Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[John Fedup]

I don’t mean this meanly but, as an outsider looking in, and noting the reported uniformed strength of the RAN and its trend over recent years, do we have any choice?

Like other western navies wrt manpower issues, not really. Big ships with designed in survival features are expensive but worse still need big crews, a very expensive requirement for 30-40 years. Small highly automated ships, less expensive but crew fatigue means not as effective and probably vulnerable if struck. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. No wonder SSKs with crews of 35-70 are looking better everyday.

 

[K.I.]

Wouldn’t surprise me. The west has never built a complex warship, and at presently has no facility capable of doing so - they are struggling with basic as bat sh*t Arafuras (ASC didn’t struggle to build them; that was not the issue). I would think we would be at least 10 years away from delivery of the first west built frigate, even if the order was placed tomorrow. If you truly want to start plugging a potential capability gap that is probably quite a bit too long

Probably a big issue not being acknowledged, they won't know if they've improved the build process until the LCs start rolling out. Potential derisking with the GP project may be first three full overseas build and the next three will have the combat/local systems fitted at Henderson?

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

The issue with MEKO is that the A200 doesn’t exist at present in a configuration that would be acceptable to the RAN, and I doubt it would offer much in the way of growth margins.

As for the A210, I don’t think it even exists?

I agree that the current A200 designs are too small for Australia's needs. You're also right that the A210 is a theoretical design. A nice model has been produced for defence events, but none have been ordered let alone built. I know that Germany is marketing them as part of a "proven" class of ships, but this is a new ship so would carry some risk for Australia.

Whilst the A210 design looks a bit more modern compared to the current A200 ships, the VLS cell positioning looks really odd to me. I don't understand why they have to be housed above the deck other than it looks like they copied the hull of the French FDI.

The A210 just looks clunky, as if the Germans realised current MEKO wouldn't cut the mustard and tried to whip something up in a rush. Whereas the Mogami variants look like they were designed from the ground up to be a modern frigate.

 

[SammyC]

I re-read the article and the writer does seem to be referring to the GPF having the first 6 built overseas.

It actually does make sense to do it that way. The first 6 ships are urgent. The entire ANZAC fleet will need to be replaced ASAP. Building the first 6 ships overseas would buy more time to prepare for Australian construction. In the case of Japan winning the contract it will be a huge learning curve for them and Australia to set up ship production in Australia. Just for starters there are so many language and cultural issues to deal with.

If the Germans win it opens the possibility that the first 6 ships will be German built A-200s and the Australian builds could be the A-210.

Doing more reading between the lines it seems that the navy might be the ones making the final call. That being the case I wouldn't write the Germans off as a mere stalking horse,

Everything is speculation at the moment.

At a high level, the government has been sticking to its plan pretty well. With the exception of the satellite cancellation, every recent announcement or procurement has been in line with the National Defence Strategy and Integrated Investment Program.

As such I can't see them varying from the plan set for the GPFs. This was for one class, three built overseas and the remainder in Henderson. So I would be suprised if they suddenly elected to split it and go for two classes. Or build six overseas. Both are major changes to the plan.

For note two classes for such a small number would significantly add to the logistics and training burden and make it hard to manage.

Six overseas will put the continuous ship building plan in jeopardy.

I did read an article in the AFR yesterday, with indicated that the two remaining tenders would be asked to include a fourth overseas build as an option to provide contingency for a delayed Henderson capability. That sounds reasonable.

 

[spoz]

Germany is lower risk and lower cost. For a Tier 2 combatant cost matters a lot I would expect. You want to spend your money on the high end warfighters.

Do you have any evidence to support that? Price and risk are things that are usually very closely held during tender evaluation, and this one seems no different. Having been involved in previous side by side comparisons such as this, it is unusual for more than half a dozen people to have anything like a complete view of the prices and risks of both contenders - it’s normally kept very compartmented for reasons of probity, and so that subjectivity or unconscious bias is reduced as much as possible. And that holds until the very final stage of the evaluation; and even then the briefing of price to decision makers is done separately to risk.

