iambuzzard
Active Member
Volks, he makes idiots look like brain surgeons.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
iambuzzard
Active Member
I think not!!!!Volk.
What are you saying about Greg S
Not a fan?
Regards S.
Birdon craft info
LCM 50-55m x 10.5m, 1.4m draft
LCH 79m, 1.9m draft
Interestingly Japan have just built a Heavy craft and plan to build many fast craft for themselves and export.
Utility Landing Craft - 80m, 3m draft, 15knts, 2,400 tons, crew 30. Payload ‘several hundred tons’.
Japan launches first LCU for the SDF Maritime Transport Group - Naval News
Japanese shipbuilder Naikai Zosen launched the first landing craft utility (LCU) on order for the Japan Ground Self-Defense Force (JGSDF).
www.navalnews.com
Fast Landing Craft - 30m x 8m, 20 knots loaded, 30 without. Payload single tank or 2 heavy veichles.
Japan Marine United Lifts Veil on New Fast Landing Craft - Naval News
JMU unveiled the "Caimen-Japan Fast Landing Craft," jointly developed by the UK-based ship design company BMT.
www.navalnews.com
BMT LCH probably the favourite.
The largest design can carry 1,000ton.
BMT's CAIMEN-Large ready to meet Australia's Landing Craft-Heavy requirements
BMT offers a rich portfolio of design services for specialised vessels, this capability is particularly relevant given the focus of the Australian Defence Strategic Review on enhancing the Army's amphibious capabilities in littoral environments.
www.bmt.org
BMT Partners with DNV to Accelerate Australian Landing Craft Design
BMT’s Mature CAIMEN® Large Design: A Key Player in the Expanding CAIMEN® Landing Craft Family for Australia’s LC-H Needs.
www.bmt.org
Sea Transport and Birdon are currently building or going to build large landing craft for the USMC.
The other design was from Serco.
Last edited:
This is exactly why having Australia as a second source or yard would add so much capability. I don't think it will impact our submarines because everything immediate is coming from the US, I also think the UK moved out the last of their subs out of the build hall?
Anzacs are now pretty much on a life support program, they are old, hard worked ships, heavily upgraded, with no spare growth margins in anything. We should do everything not to break them before we can get replacements.
Collins is actually a bit easier, even though its a sub. A mk48 torpedo is a 5.8m 530mm 1.8t lump. A TLAM is a 6.25, 520mm (unencapsulated) 1.6T lump. So TLAM is actually lighter than the torpedo's Collins currently fires. A console could be made multirole, and the combat system is already integrated because of Virginias. Collins has 6 "launch tubes" and a theoretical 22 munitions (peace time load is more like 6 filling it with 22 is likely to make for unhappy sailors as it removes bunks, gym space, reduced agility, and greater risk in weapons handling such are subs). Also Collins is far, far more survivable than a Anzac. There is probably an argument Collins could get so close as to fire a Harpoon which it can already.
One Collins could have greater strike power than two Hobart's. While the Hobart's can carry more missiles, they aren't as survivable in close and obvious launch platforms that will be watched the whole way from FBE, and also have to carry and focus on air defence for their job, If you could load 8 TLAM in a realistic fire-able way, I would be surprised.
Collins would never make a good TLAM launch platform, it doesn't have good situation awareness, coms are an issue, it can only fire six at a time max, but that isn't the point. Its deterrence. It could sit anywhere, and the enemy would have to be extremely vigilant to track and find something, and it could launch a decent volley at say a stationary target from an unexpected direction. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if it gets re-assessed when we do get SSN to do the other tasks. Collins would be great as a stationary hidden missile platform, there is huge value in that. Sit off a strait, on the Indian ocean side, ready to roll. Possibly the biggest issue is the TLAM Composite Capsule Launching System encapsulated modules, no one wants to part with them!$ 26m in 2015 for 100. At that price, we should acquire some, so if at a later time we want to do the weapons handling required to do it, we could. Or at least the enemy couldn't rule it completely out.
When the hospital is already full, we have Hobart's going under the knife, two new frigate programs, ship maintenance and amphibious stuff. There isn't the man power to even run a project like that right now, let alone the space or time or money. NSM is great, its not as long ranged, but its way more suitable for the Anzac platform. We might as will dig up the F111's, turn those to boats, and fit TLAM onto those, it could come out of the RAAF budget and manpower.
