Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[ADMk2]

That had nothing to do with either Service; and actually was a change to Force Design that I wish was publicly discussed more - because it theoretically is better but needed some kinks worked out to make it such. A number of projects were combined to (a) reduce overhead, (b) reduce internal competition, and (c) improve integration between the Services. UAS became one of those. It also allowed for more flexibility at the Capability Manager side and, in theory, a faster turn around because Government approval was for the whole project - not just a specific (in this case) UAS platform.

It should mean that for some things we can do better with the rapid into service, learn, update - but there are a few cultural and practical roadblocks to work through.

Sea-129 Ph.5 was cancelled in 2023 and seemingly nothing has moved on maritime T-UAS since that time? Certainly nothing “openly”…

We don’t seem to have a fleet wide maritime T-UAS in-service at any rate, nor one any time soon by the looks of things? Plenty of trials of course, but “in-service“ seems a long way off…

Whatever is happening now it definitely hasn’t “sped things up” compared to the original S-100 selection.

 

[Stampede]

How much weaponry do you really need for Constabulary tasking?
-A weight of fire to persuade a fleeing non-compliant vessel?
-A weight of fire to influence/dissuade a hostile aggressive act, in activities such as boarding?

non-military policing agency (such as Coast Guard or Border Force) is less internationally provocative convention-wise than a grey military asset, hence “Grey Zone” classification.

The moment there are rounds exchanged between grey zone participants, it’s escalated beyond ‘grey zone’ then hasn’t it?
- In that case would an Arafura even be relevant?
‘Rounds exchanged’ is not the same as hosing or barging is it?

So, do constabulary vessels actually need anything bigger than a 25mm?

In part it’s numbers.
An RAN with no more than ten major warships till the Hunters and Mogami hit meaningful numbers in the mid to late 30s
In part its options.
Why not enhance every vessel in the fleet to their fullest potential
Amphib,Supply,OPV,Hobarts,Capes
More capability, more self capacity, more option of response ,more option for government.

As for cost……..well it’s either the greatest threat in our times or it’s not.

Navy has a very serious ship numbers problem dealing with the full range of scenarios over the next decade.

Made worse with an impotent constabulary force working on the culture and expectation of the last fifty years.

It’s a new age with an old approach

Gun up ASAP
Which reluctantly means working with what you have.


Cheers S

 

[Volkodav]

SEA 1180 went through the courts for a bunch of stuff, and I can't find copies of findings to confirm how much is open source. But there were issues with the ship, there were issues with the wider CONOPS and there were different methods of addressing such issues considered. The final result was the (overall) cheapest path for Defence to follow.

For all the 'break things, fail fast' blah (and SEA 1180 was not that, but going extreme in example), we still have to sign contracts, and such contracts usually involve penalty fees for breaking them. There are at least two projects (not SEA 1180) that went/are going through full delivery because the penalty fees would have cost more than just accepting delivery.



That had nothing to do with either Service; and actually was a change to Force Design that I wish was publicly discussed more - because it theoretically is better but needed some kinks worked out to make it such. A number of projects were combined to (a) reduce overhead, (b) reduce internal competition, and (c) improve integration between the Services. UAS became one of those. It also allowed for more flexibility at the Capability Manager side and, in theory, a faster turn around because Government approval was for the whole project - not just a specific (in this case) UAS platform.

It should mean that for some things we can do better with the rapid into service, learn, update - but there are a few cultural and practical roadblocks to work through.

My experience is the projects that get bad press are often the ones that are sorting the issues in the design phase, but slipping the schedule, while there is a positive spin on projects that meet schedule but fail to deliver capability.

The OPVs are the bastard child of the need for affordable but capable combatants and a budget that only supports patrol boats.

In the late 80s the answer was corvettes, we got PBs. In the 30s and 40s it was sloops, we got corvettes. Now, ironically, you could probably call the Mogami a modern day sloop.