 

[seaspear]

A few years ago in another forum an ex U.S.N commander was going in length about the differences between U.S.N ships and others to add greater protection was the use of titanium steel instead of the more common steel in important piping , perhaps members here have more knowledge if this is something the RAN addresses

 

[SammyC]

Wouldn’t surprise me. The west has never built a complex warship, and at presently has no facility capable of doing so - they are struggling with basic as bat sh*t Arafuras (ASC didn’t struggle to build them; that was not the issue). I would think we would be at least 10 years away from delivery of the first west built frigate, even if the order was placed tomorrow. If you truly want to start plugging a potential capability gap that is probably quite a bit too long

Yes, the Civmec build of the remaining Arafuras does not cover itself in glory. Lots of learning to do from here.

There are some reported hull defects (manufacturing), but more of the issues seem to be from a total breakdown in relationship between Civmec and Luerssen. I should note Luerssen were the contracted ship builder, with Civmec the subcontractor. I would view that some responsibility lies with Luerssen's oversight. In my view they should have picked up the issues early and been more invested in teaching the Civmec crews the finer arts of shipbuilding.

As a general point I would view that the Osborne facility has its stuff in one sock, and is a model that Henderson should emulate. I think the BAE/ASC/ANI structure works and a similar structure wouldset Henderson up for success. If done properly this should speed up the time to be prepared.

I would also hope that some of the key staff from Osborne are seconded to Henderson to guide it through its next projects and into the GPF build.

 

[Underway]

Do you have any evidence to support that? Price and risk are things that are usually very closely held during tender evaluation, and this one seems no different. Having been involved in previous side by side comparisons such as this, it is unusual for more than half a dozen people to have anything like a complete view of the prices and risks of both contenders - it’s normally kept very compartmented for reasons of probity, and so that subjectivity or unconscious bias is reduced as much as possible. And that holds until the very final stage of the evaluation; and even then the briefing of price to decision makers is done separately to risk.

Lower risk as in the Germans have plenty of times built other people's ships and exported that knowledge and helped others build their shipyards and experience. Japan has done that zero times

Less cost in that automation is expensive. The German design doesn't have as much has been produced very reasonably for other countries. Also given Japan has never exported their knowledge that means they don't have experience which means time.to figure it out which means higher cost. I doubt very much theirs is the cheaper option unless they are taking a hit somewhere or looking at purchasing something back in compensation (Say Australian built missiles)

 

[SammyC]

Lower risk as in the Germans have plenty of times built other people's ships and exported that knowledge and helped others build their shipyards and experience. Japan has done that zero times

Less cost in that automation is expensive. The German design doesn't have as much has been produced very reasonably for other countries. Also given Japan has never exported their knowledge that means they don't have experience which means time.to figure it out which means higher cost. I doubt very much theirs is the cheaper option unless they are taking a hit somewhere or looking at purchasing something back in compensation (Say Australian built missiles)

The costs that the Japanese are stating through their government budget reports indicate that the Mogamis are very cheap to build in Japan.

Lots of the equipment fitted in the Mogami is familiar, such as the gun, VLS, seaRAM and main engines. These already have english documents and supply chains. The ship is not as foreign as people think.

Japan has an international ship building industry, one of the biggest in the world. It more than rivals the European yards on any metric.

Japan has most definitely exported their technology, its in most of our houses and factories. Yokogawa are one of the best control system and instrument providers in the world for instance. They understand how their technology is used by other people.

We have just never seen it for military equipment, but their military equipment is made by the same companies that make all the commercial equipment.

I think is a misnomer that the Japanese don't know how to make a contract and deal with an international partner. They are the fourth largest investor in Australia, with in the order of $130-150 billion invested annually. They have been doing this for the the last 30 years.

 

[Armchair]

I don’t mean this meanly but, as an outsider looking in, and noting the reported uniformed strength of the RAN and its trend over recent years, do we have any choice?

If lower crew sizes mean higher crew turnover then it may be the case that there is little difference between the choices on this point. One option has a smaller crew but you might have to replace them more rapidly than the other version (analogy is USN with two crews for each sub, does that take twice as many people or does increased retention reduce that cost).
The Chief of Navy said that the GPF acquisition fitted into the current staffing model until some time in the 2030s. Presumably that is true of any option retained.

