Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures




Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence








Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

This is a discussion on Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by ngatimozart I really wouldn't want to have to take on the Fijians, on their home turf. There ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 43 votes, 4.14 average.
Old March 17th, 2017   #20656
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,942
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngatimozart View Post
I really wouldn't want to have to take on the Fijians, on their home turf. There would be a lot of casualties all around. When the first coup occurred in 1986, our glorious leader (Lange) wanted to send the troops in. He was quickly talked out of it by NZDF as not being one of his brightest ideas.
we went through the same exercise and with the same analysis

part of the reason for getting the phatships was based around lessons learnt from ET and from the initial analysis around Bainimara's first gig

taking the fijians on in home turf with less than initial overwhelming violent force was going to be an exercise in grief. nobody wanted to do that, and more to the point, the USN was the only force in region that could have done it
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2017   #20657
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 51
Threads:
Look's very interesting for the future and for the development of Australian technology.

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/ke...marine-warfare.
Hazdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 18th, 2017   #20658
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 243
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ngatimozart View Post
I really wouldn't want to have to take on the Fijians, on their home turf. There would be a lot of casualties all around. When the first coup occurred in 1986, our glorious leader (Lange) wanted to send the troops in. He was quickly talked out of it by NZDF as not being one of his brightest ideas. I have witnessed a fight between Fijian Army SNCO's and PNG Army SNCO's when they have been on the fire water and no one dared to step in between. Just left the lot of them to it. It made cage fighting look like old girls swing hand bags at each other.
Understand the service chiefs went to the G and G and said that for all the good intentions they where just not up for this whole invade another country thing.
Just wondering;was it true there was a Hercules crewed and loaded to go,props turning ready for what know's, before sanity prevailed!

Regards S

Not sure if I'm off thread or not.
Stampede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20659
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
No Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 455
Threads:
I didn't realise that Austal had joined up with Fassmer for the OPV bid.

I guess this is some indication that Fassmer might have to be considered favourite at this stage,

Damen has hooked up with Civmec and it looks like Lurssen might go with BAE.

https://thewest.com.au/business/manu...-ng-b88390290z

I had to look up Civmec ... never heard of them before. Mostly involved in heavy industry they are looking at moving into shipbuilding and defence work. They started construction of an $80 million ship building facility in December. I may be wrong but I would imagine that with no real experience in ship building they are at long odds to win the OPV contract.
hauritz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20660
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,341
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hauritz View Post
I didn't realise that Austal had joined up with Fassmer for the OPV bid.

I guess this is some indication that Fassmer might have to be considered favourite at this stage,

Damen has hooked up with Civmec and it looks like Lurssen might go with BAE.

https://thewest.com.au/business/manu...-ng-b88390290z

I had to look up Civmec ... never heard of them before. Mostly involved in heavy industry they are looking at moving into shipbuilding and defence work. They started construction of an $80 million ship building facility in December. I may be wrong but I would imagine that with no real experience in ship building they are at long odds to win the OPV contract.
Civmec bought out Forgacs and are and experienced heavy engineering concern so I would rate them above Austal and much a muchness, if not slightly ahead of BAE. It annoys me that Austal are trying to sleaze the batch one ships as well, I suspect this is mostly down to greed but I suspect they are very uncomfortable with the idea of the RAN having an apples to apples comparison of ASC built to Austal built OPVs for the life of type. All bs aside ASC is recognised globally for their quality and engineering, while Austal tend to rely on cost and schedule, with quality and engineering not as much as a priority.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20661
Defense Professional / Analyst
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 690
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stampede View Post
Understand the service chiefs went to the G and G and said that for all the good intentions they where just not up for this whole invade another country thing.
Just wondering;was it true there was a Hercules crewed and loaded to go,props turning ready for what know's, before sanity prevailed!

Regards S

Not sure if I'm off thread or not.
The service chiefs cannot by pass the Government and go direct to the GG, it was done in house with the Government of the day, yes a C130H was on standby so was the POE Company at that time in Burnham, they were mobilised packed and waiting for the word to go.

CD
Cadredave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20662
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 243
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cadredave View Post
The service chiefs cannot by pass the Government and go direct to the GG, it was done in house with the Government of the day, yes a C130H was on standby so was the POE Company at that time in Burnham, they were mobilised packed and waiting for the word to go.

CD
Thanks Cadredave,

Just a story I had heard that stood out as I was on the understanding the correct sequence of communication was by passed and Chiefs went direct to GG.
Probably mistaken.
Long time ago and memory not as sharp as days gone bye.

Regards S
Stampede is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20663
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 117
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raven22 View Post
Each brigade will provide the ground combat element for the amphibious capability as part of the force gen cycle.
Will this result in a rifle company, a CRV troop and various support elements being embarked for the whole 'Ready' phase or would it be rotated within the Ready brigade?

And would there be specialised training in the readying phase for the designated units?

Unclear how necessary specialised training would be.

Regards,

Massive
Massive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 19th, 2017   #20664
Defense Professional / Analyst
Major General
alexsa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,221
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hauritz View Post
I didn't realise that Austal had joined up with Fassmer for the OPV bid.

I guess this is some indication that Fassmer might have to be considered favourite at this stage,

Damen has hooked up with Civmec and it looks like Lurssen might go with BAE.

https://thewest.com.au/business/manu...-ng-b88390290z

.
I am not convinced of that. Austal got their sop in the form of the Pacific Patrol Boat and the last two Cape Class (for RAN) vessels. Damen have considerable engineering experience and this is mobile. When building with Damen in Vietnam it is the head office who run the show and they have expat QA and management on the ground.

