Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[76mmGuns]

I don't think China will be worried about Australia, since our frigates will only be Anzacs for the next ten years, and won't be totally replaced til 2035 ish.

If it were a big issue, we'd need to get a big increase in numbers front end ships. Who knows. Maybe the PM will announce 18 frigates instead of 9.

I do wonder if Australia is a little bit like the USA was pre WW2- a sleeping middling giant. Our population is far less , USA 1935 approx 135 million, but our GDP roughly similar. Govt revenue is about $465bn, so if it cuts back on social security etc, it can do what Singapore does and spend 25% on military. That's a lot of money.

I know this is unlikely, but unlike the Philippines which has already lost an island, and is giving away it's rights, we have the wealth, land size, resources and educated workforce to push back and build up our military. And being so far away, we have time to prepare.

 

[oldsig127]

I know this is unlikely, but unlike the Philippines which has already lost an island, and is giving away it's rights, we have the wealth, land size, resources and educated workforce to push back and build up our military. And being so far away, we have time to prepare.

I'll say it's unlikely. There's no public will to do any such thing, and any attempt to do so that doesn't carry the public with it will instead bring about the election of a government likely to do *less*. Unpalatable but true - there will be no push back until the bulk of Australians believe there's something to push back against more important than maintaining our current course (which is effectively constant with minor variations and temporary reverses of course with changes of government)

Want a sure fire way to change public attitudes? Prove to them that Chinese frigates off our east coast will cause long weekends or the footy finals to be abolished

oldsig

 

[StingrayOZ]

I don't think China will be worried about Australia, since our frigates will only be Anzacs for the next ten years, and won't be totally replaced til 2035 ish..

Well yes and no.

In a stand alone conflict between China and Australia only, Australia will lose. But Australia isn't exactly on its own in a conflict. But the fact Australia cut across China's big displace on its own is.

Australia has 3 Aegis ships just about ready to go. While not earth shaking, it is a significant development. Australia leading Japanese and Korean fleets on exercises, provides more than a US pathway. Australia also has significant sway with the US and the US Navy. There are now levels of diplomacy for China and more options open to those who oppose her inappropriate actions.

The timing of the $35 billion ship building announcement plus the $170 billion on defense plan will be a significant gesture. Combined that with Harris arriving down under as ambassador, and a few other bits and pieces makes the situation look a bit different to how China would want it to look.

Countries like the Philippines and Vietnam and Indonesia who are looking for a credible middle power to lead the light in dealing with China, Australia is a real tangible power. Having Australia cut through the Chinese super fleet on its way from one to the other shows a clear confidence that the region has been lacking.

Being able to chuck a few extra and capable ships into the region is going to create more loose ends for China.

Having someone else credible proving input on region affairs and building relationships is not what China wants. The Americans haven't been that successful at building support for their views, it is highly likely that Australia being a bit more cerebral about its approach and a bit easier to be both cooperating with and aligned alongside is going create a middle ground China does not want.

 

[Stampede]

Training, personnel flexibility, commonality of parts, upgrade pathways etc mean there will be significant savings over the life of the ships if a common design is selected. I did post a link to a USNI News article which included comments about the operating advantages of the USN having 26 common San Antonio Class hulls around the world.

As a separate issue, there are ongoing discussions with Poland about the future of the Melbourne and Newcastle.

Adelaide class frigates sale discussions ongoing - Defence Connect

Our current AWD, the FFG's Melbourne and Newcastle should continue to provide service for the RAN as we transition to the Hobart class, and further more remain in service until the later are completely up to speed and the fleet gets to a quantity of 12 Frigates / Destroyers.
Now is not the time to let this asset go.
With all due respect to Poland, we may regret letting them go now as the region is changing much quicker than our ability to build ships.

Regards S

 

[oldsig127]

Our current AWD, the FFG's Melbourne and Newcastle should continue to provide service for the RAN as we transition to the Hobart class, and further more remain in service until the later are completely up to speed and the fleet gets to a quantity of 12 Frigates / Destroyers.
Now is not the time to let this asset go.
With all due respect to Poland, we may regret letting them go now as the region is changing much quicker than our ability to build ships.

Regards S

Nowhere in the article is there any suggestion that the two newest FFGs will be sold on before the new DDGs are in service. As we won't have a surface fleet of 12 ships again until the ninth new frigate is commissioned retaining at least one of them would be the only way to increase the size of the fleet, at the cost of trying to support aging ships with obsolescent equipment crewed by extra bodies we just don't have.

