Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
I had missed that the Constellations were only a 3 panel system. That must push their oblique angles to the absolute maximum. I was aware the F110 SPY7 was a smaller panel than the massive things planned for the ASEVs. The F110 and the upgraded mogami I think have similar displacements, so perhaps it could fit.
I agree that for their next of class to replace the smaller destroyers, starting with the Murasame, the DDX, might be a candidate for further employment of one of the SPY packages. These align with the design timeframe, given these are supposed to commence building following the Mogamis.
If I had money to bet however, I think the Japanese will want to continue to maintain an indigenous radar capability, so it will take a lot for them to move to a fully imported system beyond the Kongo-Mayas.
Bit like us. We elected to pay the extraordinary money to fit CEAFAR to the Hunters rather than copy what the Canadians are doing with the SPY7.
I have a feeling that the next few years will see some tectonic moves away from American military equipment across the globe and across the board as nations move to protect their sovereignty and supply chain.
Long history with American systems, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. If Australia presumably takes the risk and integrates CEA radars on our future 8x Australian built Mogami variants, then Japan can observe and compare the performance of the two first hand and decide from there. I think it’s become quite clear, and probably quite a shock to most of the world, especially US defence giants like RTX & Lockheed-Martin that it is Australia’s CEA that now produces the best radars on the planet, only bolstered with the recent announcement that the Royal Navy will look to use CEA radars in future
Last edited:
I’m very hesitant to make that claim about anything being “the best”, especially when a lot of countries make very good products. Plus it turns into a nation versus nation thing. The Australians think CEA makes the best products, the Americans think LM or RTX do, the British think BAe do, the Swedish think Saab do etc.
Is it “the best” for Australia? Probably, the CoA owns the IP and can direct development down the path that most optimally suits the various use cases of the ADF. Does that mean it’s the best radar in existence? Not necessarily.
Are we ever going to know which one is the best? Not unless you test them all side by side. And even then I bet that each radar will have strengths and weaknesses.
Is it “the best” for Australia? Probably, the CoA owns the IP and can direct development down the path that most optimally suits the various use cases of the ADF. Does that mean it’s the best radar in existence? Not necessarily.
Are we ever going to know which one is the best? Not unless you test them all side by side. And even then I bet that each radar will have strengths and weaknesses.
You could also reasonably argue that they may be interested in mounting something like a secondary rotating 6ft SPY-6(V)2 EASR further aft, like a lot of modern European & Chinese equivalents to complement the existing forward mast/sensor suite rather than altering it in any way. Would certainly make sense in terms of increased distribution of & reduced topside weight/lower centre of gravity, and presumably risk & cost by a big margin. A departure from its seemingly ‘stealth-first’ design, but a trade-off that might be deemed worthwhile.
devo99
Well-Known Member
Unsure if this article has been posted previously however I think this is an issue that is really going under the radar (no pun intended) at least in public discussion.
I expect they'll end up filling out a bit more of the spare berthings in RAN service in order to claw back some of the flexibility that is lost by having such a small crew. Lest we end up with patrol boats dressed as frigates.
www.aspistrategist.org.au
I expect they'll end up filling out a bit more of the spare berthings in RAN service in order to claw back some of the flexibility that is lost by having such a small crew. Lest we end up with patrol boats dressed as frigates.
People matter—especially when frigate crews are too small | The Strategist
People are getting carried away with the virtues of small warship crews. We need to remember the great vice of having few people to run a ship: they’ll quickly tire. Yes, the navy is struggling ...
www.aspistrategist.org.au
That has been the policy since 2017 when that program kicked off.
No-one has ever managed to convince any of the Governments since…
Unsure if this article has been posted previously however I think this is an issue that is really going under the radar (no pun intended) at least in public discussion.
I expect they'll end up filling out a bit more of the spare berthings in RAN service in order to claw back some of the flexibility that is lost by having such a small crew. Lest we end up with patrol boats dressed as frigates.