 

[koxinga]

Austal awarded Landing Craft Heavy Contract by Australia - Naval News

Australian shipbuilder Austal has been awarded a ~$4 billion contract for the construction of eight Landing Craft Heavy (LCH) vessels

www.navalnews.com

The Americans are also moving ahead with their Damen LSM to appoint an indepedent, third party Vessel Construction Manager (VCM) to direct and manage construction at Bollinger Shipyards in Mississippi and Fincantieri Marinette Marine in Wisconsin. The question is whether Austal USA is in a good position to bid for this as a result of RAN award.

NAVSEA opens competition for LSM vessel construction manager - Naval News

The US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) has issued a competitive Request for Proposal (RFP) for a Vessel Construction Manager (VCM) to manage the production and delivery of the US Navy’s new Landing Ship Medium (LSM) vessels.

www.navalnews.com

 

[Stampede]

My experience is the projects that get bad press are often the ones that are sorting the issues in the design phase, but slipping the schedule, while there is a positive spin on projects that meet schedule but fail to deliver capability.

The OPVs are the bastard child of the need for affordable but capable combatants and a budget that only supports patrol boats.

In the late 80s the answer was corvettes, we got PBs. In the 30s and 40s it was sloops, we got corvettes. Now, ironically, you could probably call the Mogami a modern day sloop.

Maybe there’s some light at the end of the tunnel for the six OPVs.
No doubt they will evolve in systems and application for the RAN.

Hopefully the bastard child will be appreciated!

Cheers S

 

[ADMk2]

Maybe there’s some light at the end of the tunnel for the six OPVs.
No doubt they will evolve in systems and application for the RAN.

Hopefully the bastard child will be appreciated!

Cheers S

There is no budget or resources to integrate guns we already have in the inventory, beyond the first 2.

But there are budget and resources for multi-mission capabilities including M-TUAS (that we don’t have) and unmanned surface vessels (that we also don’t have)?

Colour me shocked if those things ever actually eventuate for the OPV’s…

Funding and resources were stripped to put towards NSM, Tomahawk, ESSM Blk 2 and SM-6 for the Hobarts and ANZAC class, afterall.

And we’re about to introduce 2 entirely new classes of vessels into service, that are going to require those capabilities (and more including entirely new capabilities for the RAN such as RIM-116 RAM Blk 2) but are not currently planned to have them? I rather suspect I already know where RAN will be putting it’s available budget and resources…

Yes, the Arafuras have a bright future indeed, in that light…

 

[Reptilia]

HMAS Arafura Tour - NAVAL NEWS

 

[Stampede]

There is no budget or resources to integrate guns we already have in the inventory, beyond the first 2.

But there are budget and resources for multi-mission capabilities including M-TUAS (that we don’t have) and unmanned surface vessels (that we also don’t have)?

Colour me shocked if those things ever actually eventuate for the OPV’s…

Funding and resources were stripped to put towards NSM, Tomahawk, ESSM Blk 2 and SM-6 for the Hobarts and ANZAC class, afterall.

And we’re about to introduce 2 entirely new classes of vessels into service, that are going to require those capabilities (and more including entirely new capabilities for the RAN such as RIM-116 RAM Blk 2) but are not currently planned to have them? I rather suspect I already know where RAN will be putting it’s available budget and resources…

Yes, the Arafuras have a bright future indeed, in that light…

I hear you. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Navy will have the OPVs for a couple of decades plus.

Watch this space

Cheers S

 

[ADMk2]

HMAS Arafura Tour - NAVAL NEWS

Interesting to see the CO of HMAS Arafura confirm it has the same inherent capability as the RBN Darussalam Class but doesn’t cover the same range of missions, because the RAN “doesn’t need it to”…

Puts into perspective some of the more strident claims about the vessel being “changed“ so that it’s no longer at all capable of performing the mission set intended for it’s reference design…

 

[SammyC]

Interesting to see the CO of HMAS Arafura confirm it has the same inherent capability as the RBN Darussalam Class but doesn’t cover the same range of missions, because the RAN “doesn’t need it to”…

Puts into perspective some of the more strident claims about the vessel being “changed“ so that it’s no longer at all capable of performing the mission set intended for it’s reference design…

I didn't realise that the larger rhib can do 50kts! Nice medical bay, that's similar to what an ANZAC frigate would have. The direct side access door to the boats and flight deck is a good design feature.