 

[StevoJH]

Lower risk as in the Germans have plenty of times built other people's ships and exported that knowledge and helped others build their shipyards and experience. Japan has done that zero times

Less cost in that automation is expensive. The German design doesn't have as much has been produced very reasonably for other countries. Also given Japan has never exported their knowledge that means they don't have experience which means time.to figure it out which means higher cost. I doubt very much theirs is the cheaper option unless they are taking a hit somewhere or looking at purchasing something back in compensation (Say Australian built missiles)

As a German design that is fit for purpose does not appear to exist currently. The biggest risk of a German option would be to schedule.

These ships are supposed to start construction in the next 12-24 months and be in service less then 5 years after that.

Considering that one of the criteria was that the overseas build had to an existing ship with minimal changes…. Does that mean the Egyptian variant of A200?

How does that suit the RAN? For starters it would be a reduction in capability from the current ANZAC’s on multiple aspects.

 

[Sandson41]

Maybe I missed something but the I don't see that the Egyptian (or Algerian) MEKO A200 basis has anything on it we want. That means a total new weapons and sensors fit. Not exactly low cost and risk. This offer seems like the underdog.

Unless we're happy with MICA NG SAM missiles and exocet, of course. In which case, no notes.

EDIT: What SteveJH says.

EDIT EDIT: AFR article about possible delay to announcement. Also says 2 Anzacs already retired - I'd only heard of one - and supposedly the MEKO does have compatible weapons (even though nothing in the water does), so what the heck is that all about?

$10b warship decision months away despite China fears

The government has whittled down to two contenders for a lucrative navy project, but there are questions why a final decision won’t be made until mid-year.

www.afr.com

 

[SammyC]

Maybe I missed something but the I don't see that the Egyptian (or Algerian) MEKO A200 basis has anything on it we want. That means a total new weapons and sensors fit. Not exactly low cost and risk. This offer seems like the underdog.

Unless we're happy with MICA NG SAM missiles and exocet, of course. In which case, no notes.

EDIT: What SteveJH says.

EDIT EDIT: AFR article about possible delay to announcement. Also says 2 Anzacs already retired - I'd only heard of one - and supposedly the MEKO does have compatible weapons (even though nothing in the water does), so what the heck is that all about?

$10b warship decision months away despite China fears

The government has whittled down to two contenders for a lucrative navy project, but there are questions why a final decision won’t be made until mid-year.

www.afr.com

I'm thinking that article is confusing Arunta's scheduled retirement in 2026.

Don't forget the last submission from the five shipyards was at best an expression of interest with a proposal outline. TKMS and Mitsubishi will now need to develop a detailed firm quotation and there will need to be time for contract terms agreement (which are never quick and easy).

A three-six month period to get this completed is not surprising.

Of note I can't see TKMS putting up a final offer with MICA and exocet.

I would suggest it will be between an evolved Mogami to Japanese spec versus a Meko 200 with 16 cell Mk41, 9LV, and possibly ceafar.

 

[Volkodav]

The thing is the Evolved Mogami is a much bigger ship with room for expansion. We don't want them top heavy and looking like cruise liners. Radar cross section minimisation is paramonut.

The ANZACs were a 1970s/1980s design GP frigate, despecified to a Patrol Frigate for the RAN, that was extensively upgraded during its service life.

It's replacement should have been ordered in the 2010s and entering service already.

Furthermore, it should have served along side a fleet of nine or more high end frigates and destroyers ( ideally bigger and better than the Hobart's), supported by corvettes / light frigates or sloops.

 

[Volkodav]

Wouldn’t surprise me. The west has never built a complex warship, and at presently has no facility capable of doing so - they are struggling with basic as bat sh*t Arafuras (ASC didn’t struggle to build them; that was not the issue). I would think we would be at least 10 years away from delivery of the first west built frigate, even if the order was placed tomorrow. If you truly want to start plugging a potential capability gap that is probably quite a bit too long

I probably shouldn't even suggest this, but it may be smarter to build the first few Aussie built ships in Adelaide with an increasing number of blocks coming from WA.

As the project continues, build more block in WA then finally ship complex blocks from Adelaide to the west to be consolidated into WA built ships.

 

[Reptilia]

Yes, the Civmec build of the remaining Arafuras does not cover itself in glory. Lots of learning to do from here.

