Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Morgo]

Whether it's opinion or not he must have formed it on some basis of fact. It's that basis of fact for which we require the sources. We work from informed opinion not uniformed opinion because that's the difference between good quality discussion and rubbish. If in doubt read the rules. If it's still unclear PM one of the Moderators.

@Morgo is generally willing to learn and that's always good in a poster. I learn on here most days because something new is always posted and I will follow it up as a rule, so I have all these papers and what not on hard drives that I am working my way through.

Ha ha ha - “generally!”

For clarity - I’m very relaxed about the exchange above. Defence is a very long way from my day to day area of expertise, but that’s exactly why I’m here; to learn. I’ve got no problems with standards being maintained as the mods are fit and have a pretty thick skin. This isn’t a place for petty point scoring and that’s a good thing.

Is this the most hardcore moderated forum I’ve ever seen? Yes.

Is that what drives it’s quality? Also yes.

It’s a very valuable public good that needs to be maintained, and I’m glad that it is. If we could get a few more of our journalists covering Defence for major publications on here the quality of public discourse would be miles better.

 

[Going Boeing]

Also, the number of missiles is expected to change for latter production of the Virginia-class SSN, starting with SSN 803 (2nd vessel of Block V configuration) which replaces the 12 Tomahawk VLS tubes with Virginia Payload Module tubes. Whilst there are to be fewer VPM tubes, (four per module IIRC) each VPM tube can be loaded with seven Tomahawk missiles, or other potential loadout options in the future.

In terms of future procurement, it appears that the USN's Block V procurement covers orders placed through until at least 2023 (SSN 811) with SSN 805 having begun construction in July 2021, as of October 2021. Further, there are plans for at least two additional Blocks, VI & VII, of the Virginia-class SSN. This strongly suggests to me that versions of the USN's Virginia-class SSN will be in service for decades to come.

The 12 Tomahawk VLS tubes were only fitted to Blocks 1 & 2 Virginia class with them being replaced on Block 3 (& subsequent) with two bow mounted Virginia Payload Tubes (VPT) holding 6 Tomahawks each (much lower construction costs). The 6 missiles are arranged around the circumference of the tubes with the centre position vacant. On the Block 5’s that have the Virginia Payload Module extension which has an additional four VPT’s the plan is to have 7 missiles per tube with the additional one in the centre position. I do not know why the bow mounted VPT’s can’t fit the extra missile (same 87” diameter) but I suspect that it has something to do with the bow tube length not being as long as the ones fitted aft in the VPM. The total VPT missile capability of the Block 5’s is 40 (spread over 6 tubes) plus 25 weapons for torpedo tube use.

From various articles that I have read, the plans are for Block 6 & Block 7 Virginia’s (5 vessels in each Block) to follow on from the 10 Block 5’s that are currently contracted. At the increased construction rate of 2 submarines per year that should see Virginia construction through to the mid 2030’s. Some of the new technologies planned for the future SSN(X) are intended to be introduced in these later Virginia Blocks so, if the COA were to select this type for the RAN, they would be getting a submarine that is the latest technology and capable of remaining effective for its 30+ year service life.

Navy New Virginia Block VI Virginia Attack Boat Will Inform SSN(X) - USNI News

USS John Warner with the hatch of a bow mounted VPT open. Pic courtesy of Wikipedia.

 

[alexsa]

Could a Virginia potentially fire off 16 in a salvo if needed - 12 from the VLS, 4 from the torpedo tubes? Or is it one or the other ie Virginias can only launch missiles from VLS?

The RN paid for the modifications to allow the T boats and Astute to fire Tomahawk from tubes. The RAN was going down the same path for the Attack class (and now the Collins). I am not sure that this option was taken up for the Virginia but I doubt it.

 

[Massive]

Richard Marles, the new Defence Minister, is suggesting that there is a need of an interim submarine and that SSNs will not be available until the 2040s.

Expect submarine delays, Marles says, as he plans for defence capability gap

Australia could need a new fleet of conventional submarines to avoid a major gap in the nation’s defences amid doubts the nuclear subs will arrive by 2038.

www.theage.com.au

Feels as if this has a high potential to delay the SSN further given the effort required to build an interim submarine.

Quite surprised to be honest.

Regards,

Massive

 

[hauritz]

Yet another politician about to jump in and "fix" all of our problems.

I love his quote “We need to look at how we bridge the gap. That’s all I can say. And my mind is open about how we do that.”

To me that doesn't sound like a man who has a plan.

 

[Redlands18]

Yet another politician about to jump in and "fix" all of our problems.

I love his quote “We need to look at how we bridge the gap. That’s all I can say. And my mind is open about how we do that.”

To me that doesn't sound like a man who has a plan.

What's French for sorry Mr Macron please forgive us.

