Or, indeed, a hydrographic survey vessel, AGS
Last edited:
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Lurssen flight deck looks to be maybe 10 metres longer than that on the Fassamer design. So if a hanger was required at some future date. A 10 metre rigid hanger could be added with an 8 metre concertina extension to allow an MH-60R size helicopter to be hangered. While still leaving the flight deck the same size as on the Fassamer design.
Joe Black
Active Member
The one thing I really like about the Damen OPV design is the integration of the bridge and the CIC, and the bridge looks somewhat larger than the Lurseen's OPV80.
Anyway, it is what it is. I hope they come up with a smart idea to incorporate a telescopic helo hangar.
As for the 40mm gun, it is possible that RAN might go with the Leonardo FORTY LIGHT system as depicted in the Lurseen's OPV80 model displayed during the PACIFIC 2017.
http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/fortylight
http://yaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/yaffadsp/images/dmImage/StandardImage/P1070081.JPG
Anyway, it is what it is. I hope they come up with a smart idea to incorporate a telescopic helo hangar.
As for the 40mm gun, it is possible that RAN might go with the Leonardo FORTY LIGHT system as depicted in the Lurseen's OPV80 model displayed during the PACIFIC 2017.
http://www.leonardocompany.com/en/-/fortylight
http://yaffa-cdn.s3.amazonaws.com/yaffadsp/images/dmImage/StandardImage/P1070081.JPG
the road runner
Active Member
HMAS Darwin returns home to Sydney harbour before being decommissioned...
https://www.facebook.com/7newssydney/videos/1902477906443000/
Whats is the fate of HMAS Darwin ? Sold for scrap like Sydney or sunk as an artificial reef?
https://www.facebook.com/7newssydney/videos/1902477906443000/
Whats is the fate of HMAS Darwin ? Sold for scrap like Sydney or sunk as an artificial reef?
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Don't forget that Christopher Pyne was recently in Poland trying to get them interested in Hawkei for their Army.
And at the same time he also discussed with them the possible sale of the FFGs as they retire over the next two years too:
https://www.minister.defence.gov.au...s/promoting-australian-defence-exports-poland
Will it just be the last two FFGs? Or maybe also including Darwin? two operational and a spares ship? Who knows.
But she might also find a home on the other side of the world with her two younger Australian built sisters too.
Nice touch ... It is being escorted by the Hobart and sailing past the Canberra.
The old and the new.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
But what Damen design are you talking about??
Yes Damen has the whole range of options from PB's, OPV/OCV size to Corvette size, what we don't really have a clear picture of is what 'exactly' did they propose for SEA 1180?
It certainly became clear in the end that both of the German offerings were based on their respective 80m OPV designs, but the Damen offering didn't appear to be based on their OPV 1800 (or OPV 1800 Sea Axe), it appeared, from the model at 'Pacific 2017' that the model shown was the much smaller 6711 Sea Axe design (67m as opposed to the other 80m designs).
See the photos from DTR Magazine:
Defence Technology Review : DTR OCT 2017, Page 1
Yes their OPV 1800 design looked good (on paper at least), but if their offering was really the 6711 (smaller 67m design), then I'm more than happy that one of the German 80m designs was the winner (hangar or not!!).
I am inclined to believe that they were offering the 67m design.
Maybe the1800 is just a paper ship.
They may have had some doubts as to whether it would be ready for production next year.
I think South Africa is going to be a launch customer ... but I haven't really seen any details.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
In a way the winning Lurssen design reminds me of a 'mini' Choules (a very mini Choules), large open rear helipad and almost the same amount of deck area in front of it.
If a hangar was needed at a later stage, a permanent fixture would probably be very expensive to retrofit, but I suppose they could do a 'Choules' and procure a number of big 'tents', portable hangars for a better word.
If the need for a hangar wasn't in the RFI and there are no more helicopters planned in the DWP for the RAN, then I just can't see it happening.
