Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
StingrayOZ said:
SeaRAM on LHD may make more sense if its higher threats rather than just asymetric. It will always be inner layer anyway.

PHalanx is still useful. For secondary ships. AOR, maybe amphibious style, choules, smaller amphibs, or even a opv. Phalanx is used on land, anything that operates where mortars or pirate style weaponry might happen, its not entire stupid. We already have a lot of support to run this platform.

At this stage. I would actually think a 25mm gun on afaura is liveable. Its better than nothing. Its disappointing, but it would still be something. If you just want to hit a slow spotter UAV, you can, if you want to fire some warning shots at a decent distance well you can.. If you have something that can hit through a hull of a ship, it can do that. Put some decoys and EW capability on it. Its useful but limited, and that sums up the platform.

Thank god we didn't build the slightly large hull. We would have wasted perhaps $100,000 on steel and labor. That hull, could have supported:
  • 76mm gun (or 56mm)
  • 8xVLMica (or similar)
  • 4xRBS15' (or 4 NSM)
  • 2xtorpedoes (Mu90?)
  • 35mm close in gun (or similar, or just a remote 20mm)
  • Water cannons (hey its a OPV! EEZ, pirates, protestors, fire fighting, grey zone ops, fishing boats)
  • ESM, Giraffe, 9LV combat system (the whole ecosystem)
It would have been absolutely terrible and huge failure if we built a ship, for but not with, that. Imagine if we had 10-15t of top margin growth weight, but the same if not better OPV capability. And the design is already paid for, already in the water, already sailing and in service. Same saab weapon system, Saab ESM, a hangar, etc. All for an extra 10m of hull. Essentially no extra crew requirement if you don't fit the equipment.

View attachment 55428

No much better we designed something not compatible with anything we operate or could acquire, modified it so it can't do anything and is even less of a patrol and opv ship.

Of course, if we were building that, no one else in the region would like a ship like that, with weapons like that. No one like singapore, malaysia, phillipines, Chile, etc..

Even if you delete every weapon off that hull, it would still likely be a better ship. Cheaper too. With greater endurance. By reconfiguring a small ship we built a confused platform.

If we had built 3 more of this type, it would have given the yard a proper spin up to Mogamis, with a ship, with actual weapons, and a hangar. Not just pleasure cruise capability. Shame we could never swallow our pride and commit to that to complete the orphan fleet.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if we have the first Mogami in service before the Arafuras get a new main gun. To be honest, I'm ok with that, because the Mogamis are warships.

Look at it through a WWII lens, we built 52 Bathursts, which were more warships of their day than the OPVs are today are, no mater what we stick on them. The thing is, Australia started building River, then Bay class frigates as soon as we could, despite churning out Bathurst as fast as we could. Had we been able to, we would have built more Tribals, and new cruisers were a priority as well.
 
R

Reptilia

Well-Known Member
Volkodav said:
I wouldn't be surprised if we have the first Mogami in service before the Arafuras get a new main gun. To be honest, I'm ok with that, because the Mogamis are warships.

Look at it through a WWII lens, we built 52 Bathursts, which were more warships of their day than the OPVs are today are, no mater what we stick on them. The thing is, Australia started building River, then Bay class frigates as soon as we could, despite churning out Bathurst as fast as we could. Had we been able to, we would have built more Tribals, and new cruisers were a priority as well.
Click to expand...
December 2029 delivery for the 1st Mogami.
The last Arafura to be delivered in 2028 so you would think atleast 1, maybe as many as 3 would get a main gun in 2029(‘post production upgrades’)
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Volkodav said:
I wouldn't be surprised if we have the first Mogami in service before the Arafuras get a new main gun. To be honest, I'm ok with that, because the Mogamis are warships.

Look at it through a WWII lens, we built 52 Bathursts, which were more warships of their day than the OPVs are today are, no mater what we stick on them. The thing is, Australia started building River, then Bay class frigates as soon as we could, despite churning out Bathurst as fast as we could. Had we been able to, we would have built more Tribals, and new cruisers were a priority as well.
Click to expand...
Interesting perspective.

Between now and when the first Mogami arrives in 2030, Army is due to receive 126x Redback IFV’s, each one of them better armed than anything the navy has, short of a frigate. On top of which they are also getting ( eventually) 211x Boxers, 135 or so of which are the direct fire, high survivability variant.

How is it Army can afford 260+ medium calibre gun systems in that timeframe, but RAN cannot afford 6? Nor can it afford, apparently, to even use the ones it already owns?

RAN also benefits from a much larger slice of the budgetary pie…
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Volkodav said:
I wouldn't be surprised if we have the first Mogami in service before the Arafuras get a new main gun. To be honest, I'm ok with that, because the Mogamis are warships.

Look at it through a WWII lens, we built 52 Bathursts, which were more warships of their day than the OPVs are today are, no mater what we stick on them. The thing is, Australia started building River, then Bay class frigates as soon as we could, despite churning out Bathurst as fast as we could. Had we been able to, we would have built more Tribals, and new cruisers were a priority as well.
Click to expand...
I feel we need to get away from the this versus that concept and do justice to all our naval assets

OPVs should not be the enemy of the Mogami

They both belong in the same navy.

