would put priority towards license production of ESSM; NSM etc..

There's the question of how effectively DefendTex could actually leverage Avibras... DefendTex, per google currently looks to employ 50-100ish people. Scaling up to effectively use Avibras's knowledge base is non-trivial, likely with a fair degree of risk.

Then there's the question of politics. Would Brazil allow DefendTex to transfer some of capabilities acquired by the purchase to Australia or would it all be restricted to production and development only in Brazil.

On top of that when you look at Avibras's actual portfolio (wiki, official website), well, ASTROS series MLRS; an Exocet clone; guided 70mm rockets; production of parts for the A-Darter AAM and an in development 300km range cruise missile. Most of those niches are already filled in the Australian context.

 

[SammyC]

ABC News 24 is reporting that the Hunter Frigate project officially moves into the production phase today - a very welcome milestone.

Also, from what this article is saying, I don’t understand why the Federal Government hasn’t rushed in to assist DefendTex in acquiring Avibras as quickly as possible because we’re at risk of allowing high technology missile manufacturing to be transferred to China instead of to Australia.

Nice to hear on the Hunters. The news article said there would be some ceremonies to mark this today.

I haven't heard anything on the construction contract for the first three units, which on last information was in "robust" negotiations.

I would have thought a move into the construction phase would require this contract to be finalised, so maybe there will be an announcement on this as part of the above ceremony. Look forward to listening.

 

[ASSAIL]

Smaller crews and in some cases no crew will create their own challenges. I am imagining maintenance will be a problem.

We might need in to bring back the idea of an escort maintenance ship. Does anyone remember HMAS Stalwart?

Nicknamed Building 215 because it never went anywhere but maybe it’s time will come.

It may have not gone far or often but the embarked FMU enabled the rest of the fleet to deploy far and often by circumventing the many GI roadblocks!

 

[Reptilia]

NSM assembly in Australia this year.

 

[AndyinOz]

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au...-navys-undersea-warfare-and-strike-capability

According to the press release 'The contract for the construction phase for the first three Hunter Class Frigates has now been signed by Defence and BAE Systems Australia, with the first Hunter Class Frigate expected to be operational in 2034.'

So I guess that is what we might call 'Batch 1'.

 

[Stampede]

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au...-navys-undersea-warfare-and-strike-capability

According to the press release 'The contract for the construction phase for the first three Hunter Class Frigates has now been signed by Defence and BAE Systems Australia, with the first Hunter Class Frigate expected to be operational in 2034.'

So I guess that is what we might call 'Batch 1'.

Operational 2034

One ship ten year’s away.

Maybe the GPF project is a good move
I’m not sure how many ANZACs will be in service in ten years or how capable they will be for the threats of the 2030’s

cheers S

 

[Todjaeger]

Operational 2034

One ship ten year’s away.

Maybe the GPF project is a good move
I’m not sure how many ANZACs will be in service in ten years or how capable they will be for the threats of the 2030’s

cheers S

Maybe, but I rather doubt it. The RAN, Defence and gov't already have two vessel build programmes for the RAN currently running with orders placed and fabrication in progress and these programmes have been going for at least several years, yet vessels have not been accepted into service yet.

If there actually is a third class in a yet another new build programme, that would further strain the resources needed to oversee and manage such an acquisition. Also, if the first three vessels are to be built in an overseas yard, and without modification or Australianization, then the need for programme oversight would likely become even more important. Otherwise Australia might receive completed vessels which are unable (by law or maritime regulation) to serve in the RAN or something else similarly problematic.

Trying to start a programme from essentially scratch and then get a product delivered and in service ahead of a major programme which has been running for years just sounds like a recipe for problems.

 

[Reptilia]

With the Hunter class… Officially started construction although 3(prototypes) of the 22 blocks have already been completed.
I think it will be in service slightly earlier than 2034 with lessons learnt from the u.k type 26 build.

I’m not worried about an overseas build of 3 GPFs, it’s the first one built in Australia that could be a problem. Hopefully if time slips they would allow a 4th to be built overseas.

 

[Massive]

Once concern I have about the GPF is that by going for the suggested designs will they have the space and generation capacity for directed energy weapons.

None of the short list appear to have the capability today.

Thoughts as to whether this is an issue or not?

Regards,

Massive

 

[SammyC]

https://www.minister.defence.gov.au...-navys-undersea-warfare-and-strike-capability

According to the press release 'The contract for the construction phase for the first three Hunter Class Frigates has now been signed by Defence and BAE Systems Australia, with the first Hunter Class Frigate expected to be operational in 2034.'

So I guess that is what we might call 'Batch 1'.

