Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[iambuzzard]

I think we should be looking at this holistically, i.e. a non penetrating mount with a useful ordinance capable of anti surface and anti air fire against crewed and uncrewed threats. Ideally a facility of last ditch defence against incoming highspeed threats through putting up a wall of high velosity fragments.

Main armament for PBs, OPVs and auxillaries, secondary on MFUs.

That's common sense. Do the powers that be have any of that? Honestly, I think some on this forum could make better decisions on equipment. At least they made the right call with the Evolved Mogami.

 

[Todjaeger]

I would presume if the OPV’s be given the task as a minelayer again they would need self defence weapons installed.., aka an anti air and surface gun/missiles.

It would really depend on where any minefields were to be laid by an OPV (if that is even how the mines would be deployed) and perhaps the nature of the minefield (i.e. offensive minefield vs. defensive minefield). A minefield laid around/near an Australian port to restrict or deter the approach of hostile vessels, subs in particular, would not likely require any significant self-defense capabilities because the vessel would be operating under an ADF defensive umbrella. OTOH if the intention was to sail an OPV into or near a contested SLOC like the Malacca Strait to deploy mines to close or further restrict the SLOC, then yes, significant defensive capabilities would likely be needed. However, I would think it more likely that the RAN would deploy sea mines into threatened or contested areas via submarine rather than via a known surface vessel of the RAN.

By using deploying via submarine, the field could be deployed covertly and hostiles might not even become aware of the existence of the minefield until a vessel hits one.