 

[Morgo]

Yet another politician about to jump in and "fix" all of our problems.

I love his quote “We need to look at how we bridge the gap. That’s all I can say. And my mind is open about how we do that.”

To me that doesn't sound like a man who has a plan.

I wouldn’t jump to conclusions. And rather than accepting what the journo thinks Marles is thinking, have a look at what he actually said:

1) We may not be ready to build our own SSNs until the 2040s. Fair enough given the workforce and infrastructure required.

2) A capability gap may emerge in the meantime, that may need to be plugged, and we should plan for this in advance.

3) The options might include a new conventional boat, but might also include leasing SSNs, having the first couple of the class built partly or wholly offshore or further steps to extend the life of Collins (if possible).

I don’t read anything into what he said that indicates an intention for a new class to be acquired. He’s been in the seat for a week so of course he’s non committal. He’d be foolish to be otherwise until he has all the facts and time to process them.

 

[Volkodav]

Yet another politician about to jump in and "fix" all of our problems.

I love his quote “We need to look at how we bridge the gap. That’s all I can say. And my mind is open about how we do that.”

To me that doesn't sound like a man who has a plan.

I have no issue with incoming governments reviewing projects, in fact its part of their job. Understand though, reviewing doesn't necessarily mean they will change anything, rather that they are looking at the existing project and time line.

I am a firm believer that the SSNs and Hunters should be replacing the capabilities that replaced the Collins and ANZACs, not replacing them directly, or more to the point, the replacement programs should have kicked off in the early to mid 2000s, before the last hulls of the classes being replaced, entered service.

 

[Stampede]

Richard Marles, the new Defence Minister, is suggesting that there is a need of an interim submarine and that SSNs will not be available until the 2040s.

Expect submarine delays, Marles says, as he plans for defence capability gap

Australia could need a new fleet of conventional submarines to avoid a major gap in the nation’s defences amid doubts the nuclear subs will arrive by 2038.

www.theage.com.au

Feels as if this has a high potential to delay the SSN further given the effort required to build an interim submarine.

Quite surprised to be honest.

Regards,

Massive

Whatever the reality of intent for the future nuclear submarine, when a defence minister of a new government starts talking about how we bridge the gap,we should take note!

With so little known about the submarine project, the assumption is that Gap in the transition from the Collins Class to our next generation of Nuclear Submarines not going to the timetable that is hoped for.
A gap in submarine capability!
What I deduce is that when the Defence Minister makes such a comment to the media, we are being softened up for future information and directives regarding our submarine force, composition and numbers
A bridging capability and a transition to nuclear propulsion pushed further down the track would be my guess.

We watch this space.

Cheers S

PS

My thoughts before reading today's APDR's opinion piece

End the insanity and order interim submarines – now - APDR

When the new A26 class become available later this decade, the Royal Swedish Navy (RSwN) will be operating three generations of submarines simultaneously.

asiapacificdefencereporter.com

 

[Stampede]

I wouldn’t jump to conclusions. And rather than accepting what the journo thinks Marles is thinking, have a look at what he actually said:

1) We may not be ready to build our own SSNs until the 2040s. Fair enough given the workforce and infrastructure required.

2) A capability gap may emerge in the meantime, that may need to be plugged, and we should plan for this in advance.

3) The options might include a new conventional boat, but might also include leasing SSNs, having the first couple of the class built partly or wholly offshore or further steps to extend the life of Collins (if possible).

I don’t read anything into what he said that indicates an intention for a new class to be acquired. He’s been in the seat for a week so of course he’s non committal. He’d be foolish to be otherwise until he has all the facts and time to process them.

When a new Defence Minister who has only being in the job for a week makes such a comment.
Take note, there is a reason for it.
I smell something cooking in the kitchen with this subject.

Cheers S

 

[Volkodav]

In terms of schedule and capability four or so interim subs, tapered into the Collins LOTE, or eight replacing Collins, would still permit Australia to proceed with the SSN acquisition but with lower risk.

The issues are greater cost, the risk of a future government deciding the new SSGs are perfectly good enough, a slipping of the SSN if it proceeds but is seen as less urgent.

The benefit, greater capability sooner, a larger fleet to train the crews required by the SSNs, a real construction project to upskill and de risk the submarine workforce.

 

[John Newman]

“The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Run for your life! The sky is falling!” .... not

C’mon guys, reality check.

This is ‘political business as usual’ at a change of Government, the new Government always goes out of its way to slag the previous Government, happens every time.

They make a lot of noise of how bad the previous Government did, run various inquiries, etc, etc, but then a bit later on, projects get confirmed as they were before the election.

My favourite one is when the Rudd Government was elected and new Def Min Fitzgibbon was slagging the Super Hornet purchase, and announced a review in Jan 2008, he also started to talk about F-22 instead of F-35.