 

[spoz]

Yes, as a number of us have been saying, for constabulary duties these are good ships. The Bruneians have made it into a “warship” (of sorts) which it is not. As a replacement for a weather and sea state limited patrol boat offshore it is a well thought out and executed design; and that it is what is intended to be and why it was acquired. They do need a main gun, however!

 

[Reptilia]

CO said just over Half the ships fuel spent for the trip from Perth to Sydney. Looks like that 7000+ km range is about right.

 

[Richo99]

Realistically, how much money is being saved by not arming the last 4 OPVs with 4 existing 25mm guns, particularly when the integration work has already been done on Arafura ? The money saved might purchase how many SM2s or Tomahawks for the majors? One? If we are squabbling about that much money, the ADF would seem to have bigger problems.

 

[ADMk2]

Realistically, how much money is being saved by not arming the last 4 OPVs with 4 existing 25mm guns, particularly when the integration work has already been done on Arafura ? The money saved might purchase how many SM2s or Tomahawks for the majors? One? If we are squabbling about that much money, the ADF would seem to have bigger problems.

I suspect it is the availability of RAN engineering resources that is the main limitation as well as the long term plans for the class. The 25mm was only ever intended as an interim gun and as Chief of Navy stated in Estimates last week, priority was given to the “rapid” introduction of Tomahawk, SM-6 et al to achieve lethality increases across the fleet.

Perhaps a decision has been made to shelve the 25mm gun idea and investigate a new gun system alongside the other proposed capabilities (but not yet actioned) for the class, bearing in mind they did of course originally require a 40mm gun for the class and considering any future availability of funding and resources to implement such a program.

In any case, it is disappointing that things come together (assuming they actually do) in such an adhoc manner. Why we can’t have a well funded, well resourced program that meets ALL of our requirements, especially in a project that is hardly pushing engineering, cost or technological boundaries, is a disappointing insight into ADF processes…

 

[Stampede]

Interesting to see the CO of HMAS Arafura confirm it has the same inherent capability as the RBN Darussalam Class but doesn’t cover the same range of missions, because the RAN “doesn’t need it to”…

Puts into perspective some of the more strident claims about the vessel being “changed“ so that it’s no longer at all capable of performing the mission set intended for it’s reference design…

A good video of Arafura.
I felt for the captain who had to choose his words very carefully regarding anything to do with capability.
Xavier is not a confrontational interviewer and still it felt awkward.

It was agonising seeing the multi mission deck with all its potential. Same for the flight deck and that “25mm thing up front”

Re the medical tour
Interesting comment suggesting they could conduct aero medical evacuations.

I wonder what that looks like?
Helicopter on deck or hovering above?

Interesting

Cheers S

 

[Stampede]

I suspect it is the availability of RAN engineering resources that is the main limitation as well as the long term plans for the class. The 25mm was only ever intended as an interim gun and as Chief of Navy stated in Estimates last week, priority was given to the “rapid” introduction of Tomahawk, SM-6 et al to achieve lethality increases across the fleet.

Perhaps a decision has been made to shelve the 25mm gun idea and investigate a new gun system alongside the other proposed capabilities (but not yet actioned) for the class, bearing in mind they did of course originally require a 40mm gun for the class and considering any future availability of funding and resources to implement such a program.