Greg doesn't sell papers unless there is drama in what he is writing.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
UK Defence Journal has provided an update - the damage was contained to one section but no indication of the ongoing production difficulties.Not a good sign, BAE in Barrow was on fire this morning. Not sure how this will impact the UKs submarine programme and any knock-on effects to SSN-AUKUS. Hopefully the impact will be minimal.
Nuclear submarine shipyard fire at Barrow-in-Furness leaves two in hospital
Residents told to stay indoors but police say there is no nuclear risk from blaze at BAE Systems complexwww.theguardian.com
BAE Systems issues update following submarine yard fire
Any indication of range and loiter time?Glad navy are doing something in this space.
Quick search turned up this info from Flightwave.
Edge 130 Blue – FlightWave Aerospace Systems
Introducing the Edge 130 Blue - the ultimate military-grade tricopter for your long-range mapping, inspection, surveillance, and reconnaissance needs. With ... Read Morewww.flightwave.aero
Looks the same.
As spoz mentions, it looks like a toy in comparison to Schiebels offering.
That said, I assume its low cost and has a place across the fleet.
If it proves its worth I'd imagine it's cheap enough to buy in significant numbers to employ on every vessel from a Cape to a LHD.
Still see a place for a S-100 sized platform in conjunction with the above and also manned helicopters.
Cheers S
It shits me to tears that "defence journalists" obviously don't even check Wikipedia before writing their articles.
Sheridan isn't the only offender but his BS really gets under my skin. The ANZACs were patrol frigates that were never designed for high end ASW, let alone air defence and now the clown club is claiming they can be upgraded for land attack!
If they were still in service the larger more capable FFGs would not have been suitable.
Sheridan isn't the only offender but his BS really gets under my skin. The ANZACs were patrol frigates that were never designed for high end ASW, let alone air defence and now the clown club is claiming they can be upgraded for land attack!
If they were still in service the larger more capable FFGs would not have been suitable.
Kym is still struggling with the loss of the lurresen OPV as air defence/landstrike ships. But that would again, take money, time and resources where much, much more effective things could be procured in less time.
I get it, new things, a new project is hard and risky. The idea of modifying an existing seems less ambitious and less risky and maybe cheaper. But it isn't. It will take more money, more resources, more risk, more people, more people, than other options. Plenty of ships have gone into a shipyard for one last modification and never returned to service. Or come out completely compromised an not really meeting any useful purpose.
800+ VLS is plenty of useful VLS. The hard part is making sure everyone commits to what is now planned and in useful timeframes.
$7 Billion in SM-2/SM-6 now sounds very reasonable.
Incorporating new capability into old platforms that were never designed for anything like it is more complex than designing a new platform.
But the armchair newpaper guy loves it, because then we don't need fancy new complex things, just put this LS3 and 40 ft trailer in/onto your VK commodore and it will be better than a 30t truck, and faster than a ferrari.
The Anzacs aren't even newish ships at this point, we have already started decommissioning.
Plus being an existing platform you have to take it out of service to do ANYTHING! At least with a new platform, the existing platform can serve its time. I would think the last thing we need now is to start pulling out more ships for a multi year high risk, upgrade on platforms that have been at their development limit, 2 upgrades ago!
d-ron84
Member
The loss of appetite for encapsulated TLAM is because the production line is done and has been for awhile.
The cost to restart production for such a small amount of encapsulated Tomahawk is astronomical and better used elsewhere.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
I understand that adding Tomahawk capability to the Collins class as part of the LOTE will not proceed but I’d like to know if it was because of the lack of launch capsules or another techical reason.
As all of the Block 1 Los Angeles class have been retired, it’s quite possible that the USN have a supply of Tomahawk capsules in storage and, if so, would probably be available as the Block 2 & 3 Los Angeles subs have vertical launch tubes for Tomahawk deployment.
The reason released for not integrating tomahawk into a CCSM was due to risk of delays in the LOTE program. A lot of changes are happening during the LOTE And was deemed to high risk.
The attached article indicates that several were transferred to Ukraine, cheers. Australian JDAM-ERs sent to Ukraine - Australian Defence Magazine
It would be interesting to know how many Tomahawks the British purchased back in the 2000's noting they've recently upgraded them to Block V. has there been any top-up purchases since the initial buy? Cheers.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
What is the state of Royal Navy land-attack missile capability? | Navy Lookout
www.navylookout.com
This lists an initial order of 65 units followed up by several top up orders of similar size.
So that would suggest the UK keeps a relatively small number on hand. But that makes sense considering that until their new frigates enter service their only launch platforms were SSN’s.
Is there any difference between torpedo tube launched tomahawks and submarine VLS launched?