There are some reported hull defects (manufacturing), but more of the issues seem to be from a total breakdown in relationship between Civmec and Luerssen. I should note Luerssen were the contracted ship builder, with Civmec the subcontractor. I would view that some responsibility lies with Luerssen's oversight. In my view they should have picked up the issues early and been more invested in teaching the Civmec crews the finer arts of shipbuilding.

As a general point I would view that the Osborne facility has its stuff in one sock, and is a model that Henderson should emulate. I think the BAE/ASC/ANI structure works and a similar structure wouldset Henderson up for success. If done properly this should speed up the time to be prepared.

I would also hope that some of the key staff from Osborne are seconded to Henderson to guide it through its next projects and into the GPF build.

It’s a good sign that BAE are already involved in the Mogami offer.

 

[Reptilia]

Maybe I missed something but the I don't see that the Egyptian (or Algerian) MEKO A200 basis has anything on it we want. That means a total new weapons and sensors fit. Not exactly low cost and risk. This offer seems like the underdog.

Unless we're happy with MICA NG SAM missiles and exocet, of course. In which case, no notes.

EDIT: What SteveJH says.

EDIT EDIT: AFR article about possible delay to announcement. Also says 2 Anzacs already retired - I'd only heard of one - and supposedly the MEKO does have compatible weapons (even though nothing in the water does), so what the heck is that all about?

$10b warship decision months away despite China fears

The government has whittled down to two contenders for a lucrative navy project, but there are questions why a final decision won’t be made until mid-year.

www.afr.com

Australien auf Fregatten-Kurs: Deutsch-australische Rüstungskooperation in Reichweite

Im Rahmen des australischen Flottenumbaus bietet sich für Deutschland eine strategische Gelegenheit: Der geplante Bau von Tier-2-Kampfschiffen könnte die bewährten MEKO-Designs von thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (tkMS) ins Spiel bringen. Doch für eine erfolgreiche Partnerschaft bedarf es nicht nur...

esut.de

Batch IV A200?

‘For the first batch of three frigates to be produced in Germany, tkMS is offering the MEKO A-200. This frigate is 121 meters long, 16.34 meters wide and has a displacement of 3,940 tons. It is capable of accommodating both a Seahawk helicopter and two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The MEKO A-200 is powered by a CODAG WARP system, which enables a top speed of over 28 knots. At a cruising speed of 16 knots, she has a range of 6,500 nautical miles. The crew numbers 125 people, including the helicopter contingent, and there is space for an additional 49 people.

When delivering the MEKO A-200EN for Egypt, tkMS has already shown that they can both deliver quickly and implement technology transfer. There are two possible versions of the A-200 available for Australia.

On the one hand there is the MEKO A-200 Batch III, which was built for Egypt. It is equipped with the ATLAS Elektronik ANCS Combat Management System (CMS), the Thales NS-110 radar and a sonar suite from ATLAS Elektronik. The armament includes, among other things, the 127/64 Lightweight anti-ship gun from Leonardo, 32 MICA NG anti-aircraft missiles, 16 Exocet MM40 Block 3 anti-ship missiles from MBDA as well as Typhoon 30mm Remote Weapon Stations (RWS) from Rafael and MU90 lightweight torpedoes.

Alternatively, the MEKO A-200 Batch IV could also be adapted for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). This version could include Saab's 9LV guidance and weapons deployment system, Saab's Sea Giraffe 4A radar and a Thales sonar suite. Possible armament would include a 76/62 STRALES naval gun from Leonardo, 16 NSM anti-ship missiles from Kongsberg and 16 MK41 'Tactical' VLS cells for 64 ESSM Block 2 anti-aircraft missiles. A PHALANX short-range defense system and Nulka decoy launchers could also be integrated.

Both versions of the MEKO A-200 apparently meet the requirements of the Royal Australian Navy and could therefore be considered for the first batch to be built in Germany. Delivery of the first batch is planned for 2029 and the costs are estimated at around two billion euros.‘

 

[SammyC]

I probably shouldn't even suggest this, but it may be smarter to build the first few Aussie built ships in Adelaide with an increasing number of blocks coming from WA.

As the project continues, build more block in WA then finally ship complex blocks from Adelaide to the west to be consolidated into WA built ships.