In any case, it is disappointing that things come together (assuming they actually do) in such an adhoc manner. Why we can’t have a well funded, well resourced program that meets ALL of our requirements, especially in a project that is hardly pushing engineering, cost or technological boundaries, is a disappointing insight into ADF processes…

Looks like Navy are going with a 30mm solution for the Hunters and potentially the Mogami.
Not too difficult to envisage this calibre will role out across the fleet as standard replacing the in service 25mm

Maybe this could be the intended future solution for the Arafura’s.

As for timing…………………not holding my breathe for anything in the 2020s

Unfortunately!


Cheers S

 

[Wombat000]

Interesting re Arafura main gun conundrum.
The Huons (and Armidales) operated with a 25mm Bushmaster and that seemed ok.
I would’ve thought counter mine warfare ops were more likely to attract bad guy attention than a constabulary patrol boat?

I’m not really sure what the CONOPS justification is for a heavy main gun on a constabulary vessel?
If shots are exchanged then it’s escalated beyond grey zone low tier enforcement operations and I’m not sure you would want an Arafura there at all.
The asset required for that would ideally be an Anzac or upcoming Mogami type, wouldn’t it?

If the Darussalam example wasn’t fitted with a 57mm, would we notice our patrol boat didn’t have one?
It looked good on the brochure, we were teased with it being included but really isn’t a 57mm just mission creep?

I think I would prefer the money be spent on inevitable SeaRAM adoption across the fleet earlier.

 

[MickB]

Interesting re Arafura main gun conundrum.
The Huons (and Armidales) operated with a 25mm Bushmaster and that seemed ok.
I would’ve thought counter mine warfare ops were more likely to attract bad guy attention than a constabulary patrol boat?

I think I would prefer the money be spent on inevitable SeaRAM adoption across the fleet earlier.

The Huons had an entirely diferent 30mm cannon but I get your point.

 

[ADMk2]

Interesting re Arafura main gun conundrum.
The Huons (and Armidales) operated with a 25mm Bushmaster and that seemed ok.
I would’ve thought counter mine warfare ops were more likely to attract bad guy attention than a constabulary patrol boat?

I’m not really sure what the CONOPS justification is for a heavy main gun on a constabulary vessel?
If shots are exchanged then it’s escalated beyond grey zone low tier enforcement operations and I’m not sure you would want an Arafura there at all.
The asset required for that would ideally be an Anzac or upcoming Mogami type, wouldn’t it?

If the Darussalam example wasn’t fitted with a 57mm, would we notice our patrol boat didn’t have one?
It looked good on the brochure, we were teased with it being included but really isn’t a 57mm just mission creep?

I think I would prefer the money be spent on inevitable SeaRAM adoption across the fleet earlier.

Overmatch against the types of weapons routinely encountered in so-called Constabulary operations, especially naval counter-narcotics operations.

When drug cartels are known to be in possession of medium machine guns, anti-armour weapons, mini-guns, automatic grenade launchers and the like, it’ll take a bold captain to go up against that level of weaponry with nothing larger than a flex mounted 0.50cal to prosecute them with…

And that’s before you even consider nation state sanction enforcement and the like.

There is a reason almost every other serious nation runs with a 30mm cannon or larger on their “offshore patrol vessels” and it’s the same reason RAN required a 40mm gun system for these in the first place, before they stuffed that up at a cost to us of $10m for nothing in return…

The 57mm gun idea comes from that system being integrated onto the platform already. In addition to which, these Arafuras may not be “intended” for combat operations, because that is our intention. Do you think that intention applies to any enemy? As I said earlier, are we going to tie these up at port at the commencement of hostilities, because we have so intentionally under-specc’d them?

Come real wartime, we’ll be bolting on every weapon we can get our hands on, on these things. Perfect or not, we have them and we’ll need to use them, given how small our navy has been allowed to become.

 

[spoz]

The Leonardo 40 was not Defence’s idea; that was part of the package offered by Luerssen. Unfortunately, it was at that stage much more of a concept than an actual gun. Still, they should have switched straight over to the Bofor 40.