What I definitely think we will see is the carriage of containers on that 'spare' deck area, mission container for a UAV, it appears from the model at Pacific 2017, there may be just enough space (width wise) for three containers across.
Defence Technology Review : DTR OCT 2017, Page 1
But we will just all have to wait and see as things progress and more information is eventually available as to the sort of 'extra' mission capabilities these ships will perform in the future.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Yeah well maybe the OPV 1800 was too much risk if it was still a paper design (as opposed to real and in the water designs already delivered by the two German contenders).
The other issue could have been size, both the German design were right on the 80m length and between 1700t and around 1800t.
Looking at the specs of the Damen OPV1800 and OPV1800 Sea Axe, they were larger ships.
The OPV1800 is actually 83m and 1890t (according to Damen's spec sheet) the OPV1800 Sea Axe version was longer at 85m, but no displacement given, probably closer to 2000t.
Maybe they were just 'too much' ship (you would suppose they could have put up their OPV1400 design), sort of half way between the larger 1800s and the small 67m offering.
Anyway, decision made and doesn't matter now!!
Joe Black
Active Member
TKMS lost Australia's sub competition for good reasons
More information is slowly coming out of the Sea1000 selection..
https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/thyssenkrupp-shipbuilding-rapidly-sinking-856111
I find this the most interesting.... thinking that TKMS is the best sub builders out there.... not to be....
"ThyssenKrupp’s Achilles heel is not in its steel business. Rather it is found along the wharves and dry docks in the northern city of Kiel, where the skeletons of dozens of ships and submarines under construction by ThyssenKrupp’s Marine Services line the shore.
Despite all the evidence of feverish activity, ThyssenKrupp’s shipbuilding division is in a mess. Sources at the company told Handelsblatt that the division suffered an operational loss in the financial year 2016-2017, and that the dire situation is unlikely to change going forward. As a result, company sources told Handelsblatt that division chief financial officer Evelyn Müller will depart the firm by the end of the year.
If every dry dock in Kiel is occupied with a ship or sub under construction, how could the company be losing money? Because of technical and planning bottlenecks and delays, almost every ship is finished well behind schedule. The company actually loses money every time the Dom Perignon bottle smashes on a hull at launch. “No submarine is delivered on time,” said one source at the company.
This sloppy management convinced the Australian government to award a €34-billion contract for a fleet of new submarines to France’s DCNS shipyards in 2016, a huge blow to ThyssenKrupp’s ambitions. After that fiasco, company management promised a complete overhaul of its business – but nothing much seems to have happened."
----
I do wonder if Singaporean Navy will switch back to Swedish subs after taking delivery of their Type 218SGs.
More information is slowly coming out of the Sea1000 selection..
https://global.handelsblatt.com/companies-markets/thyssenkrupp-shipbuilding-rapidly-sinking-856111
I find this the most interesting.... thinking that TKMS is the best sub builders out there.... not to be....
"ThyssenKrupp’s Achilles heel is not in its steel business. Rather it is found along the wharves and dry docks in the northern city of Kiel, where the skeletons of dozens of ships and submarines under construction by ThyssenKrupp’s Marine Services line the shore.
Despite all the evidence of feverish activity, ThyssenKrupp’s shipbuilding division is in a mess. Sources at the company told Handelsblatt that the division suffered an operational loss in the financial year 2016-2017, and that the dire situation is unlikely to change going forward. As a result, company sources told Handelsblatt that division chief financial officer Evelyn Müller will depart the firm by the end of the year.
If every dry dock in Kiel is occupied with a ship or sub under construction, how could the company be losing money? Because of technical and planning bottlenecks and delays, almost every ship is finished well behind schedule. The company actually loses money every time the Dom Perignon bottle smashes on a hull at launch. “No submarine is delivered on time,” said one source at the company.
This sloppy management convinced the Australian government to award a €34-billion contract for a fleet of new submarines to France’s DCNS shipyards in 2016, a huge blow to ThyssenKrupp’s ambitions. After that fiasco, company management promised a complete overhaul of its business – but nothing much seems to have happened."