Cheers S
 
I

iambuzzard

Well-Known Member
Stampede said:
I feel we need to get away from the this versus that concept and do justice to all our naval assets

OPVs should not be the enemy of the Mogami

They both belong in the same navy.

Cheers S
Click to expand...
The RAN (and Government) just need to give them some teeth to compliment the Mogamis. Defence in depth. Plus it would help to build more of them to help train more personnel.
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Arafuras are useful as they are.

Up gunned Arafuras may be more capable on paper but will they be in reality?

Let me recast this, we could have developed a missile launching capability for the C27J instead of retiring them, but would it have been worth it?

Lets say we did it but it took resourses from integrating the same capability into Ghostbat, whould that be good value for money?

By all means develop solutions that can be easily integrated into multiple platforms in an emergency, but do not knowingly divert finite resourses from critical areas to non critical.

There are engineering issues slipping through that impact cost and schedule on major projects because those who would have caught them are busy on other things.

We are in this situation because of decades of rating prats with MBAs (or worse, people who don't even have that but are liked by those who do), higher than competent technical people. Now we need technically competent people and we dont have enough of them, i.e. we need to shuffle them around.

It is what it is and we need to make do, but putting more onto aleady over stretched teams will make it worse.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
iambuzzard said:
The RAN (and Government) just need to give them some teeth to compliment the Mogamis. Defence in depth. Plus it would help to build more of them to help train more personnel.
Click to expand...
Not only are we not giving them any “teeth” we are not even giving them a moderate self-defence capability.

They were scheduled to get one, funded to do so, but RAN screwed that one up and now they get nothing instead…

As for workforce, we don’t seem to have a workforce issue to build a 1600t ship, put every system on them that they have, but mount a weapon station and a medium calibre gun on it?

No problem installing a radar. No problem installing a combat system.

But a medium calibre gun? Impossible! Apparently…
 
R

Richo99

Active Member
Your c27 is an extreme example, but yes I understand what you're saying.

On the other hand, we have a surplus of 25 mm Typhoons, we know how to use them, and they've already been mounted onto the first 2 units, so there is an absolute minimum of capitol or integration costs.

Seems nonsensical not to install 4 more.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
iambuzzard said:
The RAN (and Government) just need to give them some teeth to compliment the Mogamis. Defence in depth. Plus it would help to build more of them to help train more personnel.
Click to expand...
I sometimes think that the RAN is trapped in a mindset that with a lot of projects building a newer and bigger fleet that this is fact the fleet we have today.

Realistically that fleet is not till the late 2030s to 2040s assuming it all goes to plan

So let’s look at prudent opportunity’s for our in service fleet today.

With just two Hobart s in the water, that includes the ANZACs

Cheers S
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Stampede said:
I sometimes think that the RAN is trapped in a mindset that with a lot of projects building a newer and bigger fleet that this is fact the fleet we have today.

Realistically that fleet is not till the late 2030s to 2040s assuming it all goes to plan

So let’s look at prudent opportunity’s for our in service fleet today.

With just two Hobart s in the water, that includes the ANZACs

Cheers
Click to expand...
Three Hobarts in the next few hours ;)

www.facebook.com

49K views · 939 reactions | HMAS Hobart is the first upgraded destroyer to reach this major milestone, undocking on schedule. This is evidence of the power of partnering with industry and our delivery shipmates. BZ to the whole Defence enterprise and our Industry partners for this milestone. BAE Systems Australia | Chief of Navy Australia

HMAS Hobart is the first upgraded destroyer to reach this major milestone, undocking on schedule. This is evidence of the power of partnering with industry and our delivery shipmates. BZ to the whole...
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
O

Oldbeagle

New Member
Richo99 said:
Your c27 is an extreme example, but yes I understand what you're saying.

On the other hand, we have a surplus of 25 mm Typhoons, we know how to use them, and they've already been mounted onto the first 2 units, so there is an absolute minimum of capitol or integration costs.

Seems nonsensical not to install 4 more.
Click to expand...
In addition 25mm AMB rounds are now available coupled with a fuse setter it provides a more useful cheap CiWS. So many more effective options exist, but at what cost to more important programs ?
 
R

Reptilia

Well-Known Member
SammyC said:
I can't see searam or Phalanx on the Arafuras as that weight is upwards of 6-8 tonnes, and it needs to be mounted relatively high up for effectiveness. There's also no existing platform for it, so will also need a substantial structure resulting in even more weight. Ship stability would likey be compromised after all of that.

I would have though that 40mm is the maximum that these vessels will ever get, however I would view that a navalised EOS R400 with a 30mm bushmaster is a more likely outcome, perhaps with a Spike, Javelin, Hellfire or other missile that this system already works with. Its only about half a tonne, maybe a tonne with missiles, and already in the inventory.

Again these won't get weapons until they are properly in service and their purpose has been proven. That has to come first.

Mind you, I've seen systems bolted to ships going into active operational areas in very quick time. What can take years in peacetime, can (unsuprisingly) happen very fast when push comes to shove, particularly for well understood weapons.