I would view it just depends how much the GPF build would get in the way of the Hunter program. By 2030 I would have thought three Hunter hulls would be in various states of construction. Two in the shed in hot works, one alongside in fitout.

The main assembly hall in Osborne only has two undercover bays, meaning GPFs would take Hunter slots.

One of the advantages of the potential Henderson facility is the two large bays in the Civmec shed, plus (if it eventuates), another two large halls where the Silveryachts facility is. Henderson is likely to have significantly more capacity than Osborne in a final fitout.

If I counter suggest, the fine people of Adelaide migrate to Perth and work at Henderson. We could even give them free membership to our football teams and a photo with a Quokka thrown in.

 

[SammyC]

Australien auf Fregatten-Kurs: Deutsch-australische Rüstungskooperation in Reichweite

Im Rahmen des australischen Flottenumbaus bietet sich für Deutschland eine strategische Gelegenheit: Der geplante Bau von Tier-2-Kampfschiffen könnte die bewährten MEKO-Designs von thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (tkMS) ins Spiel bringen. Doch für eine erfolgreiche Partnerschaft bedarf es nicht nur...

esut.de

Batch IV A200?

‘For the first batch of three frigates to be produced in Germany, tkMS is offering the MEKO A-200. This frigate is 121 meters long, 16.34 meters wide and has a displacement of 3,940 tons. It is capable of accommodating both a Seahawk helicopter and two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). The MEKO A-200 is powered by a CODAG WARP system, which enables a top speed of over 28 knots. At a cruising speed of 16 knots, she has a range of 6,500 nautical miles. The crew numbers 125 people, including the helicopter contingent, and there is space for an additional 49 people.

When delivering the MEKO A-200EN for Egypt, tkMS has already shown that they can both deliver quickly and implement technology transfer. There are two possible versions of the A-200 available for Australia.

On the one hand there is the MEKO A-200 Batch III, which was built for Egypt. It is equipped with the ATLAS Elektronik ANCS Combat Management System (CMS), the Thales NS-110 radar and a sonar suite from ATLAS Elektronik. The armament includes, among other things, the 127/64 Lightweight anti-ship gun from Leonardo, 32 MICA NG anti-aircraft missiles, 16 Exocet MM40 Block 3 anti-ship missiles from MBDA as well as Typhoon 30mm Remote Weapon Stations (RWS) from Rafael and MU90 lightweight torpedoes.

Alternatively, the MEKO A-200 Batch IV could also be adapted for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). This version could include Saab's 9LV guidance and weapons deployment system, Saab's Sea Giraffe 4A radar and a Thales sonar suite. Possible armament would include a 76/62 STRALES naval gun from Leonardo, 16 NSM anti-ship missiles from Kongsberg and 16 MK41 'Tactical' VLS cells for 64 ESSM Block 2 anti-aircraft missiles. A PHALANX short-range defense system and Nulka decoy launchers could also be integrated.

Both versions of the MEKO A-200 apparently meet the requirements of the Royal Australian Navy and could therefore be considered for the first batch to be built in Germany. Delivery of the first batch is planned for 2029 and the costs are estimated at around two billion euros.‘

I would have thought the batch IV with the batch III main 127mm gun is the likely offering. At that kind of price, it looks to be in the same price range as the Mogami. Tough to compete with the Mogami given the lighter armanent and radar system if that is the case.

 

[Reptilia]

I would view it just depends how much the GPF build would get in the way of the Hunter program. By 2030 I would have thought three hulls would be in various states of construction. Two in the shed, one alongside.

The main assembly hall in Osborne only has two undercover bays, meaning GPFs would take Hunter slots.

One of the advantages of the potential Henderson facility is the two large bays in the Civmec shed, plus (if it eventuates), another two large halls where the Silveryachts facility is. Henderson is likely to have significantly more capacity than Osborne in a final fitout.

If I counter suggest, the fine people of Adelaide migrate to Perth and work at Henderson. We could even give them free membership to our football teams and a photo with a Quokka thrown in.

Civmec with an extra 2 bays at the silveryachts site would be the same as Osborne.
One fabrication hall, one hall would be for consolidation of units and one would be for block assembly. (+separate pipe and paint sheds)
The 2 shorter outer bays in the main hall would likely be dedicated to the LCH program after the Arafura build.