People matter—especially when frigate crews are too small | The Strategist
People are getting carried away with the virtues of small warship crews. We need to remember the great vice of having few people to run a ship: they’ll quickly tire. Yes, the navy is struggling ...
Good article by Rowan, with whom I served, and of course from a very knowledgeable source, even if he is a Navigator. Something that has concerned me and I’m sure many other ex Navy people for years. A further example - Hobart, with considerably more capability than a CFA but the same mission, has a crew of just over 200 including flight. The ship is 7,000 tons, almost twice the size of the CFA. Admittedly it has a much less manpower intensive propulsion system but that also means many less people for DC in a much bigger hull.
I always imagined the Mogamis operating along side the Hobarts, Hunters or as part of a coalition fleet. While it would be nice to have them all equipped with the latest and greatest radars the reality it that we are building these ships on a tight budget. They are all going to be networked together anyway. Throw in E-7s, P-8s and other assets and you should already have pretty good coverage. On top of that you should have dozens, perhaps hundreds of uncrewed systems between you and any potential enemy anyway.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Provided the government of the day funds the uncrewed systems.
I believe they are spruking that the aegis family of radars are now CMS independant, and that they are using an open API to allow intergration into other CMS systems. Aegis and SPY are two different products, they haven't always been seen that way. Most radars were always this way, why would anyone want to lock in a radar and combat system.
If we visit the article closely..
So Japan is looking at a new radar, and Raytheon wants to offer its SPY6 and LM SPY7. Japan will most likely go with a Japanese solution. It says nothing about LM or Raytheon being downselected. It talks up their existing relationship on other projects.
New AUKUS plans revealed amid bid to protect WA businesses
New boundaries to transform the Henderson shipyard into a massive AUKUS defence precinct have been finalised in a deal between the Commonwealth and WA that aims to avoid disruption to the resources sector.
thenightly.com.au
Henderson Precinct Boundaries - very odd, not what I was expecting.
Looks like only BAE/Echo Marine and the empty CUF lots will be the ones to make way, Austal(Henderson) current site will become non defence and Civmec will remain as is.
Facilities within the precinct will include:
- contingency docking capability and supporting infrastructure and facilities for nuclear-powered submarines
- maintenance facilities for nuclear-powered submarines, including graving docks
- shipbuilding facilities to support the construction of larger more complex vessels
- a modern surface fleet sustainment yard to support the sustainment of Australia's surface combatant vessels.
Attachments
Last edited:
Unexpected outcome, particularly with Civmec. Evidently a deal could not be made. I gather we will now proceed with building a near identical set of sheds to the Civmec facility, right next door to the Civmec facility. Austal must be happy with this outcome.-paywalledNew AUKUS plans revealed amid bid to protect WA businesses
New boundaries to transform the Henderson shipyard into a massive AUKUS defence precinct have been finalised in a deal between the Commonwealth and WA that aims to avoid disruption to the resources sector.
Henderson Precinct Boundaries - very odd, not what I was expecting.
Looks like only BAE/Echo Marine and the empty CUF lots will be the ones to make way, Austal(Henderson) current site will become non defence and Civmec will remain as is.
Facilities within the precinct will include:
- contingency docking capability and supporting infrastructure and facilities for nuclear-powered submarines
- maintenance facilities for nuclear-powered submarines, including graving docks
- shipbuilding facilities to support the construction of larger more complex vessels
- a modern surface fleet sustainment yard to support the sustainment of Australia's surface combatant vessels.
Explains why Austal has been communicating that it will build the heavy landing craft in the CUF area. I wonder if there is a plan to build some of the larger frigate ship construction infrastructure early to support this project.
I think the proposed submarine area is actually a lot more secure. It has to be built from scratch anyway. Might as well start with a clean beach.
I am very surprised at the conversion of the BAE maintenance facility. There will still need to be a docking capability for in service ships, and areas for regular maintenance. I struggle to see how this will fit with the infrastructure for a new ship construction yard. Seems to be a tight fit for both functions.