Austal have never built a steel hull of this size. Austal's record with the ACPB is not exactly stellar given the vessels need significant remediation after a relatively short period.

The CIMVEX subsidiary Forgacs have been engaged in a number of naval engineering projects and the new facility at AMC will be well suited to building such vessels. The current Austal facility may struggle and I suspect they would have to use the AMC facility or expand (they may have to expand their workforce as it is quite small given they do not build many HSC PAX vessel here ... that got sent offshore ... and are focused on just the Capes and the Pacific Patrol boats).

Finally Damen have runs on the board after building the following for defense support:
  • The EGS and RGS vessels (both about 90m LOA)
  • The Aviation Training Vessel (over 90m LOA)
  • The large four fuel/oil lighters
  • Four tugs
Added to that the OPV85 is pretty much a known quantity.

Last edited by alexsa; March 21st, 2017 at 12:29 AM.
alexsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017   #20665
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
weegee's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 233
Threads:
More on SEA1180.

ASC, Forgacs join forces for Australian OPV construction | Naval Today

It seems as though ASC and Forgacs have joined forces. Together they would form a fairly formidable ship building capability one would think.

When is the winner bidder going to be announced? Considering they are to cut steel supposedly next year aren't they?
weegee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 20th, 2017   #20666
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,341
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by weegee View Post
More on SEA1180.

ASC, Forgacs join forces for Australian OPV construction | Naval Today

It seems as though ASC and Forgacs have joined forces. Together they would form a fairly formidable ship building capability one would think.

When is the winner bidder going to be announced? Considering they are to cut steel supposedly next year aren't they?
Very interesting, I would suggest that this teaming may involve a shared block build on all twelve OPVs with the consolidation and combat system integration for the first two being in Adelaide and the rest in Henderson. This could then quite logically continue on with SEA5000 with ASC fabricating an pre outfitting superstructure and the more complex blocks and Civmec producing the lions share of the hull blocks.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2017   #20667
Defense Professional / Analyst
Major General
alexsa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,221
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volkodav View Post
Very interesting, I would suggest that this teaming may involve a shared block build on all twelve OPVs with the consolidation and combat system integration for the first two being in Adelaide and the rest in Henderson. This could then quite logically continue on with SEA5000 with ASC fabricating an pre outfitting superstructure and the more complex blocks and Civmec producing the lions share of the hull blocks.
It will certainly give Austal and Fassmer something to fret about. My understanding is 'at least' two will be built in Adelaide with some suggest one or two more.

A connection between ASC and CIVMEC in Fremantle is a very logical step if the build process is not to be interrupted as a new builder tools up.

I am no longer into predicting any outcome but I would surmise that this makes any suggestion that Austal are a 'shoe in' for the OPV build questionable.
alexsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2017   #20668
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,341
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexsa View Post
It will certainly give Austal and Fassmer something to fret about. My understanding is 'at least' two will be built in Adelaide with some suggest one or two more.

A connection between ASC and CIVMEC in Fremantle is a very logical step if the build process is not to be interrupted as a new builder tools up.

I am no longer into predicting any outcome but I would surmise that this makes any suggestion that Austal are a 'shoe in' for the OPV build questionable.
Forgacs performed quite well on the destroyer build and deserved more orders for their efforts, especially after they ramped up to absorb some of BAEs slack. Too bad in hindsight that the AORs weren't ordered locally as they could probably have built the hulls a Tomago, superstructures in Adelaide, building an appropriate ship lift at Tomago.
Volkodav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2017   #20669
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 735
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volkodav View Post
Forgacs performed quite well on the destroyer build and deserved more orders for their efforts, especially after they ramped up to absorb some of BAEs slack. Too bad in hindsight that the AORs weren't ordered locally as they could probably have built the hulls a Tomago, superstructures in Adelaide, building an appropriate ship lift at Tomago.
By this point even BAE could have undertaken the work. Not so certain Tomago would have been able to build the hulls, well actually have the skills to yes, but the actual site lay out and with a ship lift thrown in no so sure it would have been capable without a major redevelopment of the site.

That said could Cairncross have built them? Or at least have assembled the completed blocks?
vonnoobie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 21st, 2017   #20670
Defense Professional / Analyst
Major General
alexsa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,221
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by vonnoobie View Post
By this point even BAE could have undertaken the work. Not so certain Tomago would have been able to build the hulls, well actually have the skills to yes, but the actual site lay out and with a ship lift thrown in no so sure it would have been capable without a major redevelopment of the site.

That said could Cairncross have built them? Or at least have assembled the completed blocks?
Without building new facilities the graving dock would have to be used to build the ship. This dock is 244m long and 33.5m at the top (noting its structure narrows at the base). It could theoretically do the job but the dock would not be useable for any other and you could only build one hull (meaning a long delivery time as you can only consolidate a single hull). You would also need significant infrastructure upgrades to handle very large blocks.

But it is a moot point. The yard has been shut since 2014 and work force dispersed (It has now been sold for residential development) so this was not an option given the delivery schedule for the AORs.

There are lots of 'what ifs' in this and the greatest loss is really the facilities at Cockatoo Island with its combination of building ways and dock ..... however this is not going to change. We should be pleased that new(and modern) construction facilities are being built to support the current programme. Lets hope the Pollie's don't backslide
alexsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

« German Navy | - »
Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:37 AM.