Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
No Darwin? Indicates that no sustainment activity here but I hope it's an oversight albeit that Cairns has been given the nod for the OPV refits.
Back to 1970, the crews families will be pleased.
t68
Well-Known Member
That would be ideal situation. I think the only way around it is if it was Law that the ADF had to meet a certain level of capabilty as a minimum.
As Waylander says, Japan has no problem with buying European. E.g. AW101 helicopters, Olympus & Spey marine gas turbines, radar technology from Thales, Adour jet engines, FH70 155mm howitzers,various European small arms, Carl Gustaf, Panzerfaust 3, French & British mortars, Otobreda naval guns, British 105mm tank guns . . .
A lot will depend on how Thales performs on the ACPBs, if they can make it work in Darwin then major sustainment work on the OPVs will follow.No Darwin? Indicates that no sustainment activity here but I hope it's an oversight albeit that Cairns has been given the nod for the OPV refits.
Back to 1970, the crews families will be pleased.
Interestingly I heard something recently about a maintenance facility being looked in Darwin for amphibious vehicles. This came from the infrastructure / construction side of things not defence and I am stuffed if I know which vehicles they would be referring to, unless of course its something to support the USMC rotation.
I think if anymore work / funding gets pulled from the NT our new local member will start visiting various offices in Canberra and sorting things out on a personal level, probably starting with the absentee NT senator.
Yes, they definitely seem to shop around for the best fit for their needs without the usual procurement politicisation other countries experience. I am particularly impressed with their continuous build strategies for skimmers and subs, evolution rather than revolution, maintaining capability by integrating the best fit systems in each batch rather than delaying, then panicking and rushing programs to fit unrealistic schedules.
Trackmaster
Member
ADM carrying a report today it is an azipod issue.
Apparently Canberra and Adelaide have the same problem.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yep, apparently a azipod issue. Hopefully something that is easily corrected.
Navy's largest ships unable to join Cyclone Debbie emergency response amid engine troubles - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Navy's largest ships unable to join Cyclone Debbie emergency response amid engine troubles - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Sure, its not impossible.Japan could deal with the Norwegians directly as they have done with various European equipment and designs mentioned.
But stealthy cruise/maritime strike missiles are in a different category, and have a wider strategic implication. If Japan is serious about an alliance then this might be the type of project it makes sense to partner with Australia. I don't believe Japan currently manufactures Harpoon, and buys from the US. I'm not aware of any missile Japan currently fields that is European produced or sourced they seem to be indigenous (usually off US designs or concepts) or US based.
So going against Harpooner or JSM, as a F-35 operator in a high threat enviroment, against a capable foe, JSM would seem to be pretty attractive.
Specifically because Australia has developed parts of the JSM/NSM missile like the radio seeker and funded F-35 development, Australia isn't a passive purchaser in this missile. Australia is likely to continue funding and developing improvements for this particular missile and updating/mapping relevant possible threats and making various improvements. I am not aware of the details, but I would assume Australia has some IP in the JSM version.
While it would be great to have a clean sheet indigenous missile tech pouring out of Australian factories from Australian companies, JSM offers a very real, slightly shared development. The JSM finds itself in a niche, due to Australian funded F-35 development which makes it very attractive to other nations like South Korea and Japan. Where JSOW/Harpoon doesn't have compelling advantages.
I see Choules has left Sydney and is able to be there for support up north and the others will be available in an estimated 10 days. It seems to be preventative on Adelaide. I am sure Choules will be able to provide what the ADF needs in Queensland.
Again though, lack of amphibious (in this case HDAR) hulls is again an issue. Good thing it was spotted before Talisman.
This was from the WNS forum but I cannot find any other reference. The page
www.pulaski.pl
Has a paper that suggests there is the 'potential' to acquire Melbourne and Newcastle and and suggestion of further upgrades to the two ex USN FFG7s should be dropped if this was in the offing. I understand they SLEPed the two they got in 2002 and 2003.
If Melbourne and Newcastle were disposed of we would have a bit of a hole in airdefence noting only one DDG will be accepted into service this year.
I would note the paper did nos support such a purchase.
Thanks for that ref and I agree that denuding the AAW capability before all three DDGs reach IOC seems an exercise in stupidity given current strategic uncertainties. That's the reason I supposed it was 03 and 04.
The navy lost a S-100 Camcopter at Beecroft yesterday.
Update: Beecroft fire caused by Schiebel S-100 Camcopter crash | South Coast Register
It was purchased for evaluation purposes. It was probably the only one we bought so I am not sure how this will pan out. I know there were plans to trial it on a frigate later this year but those plans might have gone up in smoke ... literally.
Update: Beecroft fire caused by Schiebel S-100 Camcopter crash | South Coast Register
It was purchased for evaluation purposes. It was probably the only one we bought so I am not sure how this will pan out. I know there were plans to trial it on a frigate later this year but those plans might have gone up in smoke ... literally.
Lets hope that the problem is easily rectified. It is very unfortunate timing from a PR point of view as it has the potential to undermine the hard work by the RAN and Defence to convince the media and public of the value of the LHDs. On a positive note it demonstrates the need for multiple amphibious hulls so reinforces the case for a second LSD type vessel to join Choules, as outlined as a possibility in the Defence White Paper.
I find it unbelievable that Defence would even consider disposing 05 and 06 before all the DDGs are fully operational!
It would also be incredibly stupid, IMO, to dispose of them without first stripping them of all re-usable equipment (Mk41 VLS, Phalanx, 76mm gun, Nulka, etc). That would also apply to 03 and 04. Without such items it is hard to imagine that they would be of any real interest to Poland.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Be interesting to know if this 'problem' is specific to the two Australian LHD's and not the Spanish sister JC1 (I wonder if there have been problems of a similar nature with JC1?).
Would certainly agree that a second Choules type LSD would be useful, pity the DWP said LSD type or AOR and not both.
Combined with the earlier news that broke re the unavailability of the LHDs during Cyclone Debbie, this has not been a good day for the RAN. Hopefully things can only get better from here!
The unavailability of the LHDs is largely irrelevant for TC Debbie. Choules is the designated HADR ship during the cyclone season. If the LHDs were available the Choules would still have been sent. The problem is the ARG is supposed to be certified during Ex Sea Raider next month. If the LHDs aren't available for that, there will be problems.
Ironically, the plan for Ex Sea Raider was an amphibious lodgement at Bowen. It will be interesting to see if that changes after Bowen has been flattened.
Ironically, the plan for Ex Sea Raider was an amphibious lodgement at Bowen. It will be interesting to see if that changes after Bowen has been flattened.
These were contractor provider, so it is probably up to the contractor to provide one, still...
This is CN's release regarding yet again crap reporting from the ABCs Andrew Green on defence matters. The man is a menace but it is, after all, "our" ABC.
Navy on the Record Response to Andrew Greene reporting | Navy Daily
- Status