I am surprised that the existing Austal facility is excluded. I would have thought this can continue for small boats for ever.
Next move is to see if the Government will buy out Austal's Australian assets and leave the rest for Hanwa.
Echo may simply take Austals existing site?
Bhagwan Marine new approved $11 million facility also dead?
A solid 900m worth of waterfront work to be done across the precinct.
I’m beginning to wonder why Austal is being so favoured by this government - their record is not exactly stellar, but things always seem to fall in their favour. I hold no brief for any of the others, but I would have thought that BAE, at least, who do have a reasonable record for ship maintenance record in the West would get at least an equal look in. At least in SA all the facilities are owned by the CoA so the investment there is protected. That does not seem to be the case in the West; and particularly as some, at least, will be duplicating existing capability.
Could be the case for Echo. The Austal facility would be a major upgrade for them.
I note that the currently vacant Silveryachts facility is excluded, so perhaps Bagwan might move there. Or Echo.
I also note the ASC Collins submarine facility is also excluded from the defence precinct. I'm not sure what to make of this. I understand it becomes obsolete at the end of the Collins but thats currently in the order of 20 years away.
Also of note in the article, and perhaps it has gone unnoticed, is the rumoured overall price tag. $70 billion. Good grief.
Civmecs response
Civmec welcomes the site selection for the Henderson Defence Precinct - Civmec
The chosen site minimises the impact to non-defence work in Henderson. It ensures that industry will continue to have access to the Southern Common User Facility to deliver vital work for the resources, energy and infrastructure sectors. Pat Tallon, Chief Executive of Civmec said: “The...
www.civmec.com.au
Echo do have several ferries on order
Austals ABF Cape class may not be counted as defence?
An Update on the Northern Marine Complex too, completion 2027.
Shortsighted imo, both new northern defence precincts should have a 150m shiplift from the beginning.
Last edited:
Nice to see that the Darwin NMC is actually being built. I look forward to the day Henderson looks like this (I might be waiting a while).Civmecs response
Civmec welcomes the site selection for the Henderson Defence Precinct - Civmec
The chosen site minimises the impact to non-defence work in Henderson. It ensures that industry will continue to have access to the Southern Common User Facility to deliver vital work for the resources, energy and infrastructure sectors. Pat Tallon, Chief Executive of Civmec said: “The...
Echo do have several ferries on order
Austals ABF Cape class may not be counted as defence?
An Update on the Northern Marine Complex too, completion 2027.
Shortsighted imo, both new northern defence precincts should have a 150m shiplift from the beginning.
I think one of the benefits of a syncrolift is that they can be extended and upgraded over time, the Osborne lift is an example. So perhaps in the future this could be done at NMC once we have the Mogamis and Hunters in the water in numbers.
I'm thinking that an ANZAC frigate could fit on the NMC syncrolift, so it could support the fleet that exists now.
Having once had to limp to FBW on a dodgy propeller shaft for days, a port like this would be a godsend for emergency docking when up top.
Back to Henderson, I'm wondering, if we are to have a combined maintenance and construction facility, would they include a shed for overhauls as well as construction. Its no fun doing a refit in the sand. I'm imagining the luxury of cover in 40 deg days and the bliss of an elevator.
Another option is the carying of drones which I would argue have had proven value in the Ukraine conflict I dont know if Ghost bat would be an option with folding wings for storage ,I understand this has had successful missile firing testsbeing able to engage threats before they are in missile range of the naval vessels perhaps these could be operated at range another option for the drones is an inclusion of mq-28 type refueling dronesI dont believe yet any drones have air to air refueling capability but if we would require manned aircraft coverage being able to refuel them would extend that time ,I would argue that unmanned drones depending on which version have been of more use in Ukraine than helicopter assetts ,I would also suggest this option is more flexible than carrying the F35b and certainly cheaper
WA mafia?
Its been the case for years. Look at the "canoe" comments, the Japanese submarine plan, the pressure on OPVs, Armidales, Capes, Evolved Capes.