I'd bet that they'll go, if not to Poland then as a nice new reef before the first new frigate enters service

oldsig

 

[Stampede]

Australian warships 'challenged' by Chinese navy in South China Sea
Australian warships challenged by Chinese military in South China Sea
Turnbull asserts Australia's 'perfect right' to sail South China Sea

It is in this context the Sea5000 announcement will be made. China contesting the free movement of Australian war ships is no longer a theoretical scenario. What is interesting is that they were travelling on a tour from the Philippines to Vietnam, not just doing donuts around Chinese SCS features, at least that is the current context of the situation. China has also had some significant displays of Naval power recently.

Edit:
The Chinese navy challenged Australian warships in the South China Sea as it conducted its largest-ever naval parade
It looks like the Australian fleet might have been moving across/near the Chinese super fleet.

So I guess what capability is required for Australia to operate in the SCS in this environment? My guess is things are moving upscale, I wonder if future potential isn't becoming an important factor in Sea5000.

I also hear that there is talk of bringing the commissioning of the new DDG Brisbane forward.

This combined with the $200 billion announcement could make for fairly large announcement. Perhaps by the Prime Minister at the end of this month.

Report that block work may of started on the PLAN'S forth aircraft carrier.
Coupled with their production of new and larger destroyers and increased numbers of supply ships we will have a very different and confident PLAN in the next 10 years.
With the ability to sustain a carrier battle group at distance and with some years of experience behind them with this new capability they will have a robust force. The PLAN will have a level of projection not see for some 600 years. This change in force posture in one generation is says a lot about ambition.

The question is what is what is China's agenda and why.

Time will give the answer and history may help as well.

Regards S

 

[76mmGuns]

Report that block work may of started on the PLAN'S forth aircraft carrier.
Coupled with their production of new and larger destroyers and increased numbers of supply ships we will have a very different and confident PLAN in the next 10 years.
With the ability to sustain a carrier battle group at distance and with some years of experience behind them with this new capability they will have a robust force. The PLAN will have a level of projection not see for some 600 years. This change in force posture in one generation is says a lot about ambition.

The question is what is what is China's agenda and why.

Time will give the answer and history may help as well.

Regards S

The why is easy.

What's the closest large source of raw materials, and is lightly defended?

Park one carrier and amphibious group at North West Australia, and one outside Sydney.

One group causes the secession of the NW and Australia becomes two countries.

The other group holds 5 million people hostage to ensure good behaviour.

Would the USA, especially under someone like trump, come to stop China's largest landgrab ?

That might cause some delay of the weekend footie matches.

Now I think about it, they'll probably take New Zealand too.

It's been 70 years since the world has seen a huge military build up by a pure dictator who can afford it.

I honestly can't see any positive result from Xi ( it's not the CCP anymore ) having such force.

Anyway, can't wait for the frigate decision.

 

[t68]

The why is easy.

What's the closest large source of raw materials, and is lightly defended?

Park one carrier and amphibious group at North West Australia, and one outside Sydney.

One group causes the secession of the NW and Australia becomes two countries.

The other group holds 5 million people hostage to ensure good behaviour.

Would the USA, especially under someone like trump, come to stop China's largest landgrab ?

That might cause some delay of the weekend footie matches.

Now I think about it, they'll probably take New Zealand too.

It's been 70 years since the world has seen a huge military build up by a pure dictator who can afford it.

I honestly can't see any positive result from Xi ( it's not the CCP anymore ) having such force.

Anyway, can't wait for the frigate decision.

With the money they are spending on defence and the cost of invading, Australia seems to rather sell the lot and not worry about home resources as can be seen with the highest electricity prices in the world when we have an abundance of coal, think it would be cheaper to buy it!

And besides whatever Trump thinks of Australia and he's obsession with other spending more on defence, I believe our strategic position for the communication/ listening base here would far outweigh small contribution to the bigger picture.

 

[76mmGuns]

With the money they are spending on defence and the cost of invading, Australia seems to rather sell the lot and not worry about home resources as can be seen with the highest electricity prices in the world when we have an abundance of coal, think it would be cheaper to buy it!

Not a matter of money.

It's power for one person.

 

[John Fedup]

With the money they are spending on defence and the cost of invading, Australia seems to rather sell the lot and not worry about home resources as can be seen with the highest electricity prices in the world when we have an abundance of coal, think it would be cheaper to buy it!

And besides whatever Trump thinks of Australia and he's obsession with other spending more on defence, I believe our strategic position for the communication/ listening base here would far outweigh small contribution to the bigger picture.

Hightest electrical rates in the world.....you should visit Ontario!

 

[t68]

Hightest electrical rates in the world.....you should visit Ontario!

Whenever I see the electricy bill come in the mail, I have to have a couple of large wild turkeys and coke before I will open the bill nice and relaxed.

