Australian built High Speed Vehicle. Is it any good??

[Red aRRow]

The HSV catamaran which is being used by the U.S Navy and Army is built by Australian ship builders. However it does not carry huge firepower but rather serves as a high speed deployment platform for boarding parties or interdiction missions.
Just want to ask some Australians on the board that is any other country using the HSV and can you please give some info on it??
Thanking you in advance.

http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=4778
Here have a picture!

 

[gf0012-aust]

There are two diiferent types of Australian high speed vessels being used by the US.

The one in the pic is a wave piercing design and the USN has now leased another 2 vessels ( 3 all up). These vessels are made by INCAT

The other vessel os a twin hull cat made by Austal. This one is being used by the US Army and co-funded by the USMC

The INCAT type vessel was used in East Timor. We used them as it was a fast solution to shift substantial assets over long distance (IIRC they hold the trans atlantic speed record). They averaged 40 knots and some are saying that they surged to 48 knots.

The vessels are only lightly gunned as there was no need to add any other weapons due to the environment that were tasked to.

There are plans in place where INCAT are designing combat vessels for expeditionary forces, they are also designing small aircraft/helo carriers as well (maybe suitable for 4-5 aircraft)

There were a number of foreign military observers on board during East Timor (IIRC approx 12 different countries wanting to evaluate potential).

At this stage the only one committed to nuying more is the US, but there are other navies who are still evaluating.

They are very stable as ocean going units. Australia currently builds about 70% of the worlds ocean going cats and HSV's so its been easier to get into the market due to expertise levels.

There have been substantial numbers of favourable articles in USN mags such as Proceedings promoting the use of these as expeditionary vessels - they would be ideal for countries like the philippines or indonesia as they could fulfil a transport/medical/patrol role.

 

[Aussie Digger]

They are good. It was a shame the Australian Government decided not to keep HMAS Jervis Bay. It's uplift capabilities and speed makes the LPA's look extremely pedestrian in the sea lift role...

 

[Red aRRow]

Thanks mates.

 

[gf0012-aust]

HSV Swift Shows Its Stuff 2/13/2004 1:16:49 AM
(Source: US Navy; issued Feb. 11, 2004)

NORFOLK, Va. --- The Navy is experimenting with a second aluminum-hull High Speed Vessel, HSV 2 Swift. Swift is the successor to HSV 1 Joint Venture and brings new transformational capabilities to the Navy and Marine Corps team.

At 321 feet, Swift is faster than most ships, with a top speed of almost 50 knots. The catamaran hulls draw only about 11 feet of water, making the ship ideal for missions in shallow coastal waters.

Swift slipped out of Naval Station Norfolk for a demonstration in the Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic Ocean Feb. 10. Aboard were about 30 commercial enterprise and command representatives who explained a wide array of new systems that are or may be installed aboard Swift. Systems range from combat vehicles, small boats and unmanned aerial vehicles for targeting and reconnaissance, to unmanned submersible vehicles for mine hunting.

“There are two primary visions for this ship,†said Lt. Cmdr. Daniel Harris, the Ingleside-based crew’s executive officer. “One is Mine Warfare Command and Support, and the other has a special warfare/Marine expeditionary-type role. That’s where the two crews come in. The submarine community has proven that two crews has worked for many years, and we’ll be putting it to the test here in the surface community.†That allows a higher operating tempo for the ship.

Two 40-person crews are maintained, one stationed at Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Va., the other at Naval Station Ingleside, Texas.

The ship’s systems feature many automated controls, including a docking system that enables Swift to tie up without the aid of tugs in winds of less than 50 knots.

Many Swift crew members were impressed with the ship’s capabilites.

“I was in awe over all the technology,†said Interior Communications Technician 2nd Class (SW) Matthew Ferguson, Swift crew member. “I like the fact you don’t need to touch much in order for Swift to go, and that it doesn’t require a huge crew.â€

“This was a culture shock when I came on board,†said Chief Hospital Corpsman (FMF) Michael Lackrey, Swift’s independent duty corpsman. “I was so used to watertight hatches and basic military things. I love it here, though. The crew size is very small, so it’s easy to get to know everyone. You also have to work out of rate, to know a little bit of something in case someone gets hurt or sick. You have to step in and take over.â€

An aluminum, bead-blasted flight deck eliminates most of the non-skid paint products and recurring maintenance, and stainless steel tie-down fittings for aircraft are a first. Also, Swift is not painted the traditional haze gray, but she has been treated on the exterior with a blasting process that provides a haze gray appearance.