And guess what happened? Nothing changed, the procurements continued.

Fitzgibbon admitted this to the US Defence Secretary, that it was a bull$hit inquiry, purely for political purposes.

Labor's review of Howard's fighters decision a sham

amp.smh.com.au

 

[hauritz]

Even if we were to acquire interim submarines we would still have a capability gap. The whole point in acquiring nukes is that it was determined that conventional submarines could not deliver the full set of capabilities that the country needed.

 

[oldsig127]

When a new Defence Minister who has only being in the job for a week makes such a comment.
Take note, there is a reason for it.
I smell something cooking in the kitchen with this subject.

Cheers S

And the following on the front page of The Australian today suggests that you'd be better off looking to your kitchen that thrashing about with everyone else here making wild predictions on the basis of SFA actual knowledge.

To be fair, News Ltd and ABC have also produced their opposing reports on the basis of nothing concrete, so the forum is looking no less uninformed than the media

oldsig

 

[hauritz]

No surprises there. There is no quick fix. We need nuclear submarines and it will take a long time to deliver that capability. There will be a capability gap until those boats are delivered regardless of anything we do. Fortunately Australia does have a strong alliance with two like minded nations that do have these boats and will provide at least some form of cover until our own boats are ready.

It isn’t an ideal situation we find ourselves in and it is disgraceful that governments on both sides of politics have stood by and let this slow motion car wreck happen.

When you think about it we kind of stuffed things up when we introduced the Collins class as well where we went years before they reached full operational capability.

 

[ngatimozart]

No surprises there. There is no quick fix. We need nuclear submarines and it will take a long time to deliver that capability. There will be a capability gap until those boats are delivered regardless of anything we do. Fortunately Australia does have a strong alliance with two like minded nations that do have these boats and will provide at least some form of cover until our own boats are ready.

You are presupposing that the RN & USN are in a position to provide said cover. We know that both navies are short of boats to put into the water so pray tell how are they going to provide said cover. Actually don't bother because it will be pure unsubstantiated supposition.

It isn’t an ideal situation we find ourselves in and it is disgraceful that governments on both sides of politics have stood by and let this slow motion car wreck happen.

That's what pollies do. You should've figured that out by now.

When you think about it we kind of stuffed things up when we introduced the Collins class as well where we went years before they reached full operational capability.

Standard Operating Procedure.

 

[ngatimozart]

Thread locked pending Moderators discussion and to give people time to cool down.

 

[ngatimozart]

Thread is now reopened with bans on the following:

• Any SSN choices until the official announcement by the Commonwealth of Australia upon its decision of which, if any platform it has decided to go with. This includes everything type, crewing, armament, location of bases, machinery, number of heads, the lot. The mere mention of SSN and anything remotely Australian in any post on the Forum will result in immediate Moderator action. We have lost all tolerance of this topic.
• Any discussion upon a SSK program to replace the Collins Class SSK until such time an official program is announced by the Commonwealth of Australia. Same as above.
• Any spurious claims that ARE NOT BACKED UP WITH SOLID EVIDENCE will be dealt with quickly and not to the posters liking. The Moderators and DEFPROs are completely fed up with the un-informed / ill-informed speculation that has polluted this topic for the last few months.
• Any poster sanctioned by the Moderators and banned from posting on this thread, who thinks to post the same on another thread will find themselves banned from the Forum for the same period of time, plus an annoyance penalty not exceeding the original ban, without warning.

If you don't like this, don't break the constraints and you won't have grumpy Moderators breathing down your neck. We sure as hell don't like doing it.

 

[DDG38]

"HMAS Canberra embarked personnel, vehicles and equipment while alongside in Townsville Queensland on12 June, 2022 ahead of Regional Presence Deployment 22-3 where they will conduct a number of navy- to-navy engagements with partner nations across the region. The deployment continues the Australian Defence Force’s long standing program of international engagement in the Indo-Pacific." Image Source : ADF Image Library
(this is a great shot that demonstrates the sheer size of these ships)

 

[Stampede]

"HMAS Canberra embarked personnel, vehicles and equipment while alongside in Townsville Queensland on12 June, 2022 ahead of Regional Presence Deployment 22-3 where they will conduct a number of navy- to-navy engagements with partner nations across the region. The deployment continues the Australian Defence Force’s long standing program of international engagement in the Indo-Pacific." Image Source : ADF Image Library
(this is a great shot that demonstrates the sheer size of these ships)
View attachment 49439

You beat me to the line.
Defence images have some good pics

Defence Imagery: 20220612ran8598163_0344.jpg

images.defence.gov.au

This shot portrays the LHD as a true multi service asset.


Cheers S