 

[John Fedup]

Whenever I see the electricy bill come in the mail, I have to have a couple of large wild turkeys and coke before I will open the bill nice and relaxed.

I hear you! You need a PhD just to understand a bill from Ontario Power Generation. Even if you use minimal electricity your bill will include a huge transmission charge. This is what happens when greenies in government back unprofitable private solar farm and windmill companies by guaranteeing them high KWH pricing (80 cents for them,4-6 cents for hydro and nukes).

 

[Boagrius]

The why is easy.

What's the closest large source of raw materials, and is lightly defended?

Park one carrier and amphibious group at North West Australia, and one outside Sydney.

...
It's been 70 years since the world has seen a huge military build up by a pure dictator who can afford it.

I honestly can't see any positive result from Xi ( it's not the CCP anymore ) having such force.

Anyway, can't wait for the frigate decision.

I don't know if I'd call us lightly defended. Such a force would still have half a dozen or so very capable SSKs to deal with, along with the RAAF's extremely modern fleet. That said I do agree with the jist of what you are saying - PRC gunboat diplomacy has already started. Time shall tell if/when Australia truly finds itself on the receiving end of it. I would have thought we could deter such behaviour without a massive increase to defence spending... at least for the foreseeable future.

 

[t68]

I don't know if I'd call us lightly defended. Such a force would still have half a dozen or so very capable SSKs to deal with, along with the RAAF's extremely modern fleet. That said I do agree with the jist of what you are saying - PRC gunboat diplomacy has already started. Time shall tell if/when Australia truly finds itself on the receiving end of it. I would have thought we could deter such behaviour without a massive increase to defence spending... at least for the foreseeable future.

Agree we could be a thorn in there backside in the short term, but long term who knows they would have to do a IJN and take over all the western pacific unless FPDA counties just decide to put themselves in the Chinese camp. If that were to happen would Russia open up a European front as a distraction for the US?

 

[Milne Bay]

Oh for goodness sake.
This is Sinophobia.
Yes, China wants to be the major player in the western Pacific, and from their point of view this is quite understandable.
Australia's position in this will be to recognise that the major player in our own backyard is not the US or Europe but .............. yes, that's right...... China.
The challenge facing the current and future Australian governments will be to develop a foreign policy that is inclusive of China while continuing our traditional alliances.
The problem will be finding the statesmen who are up to the job in leading the country at this time.
It certainly will not be boring, that's for sure
MB

 

[Boagrius]

I think in "76mmGuns" case it may be more aptly described as "Xi" or "dictator-phobia"

That said I think it's reasonable to expect that deterring/helping to deter PLAN gunboat diplomacy may appear on the ADF's job description over the next 30 years and beyond. China's rise (not to mention recent behaviour in the SCS) strikes me as unprecedented in many ways and there is a considerable amount of uncertainty in the region as a consequence of it.

As far as I can tell this seems to have been reflected in the recent DWP and in SEA 5000 itself.

 

[John Fedup]

Agree, Xi seems to have noted how successful Putin's moves have been. More worrying will be their cyber intimidation, abilities which will exceed Russia's formidable capabilities eventually given their huge technological and financial resources.

 

[Boagrius]

The thing that strikes me most is just how suddenly the geo-strategic landscape can shift under your feet. As recently as a decade ago the concept of the Russians essentially carving out bits of the Ukraine for themselves, or the PRC aggressively militarising the SCS (or establishing military bases in the South Pacific!) could have reasonably been dismissed as Tom Clancy inspired fantasy. Look how suddenly that all changed.

I think it is in Australia's interests to monitor China/Xi's behaviour very closely going forward and to maintain a defence force capable of making the most belligerent of "South China Sea type" behaviour more trouble than it is worth (insofar as it is realistic/practical) in our own part of the world.

 

[weaponwh]

China has no intention to forcibly grab resources from Australia not when they have $$ to buy . Also in the forseeable future china concentration are on Taiwan Japan SE Asia India and US in west Pacific . so u guys can relax

 

[weaponwh]

Report that block work may of started on the PLAN'S forth aircraft carrier.
Coupled with their production of new and larger destroyers and increased numbers of supply ships we will have a very different and confident PLAN in the next 10 years.
With the ability to sustain a carrier battle group at distance and with some years of experience behind them with this new capability they will have a robust force. The PLAN will have a level of projection not see for some 600 years. This change in force posture in one generation is says a lot about ambition.

The question is what is what is China's agenda and why.

Time will give the answer and history may help as well.

Regards S

Maybe don't want 100yrs of shame occurred again where EU +Japan pillage china . China already has vast interest in Africa. It need navy to protect those interest . and through out history they always been in the top so i can see they want to be top again