Swift deployed on its maiden voyage only 11 days after delivery Aug. 15, and provided support in Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Swift is providing a platform for the Navy to explore concepts, capabilities and military utility associated with the Navy’s plans to build the Littoral Combat Ship. HSV is now testing modular technology, demonstrating endless possibilities for embarking payloads needed to accomplish missions for a variety of warfare areas. Swift fulfills the need for smaller, faster, reconfigurable, adaptable surface ships for the future Navy and provides the ability to fulfill a wide variety of missions anytime, anywhere.

-ends-

 

[PETER671BT]

There are two diiferent types of Australian high speed vessels being used by the US.

The one in the pic is a wave piercing design and the USN has now leased another 2 vessels ( 3 all up). These vessels are made by INCAT

The other vessel os a twin hull cat made by Austal. This one is being used by the US Army and co-funded by the USMC

The INCAT type vessel was used in East Timor. We used them as it was a fast solution to shift substantial assets over long distance (IIRC they hold the trans atlantic speed record). They averaged 40 knots and some are saying that they surged to 48 knots.

The vessels are only lightly gunned as there was no need to add any other weapons due to the environment that were tasked to.

There are plans in place where INCAT are designing combat vessels for expeditionary forces, they are also designing small aircraft/helo carriers as well (maybe suitable for 4-5 aircraft)

There were a number of foreign military observers on board during East Timor (IIRC approx 12 different countries wanting to evaluate potential).

At this stage the only one committed to nuying more is the US, but there are other navies who are still evaluating.

They are very stable as ocean going units. Australia currently builds about 70% of the worlds ocean going cats and HSV's so its been easier to get into the market due to expertise levels.

There have been substantial numbers of favourable articles in USN mags such as Proceedings promoting the use of these as expeditionary vessels - they would be ideal for countries like the philippines or indonesia as they could fulfil a transport/medical/patrol role.

Incat high vessels should be used,why they would be ideal for smaller operations and disaster relief.the problem with in at the time was they into recievership.The usa gov dug them out when opportunity arose.Now ownwed buy us it can biuld them cheaper here,I think one third is getting built in us to speed up numbers of ships.Australia should have least two of these boats type LHD model.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Incat high vessels should be used,why they would be ideal for smaller operations and disaster relief.the problem with in at the time was they into recievership.The usa gov dug them out when opportunity arose.Now ownwed buy us it can biuld them cheaper here,I think one third is getting built in us to speed up numbers of ships.Australia should have least two of these boats type LHD model.

Seriously - have you been on or seen up close both companies ships?

AUSTAL compared to Incat is like comparing a high end S class mercedes to a commodore. the fit and finish on an austal vessel is a golden mile ahead of the Incat - and I've been on both.

One of the LCS competing tenders is based on an Austal 127m design,

The USMC is more than happy with Austal - they've extended the lease - and they're looking at potentially 40 units.

Unlike the Incat - the Austal leased boat has an axial stern - far more useful for ROhRO and far more useful for expeditionary and emergency relief.

There is no comparison - literally.

 

[Rich]

Austals star is rising. Ive read some good things about this ship. I know Austal opened an American division and yard somewheres in our south. Is that where this ship was made or was it made down under?

 

[scraw]

Austals star is rising. Ive read some good things about this ship. I know Austal opened an American division and yard somewheres in our south.

That one is part of the requirement to build in the US for the LCS contract, they're partnered with [SIZE=-1]General Dynamics.[/SIZE]

The ones currently used were built here.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Austals star is rising. Ive read some good things about this ship. I know Austal opened an American division and yard somewheres in our south. Is that where this ship was made or was it made down under?

Both Austal and Incat have opened up yards in the US via establishing partnerships

Incat is with Bollinger
Austal is with Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Co Inc. She has a separate agreement in place with General Dynamics for the PCS contract.

 

[Tasman]

Both Austal and Incat have opened up yards in the US via establishing partnerships

Incat is with Bollinger
Austal is with Bender Shipbuilding & Repair Co Inc. She has a separate agreement in place with General Dynamics for the PCS contract.