----
I do wonder if Singaporean Navy will switch back to Swedish subs after taking delivery of their Type 218SGs.
Well damn, That puts a new spin on things. On an investmant stand point, Being 'unsellable' makes it the perfect time to pick it up on the cheap especially for an existing shipbuilder involved in the naval field. Great time for ASC to expand but that will never happen.
Hi John
I'm starting to warm to this ship.
Would be interested as to what vacant space is available under the flight deck.
Are containers to be stored on the deck only or is there space in this mission bay.
If so how is it accessed?
It appears this ship has some future growth potential.
Maybe not a hangar but some weapons growth between bridge and funnel and would suggest some lighter weight systems either side of the bridge like a Protector dual RWS.
Anyway, will be interested as to when more details are known.
Just as we had Armidale Patrol boats in Talisman Sabre 2017, I'm sure the OPV's will be integrated within future task forces where they will have a place commensurate with their abilities, and threat level.
They may even do some contabulatory work
Certainly a step up from the previous three generations of patrol boats
Regards S
On the RNZN OPVs and MRV Canterbury there is a hatch in the flight deck that containers can be lowered / lifted through with a crane. A few years back, I also saw a photo of a US humvee being lowered through the flight deck hatch on Canterbury.
That's what the PV 80 does too - there's soft patches in the forward end of the flight deck which can be seen in some of the overhead shots of the Bruneian ships. Not sure of the capacity; think it's two on the mission deck and there is some provision for stowage on the flight deck as well but what if any limits that might impose is not obvious. There's a picture of a container being lowered through one of the soft patches somewhere on the net - I was looking at it over the weekend but can't now find it.
Actually I can kind of understand why the navy wouldn't want to push the OPV as being much more than a constabulary vessel.
There is always the possibility that some politician would see this sort of ship as an alternative to bigger and much more expensive frigates and destroyers.
Down the track I can see its role be expanded into mine warfare and survey work but the navy wouldn't want to give the impression that this ship could in any way be seen as an alternative to a big heavily armed warship.
In times of war ... sure stick some missiles on it and hope for the best but in peacetime just keep pushing the line that it is just an OPV.
There is always the possibility that some politician would see this sort of ship as an alternative to bigger and much more expensive frigates and destroyers.
Down the track I can see its role be expanded into mine warfare and survey work but the navy wouldn't want to give the impression that this ship could in any way be seen as an alternative to a big heavily armed warship.
In times of war ... sure stick some missiles on it and hope for the best but in peacetime just keep pushing the line that it is just an OPV.
I agree, I am not too worried about it armament. But in these other roles I wonder how much they will need to be adapted.
But embarking helicopters is fairly standard for survey work. HMAS Moresby (II) started around the early 1960's carrying Westland Scouts (Of which I have many interesting stories about ditching in Wewak).
While adding things like a hanger might be possible, I am still attached to the idea of a unified class, and these are some pretty major modifications which might result in a new and different class of vessel being selected to replace survey ships.
These ships will be way, way more capable than the preceding class. In terms of displacement its hard to be disappointed with a fleet that will be around seven times larger than the preceding class.
The growth of the RAN continues.
Modern survey vessels have no need for a helo which in the past was used to help,set up the shore stations needed for HIFIX, the system they used for accurate position finding so I suspect that if the class carries over to REA and MW there won't be major changes as modular and remote systems will do most of the work
I would still assume they would want helicopter capability. The Leeuwins were build in 2000 when modern positioning methods were used.
HMS enterprise and echo can support a helo operations. US survey ships are 5,000t and the latest one has a moon pool. I can certainly see UAV/UUV being more useful in the future for survey type work.
Thanks Spoz and ngatimozart
Suggest if it can carry and lift a 20" container there should be no problem storing a Schiebel CAMCOPTER S-100 sized UAV.
Still hunting for an image of deck lift / container so if you find one please post.
Regards S
- Status