So if the scenario suddenly changes, and for what ever reason Arafuras need a self defence gun, then it can be done quickly. Else we might see this upgrade after the class has proven itself in service (which I'm certain it will).
Click to expand...
R800 Marine shown in 2025 also an option, recently purchased by India.

 

Attachments

StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Volkodav said:
I wouldn't be surprised if we have the first Mogami in service before the Arafuras get a new main gun. To be honest, I'm ok with that, because the Mogamis are warships.
Click to expand...
Perhaps. Entirely possible.
Perhaps we will get Mogami, and then give it back to Japan in 2030. Perhaps the Japanese yards are extinguished in 2028. I am far less certain about the immediate future now. It is clear we are unlikely to make it to the end of 2028 without the situation deteriorating terribly.

Look at it through a WWII lens, we built 52 Bathursts, which were more warships of their day than the OPVs are today are, no mater what we stick on them. The thing is, Australia started building River, then Bay class frigates as soon as we could, despite churning out Bathurst as fast as we could. Had we been able to, we would have built more Tribals, and new cruisers were a priority as well.
Click to expand...
I agree.

The problem is we are now very late in the game. I would even go so far as to scrap any and all work on 5 and 6 Arafura, build the OPV90 based of the long lead items of 5 and 6. Or plan to finish both halves and put a plug in the middle.

I don't even care about the weapon systems fitted. Acquire what ever we can to eventually fit them to them. If we have old 76mm gun mounts from shore based things, half buried in the scrap yard. Grab them. Or the 25mm. The Hangar is probably the most useful thing on that ship.

I am now very pessimistic about the future. I think now we pursue multiple acquisitions in the hope one or two pan out.

Its no long a money thing, or a value thing or a future resources thing. I would almost look at abandoning work on other long term projects. Reprofile our entire future plans and see is possible before the end of 2028 with as much domestic capability as possible. As if our life and liberty depended on it.

Focus on anything we can actually bring into service before the end of 2028. Pump money into munition stockpiling and operational in country spares. Start making plans like 2029 deliveries will never happen.
 
O

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Im sure some of you have watched this, but wouldnt it be a useful capability considering the state of the world atm? It seems a lot more feasable stop gap, that turns into a really viable capability. Still retains the amphibious tasks when fast jets not embarked, and we are planning 8 LCHs as well.

 
S

SammyC

Well-Known Member
StingrayOZ said:
Perhaps. Entirely possible.
Perhaps we will get Mogami, and then give it back to Japan in 2030. Perhaps the Japanese yards are extinguished in 2028. I am far less certain about the immediate future now. It is clear we are unlikely to make it to the end of 2028 without the situation deteriorating terribly.


I agree.

The problem is we are now very late in the game. I would even go so far as to scrap any and all work on 5 and 6 Arafura, build the OPV90 based of the long lead items of 5 and 6. Or plan to finish both halves and put a plug in the middle.

I don't even care about the weapon systems fitted. Acquire what ever we can to eventually fit them to them. If we have old 76mm gun mounts from shore based things, half buried in the scrap yard. Grab them. Or the 25mm. The Hangar is probably the most useful thing on that ship.

I am now very pessimistic about the future. I think now we pursue multiple acquisitions in the hope one or two pan out.

Its no long a money thing, or a value thing or a future resources thing. I would almost look at abandoning work on other long term projects. Reprofile our entire future plans and see is possible before the end of 2028 with as much domestic capability as possible. As if our life and liberty depended on it.

Focus on anything we can actually bring into service before the end of 2028. Pump money into munition stockpiling and operational in country spares. Start making plans like 2029 deliveries will never happen.
Click to expand...
I'm thinking you need a herbal tea stingray. Mind you the world does seem to be deteriorating faster than I was expecting lately.

In my view we need heaps of these in a hurry


Saronic appear to be putting their money where their mouth is. The first Marauder USV is now in trials and they have five more under construction, all due out this year. They say they can build 20 of these in 12 months out of a lean to shed, and they look to be prooving this at the moment. No need for fancy construction yards, just give them some beach access. They could probably work out my my local yacht club.

Combine this with rapid build containerised combat systems and you have a basic escort capability. 150 tonnes is a reasonable payload.

Given we have a production facility for NASAMS, I wonder if it would be possible to navalise it (which in my mind is waterproof it), fit ESSM to it (which given AMRAAM-ER is already configured to the Norwegian equivalent), and then mass produce it in containers with the CEAOPS tactical radar, and you have a package that could fit in the boot of a Marauder.

Link 16 it all for remote operability (or stick an operator on it with a camp bed and some ration packs). Add a launcher of NSM out of the same control and it has some offence capability as well. Google tells me that a NASAMS battery with 6 launchers (without trucks) weights in between 50-90 tonnes, well within the weight capacity of the Marauder.

The first gen might be a big buggy, but hey better than an OPV in a fight.

Team them with a heap of torpedo or NSM armed Ghost Sharks and we might have something.
 
spoz

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I think mid 32 is IOC, not delivery. A distinction most of the press, including regrettably much of the specialist press, doesn’t seem to understand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top