Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Going Boeing]

It appears that the bow & towed array sonars for Collins, Ghost Bat, Spearfish, Bluebottle & some surface combatants (such as the Hunters) will be Thales products made locally.

Conroy opens end-to-end towed array sonar manufacturing facility in Western Sydney,

 

[spoz]

I suspect a reasonably good sonar package could detect a standard cruising surface ship at distances up to and over 50 nm. A modern Mk48 is good for about 25-30nm. It would never be fired at the maximum range as a ship would hear the torpedo as soon as it was launched and high tail it the other way. To effectively be in the no escape zone, a ship needs to be about 10-15 nm away at most. A torpedo is still a close in weapon.

Ghost shark style drones will never be used to follow a ship, they will be positioned to intercept, mostly from information passed to them from another source, potentially several days beforehand. Ghost Shark manages its slow speed via large numbers prepositioned in an operational area

The Anduril Copperhead torpedo operates a little different to the Mk48. It is in effect a small loitering drone. It can be sent out on independent recon, and then activate in torpedo mode a substantial distance/time from the Ghost Shark itself. A Ghost Shark could send one or multiple out ahead of an intercept point, which then wait in silence and go live when the target is close.

Well over 50 miles.

 

[iambuzzard]

The former.

I have it on good authority that USS Colorado is one of the best kept of the Block IIIs and a good boat generally so at least we're not getting the dregs as some continue to obsessively claim.

So up to five boats rotating out of FBW at a time. That means good regional coverage.

 

[Sandson41]

So up to five boats rotating out of FBW at a time. That means good regional coverage.

That article says 'rotational basis'. Where are we getting the idea of five SSN home ported there at once? Did I miss something?

BTW, I'm also seeing some news articles calling Colorado the first 'AUKUS submarine', which is of course very misleading.

 

[devo99]

That article says 'rotational basis'. Where are we getting the idea of five SSN home ported there at once? Did I miss something?

BTW, I'm also seeing some news articles calling Colorado the first 'AUKUS submarine', which is of course very misleading.

Surely they will be rotating through which boats are posted to SRF-W.

 

[iambuzzard]

Surely they will be rotating through which boats are posted to SRF-W.

I think it means up to 5 boats will assigned to the region and will return to FBW for replenishment and maintenance. They are not home ported.

 

[SammyC]

I think it means up to 5 boats will assigned to the region and will return to FBW for replenishment and maintenance. They are not home ported.

Families are moving with the boats, so the rotations will not be short, expect multiple years as a minimum. The boats will be coming back to FBW at the completion of each deployment for crew rest and family time, and will be progressively undertaking the majority of shoreside maintenance at FBW.

While the Government and Navy seem at pains to not say they are home ported, they will be home ported in all but name.

 

[StevoJH]

While the Government and Navy seem at pains to not say they are home ported, they will be home ported in all but name.

And that is purely political, as far as I am aware the Australian Government has never allowed US Troops to be *permanently* based in Australia since the end of WW2?

 

[SammyC]

And that is purely political, as far as I am aware the Australian Government has never allowed US Troops to be *permanently* based in Australia since the end of WW2?

I don't know why.

I'm no polster, but I don't think it is such an emotive subject in the general population. I'm not sure the majority would be that fussed of the USN has permanent assets based in Australia. Pine Creek has never been referred to as a rotational force for instance.

Maybe I live a sheltered existence.

 

[Stampede]

Families are moving with the boats, so the rotations will not be short, expect multiple years as a minimum. The boats will be coming back to FBW at the completion of each deployment for crew rest and family time, and will be progressively undertaking the majority of shoreside maintenance at FBW.

While the Government and Navy seem at pains to not say they are home ported, they will be home ported in all but name.

Christopher Pyne does did a very interesting speech to the Public enquiring into AUKUS.

Clearly he has a different view to many who made submissions to that public forum.

I’ve certainly been one who has enjoyed viewing the variety of opinions presented to that enquiry.

All up , Pyne certainly does not shy away from the reality that FBW will not be only a shared facility,
but very much a US base.

Thats the future reality regardless of how the politicians play with words.

Rotational force and all !

Cheers S

 

[seaspear]

I suspect a reasonably good sonar package could detect a standard cruising surface ship at distances up to and over 50 nm. A modern Mk48 is good for about 25-30nm. It would never be fired at the maximum range as a ship would hear the torpedo as soon as it was launched and high tail it the other way. To effectively be in the no escape zone, a ship needs to be about 10-15 nm away at most. A torpedo is still a close in weapon.

Ghost shark style drones will never be used to follow a ship, they will be positioned to intercept, mostly from information passed to them from another source, potentially several days beforehand. Ghost Shark manages its slow speed via large numbers prepositioned in an operational area

The Anduril Copperhead torpedo operates a little different to the Mk48. It is in effect a small loitering drone. It can be sent out on independent recon, and then activate in torpedo mode a substantial distance/time from the Ghost Shark itself. A Ghost Shark could send one or multiple out ahead of an intercept point, which then wait in silence and go live when the target is close.

Christopher Pyne does did a very interesting speech to the Public enquiring into AUKUS.