As much as I would love to see vessels built in my home city for the RAN and allied navies by Incat I regret that this seems unlikely to happen in the near future. A report in The Hobart Mercury Newspaper on 7 January quoted the Incat chairman Robert Clifford as predicting:

a strong future for the company as global demand continued to get stronger.

However, Mr Clifford said Incat would not be returning to the days when it had 1000-plus employees.

"Although we have the capacity in this shipyard to build four large boats a year, we would never be able to find enough skilled employees to achieve this," he said.

"We will settle for building two, and I see the workforce being sustained at between 600 and 700 for a long time to come.

"Once we have customers using our boats we rarely lose them and we are getting repeat orders as they upgrade to bigger and better boats.

"Having said that, potential new customers are coming out of the woodwork.

"At present we are building two boats for a new customer in Japan which, at 112 metres, are the largest boats we have built."

The full article can be found in the following link:

http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,21022258-5007221,00.html

Incat seems to be fully occupied with commercial orders at present and, from my observation, still seems to be doing maintenance work on the vessels leased to the USA, so it seems that military projects would have to wait for a while. Having said that the RAN has no immediate plans for HSVs so Incat may well be in a position to compete if and when such plans appear. Whether it will be able to beat Austal in that regard is another matter.

Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

As much as I would love to see vessels built in my home city for the RAN and allied navies by Incat I regret that this seems unlikely to happen in the near future. A report in The Hobart Mercury Newspaper on 7 January quoted the Incat chairman Robert Clifford as predicting:


The full article can be found in the following link:

http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,21022258-5007221,00.html

The biggest allied warships market is the US. For reasons of national security interest - any foreign sourced platforms must be built in the US. Hence why Austal and Incat have US yards in place. There would be an absolute minimum of local involvement.

Incat seems to be fully occupied with commercial orders at present and, from my observation, still seems to be doing maintenance work on the vessels leased to the USA, so it seems that military projects would have to wait for a while. Having said that the RAN has no immediate plans for HSVs so Incat may well be in a position to compete if and when such plans appear. Whether it will be able to beat Austal in that regard is another matter.

Cheers

Australia has a footprint that totals approx 70% of the worlds large Cat market.

On the issue of Incat vs Austal for the military market, I'd argue that as an expeditionary asset that the Westpac Express is the superior design. Its a true Ro-h-Ro asset.

The US has had some significant structural design issues with Incat. (similar to RANs problems when we owned Jervis Bay before reflag as an HSV) One of the posters on here did an eval on JB. He might deign to pop up and pass comment.

 

[ThePuss]

About one and a half years ago I met the boys from the USAV Spearhead (The Austal ship) at the Newport pub in Fremantle. Nice blokes and strangely (to me at least) they where all US Army Warrant officers from captain down (except for a couple of deck hands i think).They couldn't speak highly enough of the ship and loved being posted to it because they where all used to puttering about in slow arsed landing craft. After many hours of beer swilling and swaping "warries" (even though they are army their just like saliors) they gave me a fancy medalion from the ship. USAV SPEARHEAD (TSV-1X) "Sail Army Fast"

 

[PETER671BT]

may-be, but I've seen the plans for both companies 120 metre LHD'S and LCC,
LITTORAL COMBAT CARRIER.And think both companies have lot to offer as a project.Both companies have broken records in design and on the sea for speed and cabalities.Australia should embrace both companies.

 

[gf0012-aust]

may-be, but I've seen the plans for both companies 120 metre LHD'S and LCC,LITTORAL COMBAT CARRIER.

Incat build impressive looking vessels. There is however, a vast difference between visually attractive, and quality workmanship. A brief and cursory look at the baptism ferry cycle of HSV to the States should be an indicator in the differences of QA management between the two companies.

btw, I've seen the DERA/Russian trimaran CV plans - that doesn't mean that they would have translated into a useful product. The UK dropped those plans for a reason (as have Austal). 120m LCC's are a platform looking for a procurement insertion - not a platform filling a requirement.

And think both companies have lot to offer as a project.Both companies have broken records in design and on the sea for speed and cabalities.Australia should embrace both companies.

I've seen far too many Oz companies trading on their nationality rather than their capability. I strongly support Oz companies when they deliver on capability. IMHO Incat needs to stick to tourist ferries where the quality control won't trip them up so much. As I said before, a 5 minute walk on either vessel will show a golden mile of difference in build quality even to the uninitiated.