20 years for six ships. First one in the fleet in 2034, last one in 2044, 18 month cadence. I will be retired and on an island somewhere by the time this has completed.

In the same time, we will make 11 GPFs, 6 LOCSVs, 18 LCMs, 8 LCHs and however many new patrol boats.

I'm glad it's kicked off and I believe it will be a great ship. It just feels a bit glacial. Good thing there are some other programs running in parallel.

 

[Redlands18]

20 years for six ships. First one in the fleet in 2034, last one in 2044, 18 month cadence. I will be retired and on an island somewhere by the time this has completed.

In the same time, we will make 11 GPFs, 6 LOCSVs, 18 LCMs, 8 LCHs and however many new patrol boats.

I'm glad it's kicked off and I believe it will be a great ship. It just feels a bit glacial. Good thing there are some other programs running in parallel.

Personally, I don't count the LOCSVs at this stage, first vessel won't be started before 2034 and as we have seen over the last 4-5 decades, 10 years is a very, very long time in RAN procurement and we are talking about a capability that does not have a single vessel laid down anywhere in the world. It's a bit like if the RAN had decided in 1950 they were going to acquire Guided Missile Destroyers in 1960.

 

[Reptilia]

20 years for six ships. First one in the fleet in 2034, last one in 2044, 18 month cadence. I will be retired and on an island somewhere by the time this has completed.

In the same time, we will make 11 GPFs, 6 LOCSVs, 18 LCMs, 8 LCHs and however many new patrol boats.

I'm glad it's kicked off and I believe it will be a great ship. It just feels a bit glacial. Good thing there are some other programs running in parallel.

Might only have 8 GPFs in 2044.
1 every 2 years, we could be looking at 2050 for all 11 in service.

Selection 2025
Offshore build begins 2026
29/31/33 delivery
Onshore build begins 2029 - (first will be slower than parent company.)
35/37/39/41/43/45/47/49 delivery

 

[StevoJH]

Compared to the ANZAC Class that commissioned with an average cadence of one ship every 12 months for 10 ships (including the RNZN).

Even with the Hunters included, that isn't anywhere near quick enough.

HMAS Perth will be 30 years in commission by 2036, at that time the RAN will likely have 3x Hobart, 2x Hunter & 4x GP Frigate for a fleet size of only 9 major units.

And that is assuming that nothing happens in the meantime that causes a sudden reduction in the number of ships in commission.

 

[SammyC]

Might only have 8 GPFs in 2044.
1 every 2 years, we could be looking at 2050 for all 11 in service.

Selection 2025
Offshore build begins 2026
29/31/33 delivery
Onshore build begins 2029 - (first will be slower than parent company.)
35/37/39/41/43/45/47/49 delivery

I was working on an 18 month cadence for the GPFs, with the first Aust built ship commissioning 2035 (so a year after the first Hunter).

On that basis you get Jan 35, Jul 36, Jan 38, Jul 39, Jan 41, Jul 42, Jan 44, Jul 45.

Even that is slow in comparison to how fast the Korean and Japanese yards can build them. And as Stevo above says, slower than the ANZAC build.

It means we would have either a Hunter (on an 18 month cadence as well) or GPF coming online every nine months from 2034, which I think is about as fast as the Navy could absorb them.

It will be interesting to see where the remaining 6 ANZAC decommissioning dates align. Will they be one for one from 2029 with the first GPFs and then Hunters, or will they be later from say 2034.

 

[Stampede]

Maybe, but I rather doubt it. The RAN, Defence and gov't already have two vessel build programmes for the RAN currently running with orders placed and fabrication in progress and these programmes have been going for at least several years, yet vessels have not been accepted into service yet.

If there actually is a third class in a yet another new build programme, that would further strain the resources needed to oversee and manage such an acquisition. Also, if the first three vessels are to be built in an overseas yard, and without modification or Australianization, then the need for programme oversight would likely become even more important. Otherwise Australia might receive completed vessels which are unable (by law or maritime regulation) to serve in the RAN or something else similarly problematic.

Trying to start a programme from essentially scratch and then get a product delivered and in service ahead of a major programme which has been running for years just sounds like a recipe for problems.

I hear your concerns
I wish we could turn back the clock
We can’t , therefore the RAN finds itself in a reluctantly challenged position.
Options appear limited
My preference would of been fast tracking the Hunters and some limited enhancement for the 12 OPVs
Neither were judged feasible or worthy
With no second hand destroyer shop to buy from what else could we do to provide maritime capability.
The GPF has merit , but it is ambitious and not without risk for delivery to service, compatibility of systems across the fleet and relevance of lethality going forward.

A project we can only hope delivers on many levels



Cheers S