Clearly he has a different view to many who made submissions to that public forum.

I’ve certainly been one who has enjoyed viewing the variety of opinions presented to that enquiry.

All up , Pyne certainly does not shy away from the reality that FBW will not be only a shared facility,
but very much a US base.

Thats the future reality regardless of how the politicians play with words.

Rotational force and all !

Cheers S

It does sound like the basing for the American subs will be similar to the then Holy Loch in Scotland

 

[Maranoa]

And that is purely political, as far as I am aware the Australian Government has never allowed US Troops to be *permanently* based in Australia since the end of WW2?

The USMC has a small permanent logistics unit in Darwin that keeps everything in order in between rotations of MRF-Darwin, and I believe two other USAF units one at RAAF Darwin and a second larger one at Tindal which has its own facility. Both USAF units are pretty recent.

 

[Nudge]

The USMC has a small permanent logistics unit in Darwin that keeps everything in order in between rotations of MRF-Darwin, and I believe two other USAF units one at RAAF Darwin and a second larger one at Tindal which has its own facility. Both USAF units are pretty recent.

You can add Richmond to that list. Long standing.

 

[justinterested]

Interesting video clip from senate estimates concerning the Henderson upgrades and timelines for LCM, LCH and Mogami builds:

A few points:

• A mid 2028 report will be done to determine if the LCH construction will be finished in time for the Mogami to start production in the same facility.
• If the LCH build is not progressing as planned, MHI will build the 4th Mogami
• Prototyping of Mogami to commence in 2030
• 2 dry docks to be built

 

[iambuzzard]

Interesting video clip from senate estimates concerning the Henderson upgrades and timelines for LCM, LCH and Mogami builds:

A few points:

• A mid 2028 report will be done to determine if the LCH construction will be finished in time for the Mogami to start production in the same facility.
• If the LCH build is not progressing as planned, MHI will build the 4th Mogami
• Prototyping of Mogami to commence in 2030
• 2 dry docks to be built

I suspect we will see hull 5 built by MHI as well. Just saying!

 

[SammyC]

Interesting video clip from senate estimates concerning the Henderson upgrades and timelines for LCM, LCH and Mogami builds:

A few points:

• A mid 2028 report will be done to determine if the LCH construction will be finished in time for the Mogami to start production in the same facility.
• If the LCH build is not progressing as planned, MHI will build the 4th Mogami
• Prototyping of Mogami to commence in 2030
• 2 dry docks to be built

First actual confirmation that there are additional hull options included in the MHI Japan build contract.

 

[StingrayOZ]

First actual confirmation that there are additional hull options included in the MHI Japan build contract.

Labour has tried to source local builds, but realistically if local industry isn't able to supply them, and we still need them, then we should get them from somewhere else.

But at that point its into the 2030 period I suspect world events will perhaps overtake what will happen next.

 

[Stampede]

Interesting video clip from senate estimates concerning the Henderson upgrades and timelines for LCM, LCH and Mogami builds:

A few points:

• A mid 2028 report will be done to determine if the LCH construction will be finished in time for the Mogami to start production in the same facility.
• If the LCH build is not progressing as planned, MHI will build the 4th Mogami
• Prototyping of Mogami to commence in 2030
• 2 dry docks to be built

So build a shipyard and train a work force

18 LCM complete by 2032
8 LCH complete by 2038
Plan / construct a 5000t frigate with physical work starting early 2030s for potentially eight ships
Hats off to can do enthusiasm, but is any of this realistic tired in with all the other civil and defence heavy engineering demands going forwards.

Most concerning

I had to smile when talking about Williamstown and its state of play.
It was recognised that Melbourne was well placed to ramp up a work force even if the infrastructure was not up to date.

Maybe a greenfield site in VIC may of helped share the national load.

Cheers S

 

[StevoJH]

Or NSW with CIVMEC, BAe, Thales or Babcock.

CIVMEC have an existing footprint in Newcastle, there is also significant free space still available on the old BHP site.

Thales have an existing footprint in Sydney, there are numerous legacy facilities in place that have been stripped of equipment but could probably be restored if the will existed. Sutherland dock can fit anything in the RAN except the AOR's and Canberra class.

Woolwich dock is also still around, it *should* be deep enough since a bunch of super maxi's yachts live there but no idea what would be required to install a new dock gate. Not a huge amount of space around the dock though and access could probably be problematic.

 

[iambuzzard]

So build a shipyard and train a work force

18 LCM complete by 2032
8 LCH complete by 2038
Plan / construct a 5000t frigate with physical work starting early 2030s for potentially eight ships
Hats off to can do enthusiasm, but is any of this realistic tired in with all the other civil and defence heavy engineering demands going forwards.

Most concerning

I had to smile when talking about Williamstown and its state of play.
It was recognised that Melbourne was well placed to ramp up a work force even if the infrastructure was not up to date.

Maybe a greenfield site in VIC may of helped share the national load.

Cheers S

From what I've heard a Chinese company based in Hong Kong is trying to buy it. Melbourne Port has already been leased to the Chinese I believe.