Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[iambuzzard]

I remember Adm Hammond discussing the Arafura and drones, back in the February senate estimates. I went back and refreshed my memory. The below defence connect is perhaps the best summary of that.

Navy leaders clarify drone integration plan for Arafura Class OPVs

So, clearly articulating the intent to use the Arafuras as a drone platform, in particular arial and surface, rather than undersea.

The advantage of an Arafura is that it can travel about 5 times faster than a surface or underwater drone. It can pick up, transport, drop and then monitor. And if need be refuel. It's the difference between moving a 1000kms in two days rather than 10 days.

I also noted earlier that the bluebottle can launch and recover aerial drones. I think Arafura could carry bluebottles on the flight deck on a cradle, they would not need to be containerised. The sail I know folds down. I wonder if the keel can be retracted, then it would be a very compact unit.

Sounds good, Sammy. But they must give them a decent gun. Would a 57mm with programable ammo be able to be installed?
What's the deck penetration on a 57mm as opposed to a 40mm Bofors? Would the ship have systems capable of handling it?

 

[spoz]

For the record, Osborne South shipyard to construct the DDGs was built between late 2007 and the third quarter of 2010, to a design from Aurecon, by McConnell Dowell and Built Environs, all Australian companies, under contracts with the South Australian government, on behalf of it and the. CoA. Admittedly, the shiplift was provided by Rolls Royce as a subbie, but in the same period.

The expansion of the yard for the HCF took place between, roughly, 2018 and 2022, again by Australian contractors although in that case the design came from Odense of Denmark. Most of the increase in time over the initial build was due to various complications caused by COVID. You’ll find other dates occasionally, and certainly parts of the expansion were in use before 2022, but that’s the reality of work completion. (And a few bits of associated infrastructure, like the new HMAS Encounter and an expanded car park, weren’t finished until a couple of years later, but they also started later.)

So there is absolutely no reason why Henderson could not be up and running for Mogami construction, with the work having been done by an Australian prime, by 2031 - assuming we don’t have another global pandemic and that they get going.

 

[ADMk2]

Just for clarification, it's not billions (strictly according to the English dictionary that needs to be at least plural), it lists $1-1.5 billion unapproved, on top of the approved $1.6 billion (which I assume is the money to civmec to finish the last four units).

So much of me wants to yell out its for a five inch gun upfront and a strike length VLS out back. I will try desperately to withhold this urge.

I think for $1.5 billion, that will be enough to retrofit them to their final purpose. The IIP states the function of patrol and recon. The recon perhaps needs some more systems, including a decent UAV, perhaps even an ESM kit.

Not to mention the oft talked about but not yet seen “modular mission systems” the class is supposed to have in order to conduct it’s mission though.

The adding of recon in official documentation to it’s tasks was interesting though. That sounds awfully like a military role to me… But we are told so regularly this class can’t possibly perform military roles…

 

[Todjaeger]

For the record, Osborne South shipyard to construct the DDGs was built between late 2007 and the third quarter of 2010, to a design from Aurecon, by McConnell Dowell and Built Environs, all Australian companies, under contracts with the South Australian government, on behalf of it and the. CoA. Admittedly, the shiplift was provided by Rolls Royce as a subbie, but in the same period.

The expansion of the yard for the HCF took place between, roughly, 2018 and 2022, again by Australian contractors although in that case the design came from Odense of Denmark. Most of the increase in time over the initial build was due to various complications caused by COVID. You’ll find other dates occasionally, and certainly parts of the expansion were in use before 2022, but that’s the reality of work completion. (And a few bits of associated infrastructure, like the new HMAS Encounter and an expanded car park, weren’t finished until a couple of years later, but they also started later.)

So there is absolutely no reason why Henderson could not be up and running for Mogami construction, with the work having been done by an Australian prime, by 2031 - assuming we don’t have another global pandemic and that they get going.

My take on it, is that whilst the new facility in Henderson might be ready by 2031, it could also quite easily not be ready by then, and for a variety of reasons.

The concerns revolve less around Australia being able to get the actual infrastructure of a new shipyard built, but more about all the things which need to happen in order for the construction to take place and be at a reasonable pace. Assuming (yes, I am aware of what it means to assume) no major disruptions in supplies once ground has broken, then a three year construction timeframe sounds reasonable, albeit I have and claim no expertise on such matters. However, I could a number of issues which could arise which might delay real ground breaking. These issues could run from things like legal challenges by various parties not satisfied with whatever the arrangements are, to demands for more (esp significantly more) funding to complete construction and get the yard operations. Given the likely economic impact which has still not really hit from disruptions to the global petroleum supply chain, inflation could very possibly cause costs to spike, and/or certain materials just become unavailable.

Then there is also the very real possibility that pollies could interfere or even disrupt getting a new yard in WA established and operational. Now I am not posting this to be political, but to make people aware of something that they likely have not realized or perhaps have overlooked. The current (31st) PM of Australia is Anthony Albanese who has been in office since May of 2022. I had to go back to the 25th PM, John Howard (March 1996 to December 2007) to find a PM who held the office for longer than about four years. This means that Australia has not had a PM serve for more than five years in nearly two decades. This in turn suggests that the current PM could easily be out of office within a year or two if not less, followed by a change in gov't. Following a change in gov't it could be very, very easy for a different, future gov't to make changes to plans drawn up by their predecessors but not put into action. Particularly if the plans were made at the time with an eye to advantages gained by the then sitting gov't, but which provided little or no advantage to whomever was the incoming gov't.

Or put another way, if there were to be a change in gov't before construction of the new yard really got started, would WA still have enough political influence with the new gov't to keep the plans moving forward?

There would also be the matter of getting a workforce established at the new yard. No idea how long it would realistically take to get the yard workers appropriate skilled, or how far along the yard would have to be to start recruiting and skilling the workers, but I would imagine it would take anywhere from several months to several years.

 

[ADMk2]

Sounds good, Sammy. But they must give them a decent gun. Would a 57mm with programable ammo be able to be installed?
What's the deck penetration on a 57mm as opposed to a 40mm Bofors? Would the ship have systems capable of handling it?

The 57mm Bofors Mk.3 requires minimal deck penetration, basically only ammunition hoists and below deck storage, plus ships power and networking, with no other utilities required. They can also be mounted in a non-deck penetrating installation if the user is happy to manually reload them.

But personally I think the 57mm is overkill for what we need. If more “bang” is required from what is repeatedly stated as non-combat oriented ship, then I’d rather the additional money be spent on counter-drone capabilities, perhaps a JAGM, Hellfire or APKWS derived solution as Army will employ.

However, the fact it has already been installed on this design on the Darrasulum Class should provide confidence our Arafuras can accommodate them.

Personally I’d be happy if the RAN invested in the 40mm Bofors Mk.4 for these and perhaps long- term as a Phalanx replacement (if they still want a gun) across the fleet as the RN seem to be doing.

In focus: the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun that will equip the Type 31 frigates - Navy Lookout

The Type 31 frigates will introduce two guns types new to Royal Navy service. In the first of two articles examining these weapons, we look at the Bofors 40mm Mk 4 gun. Background The RN has not had a 40mm gun in service since the Bofors 40mm L/60 Mark IX was phased out in the

www.navylookout.com