Incat/Clifford does not have a very good reputation in the commercial maritime industrial community for a reason.

Ever wondered why the Tassie Govt is fed up with his antics?

Maybe they've lifted their game in the last couple of years - but having seen HSV and HSV2 I'm not that confident.

 

[Sea Toby]

I hate to put a monkey wrench into the HSVs, but they do have one flaw. While they are very fast up to a 1000 nautical miles, their range and sustained speed decreases rapidly beyond that range, to the point its cheaper and better to build a slow 20 knot amphibious vessel.

You'll notice that many of the civilian ferries of that type run short runs, none operate across the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I hate to put a monkey wrench into the HSVs, but they do have one flaw. While they are very fast up to a 1000 nautical miles, their range and sustained speed decreases rapidly beyond that range, to the point its cheaper and better to build a slow 20 knot amphibious vessel.

One of the members on here when he was in RAN did an eval on Jervis Bay (HSV) during Timor 99.

He found a number of issues with the platform...

 

[Tasman]

I hate to put a monkey wrench into the HSVs, but they do have one flaw. While they are very fast up to a 1000 nautical miles, their range and sustained speed decreases rapidly beyond that range, to the point its cheaper and better to build a slow 20 knot amphibious vessel.

What is the reason for this? Is it that they have to slow to conserve fuel?

One of Incat's vessels, Hoverspeed Great Britain, won the Blue Riband for crossing the Atlantic in 1990 so I can't understand why the military vessels can't sustain their speed.

http://www.incat.com.au/product.cgi?articleID=63776

 

[Sea Toby]

Yes, they did it, but in favorable conditions: they waited for favorable weather, loaded with fuel, and without full consists in passengers. Load them down with people's automobiles, people, their clothes, the food and drinks to sustain them, and a crew to serve them, In doubt whether they would sustain their best speed.

But that is not what I said before. I said: You'll notice that many of the civilian ferries of that type run short runs, none operate across the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.

The US Navy operates a HSV from Okinawa to Japan. Notice the US Navy does not operate one from Japan to the US, nor even Okinawa to Hawaii. During the East Timor crisis, Australia operated one from Darwin to Dill, not from Perth or Brisbane. They operate on short runs throughout the world, crossing the Baltic Sea, North Sea, Irish Sea, the English Channel, Adriatic Sea, Tyrennian Sea, etc., etc. Not one operates a schedule across the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans.

As far as navies are concerned, while its nice to have one operating from Okinawa to Japan, we have no intentions of operating one across either the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans. The US Navy perfers to fully load their ships before crossing either ocean.

 

[PETER671BT]

Incat build impressive looking vessels. There is however, a vast difference between visually attractive, and quality workmanship. A brief and cursory look at the baptism ferry cycle of HSV to the States should be an indicator in the differences of QA management between the two companies.

btw, I've seen the DERA/Russian trimaran CV plans - that doesn't mean that they would have translated into a useful product. The UK dropped those plans for a reason (as have Austal). 120m LCC's are a platform looking for a procurement insertion - not a platform filling a requirement.

LCC does have but they were having trouble with lift postioning operations.

I've seen far too many Oz companies trading on their nationality rather than their capability. I strongly support Oz companies when they deliver on capability. IMHO Incat needs to stick to tourist ferries where the quality control won't trip them up so much. As I said before, a 5 minute walk on either vessel will show a golden mile of difference in build quality even to the uninitiated.

Incat/Clifford does not have a very good reputation in the commercial maritime industrial community for a reason.

Ever wondered why the Tassie Govt is fed up with his antics?

Maybe they've lifted their game in the last couple of years - but having seen HSV and HSV2 I'm not that confident.

Well if the incat spaer head is no good,why do the usa have an order of 60 vessels.I've seen the incat models pough thought heavy sea of the caost of tasmania that were 4metre waves.They peirce straight throught them.I must admitt though AUSTAL has better effecency production speed than incat.But incat holds the record in the pacific for fastest cat in the world usa military hold that record.
But what I would like to see from both designs is a three deck version.
1-landing pad,2- aircraft hanger,3- vechicle storage hanger in companies design.At the moment they only carry 2-decks.
To do this they would have extend each ship by 20 metres,but the design might able to this.