Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Stampede]

Actually I imagine that the US would be interested as well.

Whichever frigate wins this competition would be a good match for the FFX program ... unless the type 26 gets up.

I'm sure every major Navy will have some degree of interest in the outcome of SEA 5000.
Some interested in the contending designs and others in what the winning design can do, and what capability it brings to the RAN.

Would the South Korean summit be a good or bad time for an announcement.

Not Sure?

Ps - If I recall Malcolm Fraser made the connect between the Soviet Union going into Afghanistan and the rationale of building two extra FFG's.
Not sure in the 80's what ship building / planing the Navy had as the fleet looked a bit lost for direction back in the day, particularly with the non replacement of the Carrier Melbourne.
For SEA 5000 this is a long standing project, so hopefully the politics is taken out of the announcement when the decision is finally made.

Cheers S

 

[StingrayOZ]

In reference to this article:
Adelaide class frigates sale discussions ongoing - Defence Connect.

The article reads: "The vessels could provide enhanced ballistic missile defence to Poland, given the frigates are armed with a Mark 13 missile launcher for SM-2 missiles."

I am almost 100% sure that the SM-2 missile and the Adelaide Class frigates cannot perform any BMD role. Does anyone else recognise this or does the SM-2 really have any BMD capability?

On another note, an old video from BAE shows the outline for the production of the Future Frigates

.

The latest SM-2 missiles (RIM-156A) has some BMD capability, but it is fairly limited. I don't think Australia has ever fitted or fired these latest blocks out of the FFG's. I guess its possible. It might even be possible to fire SM-6.

But some capability is better than no capability.

Poland is an interesting country in an interesting position. They are buying ships to fill in until they build their own. It will be interesting to see what happens out of that.

I think the FFX is interesting looking at the F-5000.

 

[Volkodav]

I started to feel a little uneasy with comments about major mods to meet our needs. Also risk and maturity of design came to mind. I browsed through the ANAO's report on the AWD and happened upon footnote 17 which made pretty sobering reading.

The ANAO has previously observed that it is not uncommon for major projects, including Defence projects, to experience cost overruns and integrations issues. There is a tendency for initial estimates to be optimistic, contingencies to be too low, the severity of risks to be underestimated, delays to be more extensive than anticipated and the complexity of integration issues not to be fully appreciated. ANAO reference its report on the Seasprite.

The main issue with the AWD was the assumption that we were buying a complete design and hooking into an existing supply chain while using experienced and competent subcontractors. This ignored the fact that the Spanish design had evolved, many original systems were obsolescent, the supply chain was stale (some suppliers had gone out of business and others had cut work forces and subcontracted to new unproven suppliers) and while a massive effort was made to build the ASC work force, the assumed competency and capability of the "highly experienced" sub contractors, including Navantia, was invalid due to mass redundancies of their experienced workforces. Yards and companies don't build ships people do, if the competent and capable teams of experienced people no longer work at those yards, or for those companies, then all that has been achieved before counts for nothing.

 

[Jack Wyatt]

The main issue with the AWD was the assumption that we were buying a complete design and hooking into an existing supply chain while using experienced and competent subcontractors. This ignored the fact that the Spanish design had evolved, many original systems were obsolescent, the supply chain was stale (some suppliers had gone out of business and others had cut work forces and subcontracted to new unproven suppliers) and while a massive effort was made to build the ASC work force, the assumed competency and capability of the "highly experienced" sub contractors, including Navantia, was invalid due to mass redundancies of their experienced workforces. Yards and companies don't build ships people do, if the competent and capable teams of experienced people no longer work at those yards, or for those companies, then all that has been achieved before counts for nothing.

Thanks for providing such a detailed reply and context to the ANAO footnote.

On Save The Royal Navy webpage there is an article confirming the UK Govt has slowed the build and delivery schedule of the Type 26 due to budgetary issues. The construction of the third of the class is now not due to commence until 2021. Type 31e apparently to be in service two years prior to Glasgow.

Sorry I can't provide a link (technical issue).

 

[Meriv90]

The main issue with the AWD was the assumption that we were buying a complete design and hooking into an existing supply chain while using experienced and competent subcontractors. This ignored the fact that the Spanish design had evolved, many original systems were obsolescent, the supply chain was stale (some suppliers had gone out of business and others had cut work forces and subcontracted to new unproven suppliers) and while a massive effort was made to build the ASC work force, the assumed competency and capability of the "highly experienced" sub contractors, including Navantia, was invalid due to mass redundancies of their experienced workforces. Yards and companies don't build ships people do, if the competent and capable teams of experienced people no longer work at those yards, or for those companies, then all that has been achieved before counts for nothing.

Then how much TOT or better transfer of experience has truly happened with your Australian shipyards? Because by the graph I posted in the Canadian topic Navantia is going to loose 50% of their workforce in few years (25% in 5, 50% in 10 or less, idk if in Spain you have special retirement cases for heavy jobs ), by 2022 it will have lost a lot of experience on the F-100.

Is the reasoning correct? How are they going to face the F-110 program plus the SEA5000 on the work experience?

 

[hauritz]

Thanks for providing such a detailed reply and context to the ANAO footnote.

On Save The Royal Navy webpage there is an article confirming the UK Govt has slowed the build and delivery schedule of the Type 26 due to budgetary issues. The construction of the third of the class is now not due to commence until 2021. Type 31e apparently to be in service two years prior to Glasgow.

Sorry I can't provide a link (technical issue).

Allow me ...
Why will the Royal Navy not have its first Type 26 frigate operational until 2027?

The lack of urgency certainly won't help the Type 26 cause. The Type 26 looks like it would be the riskiest selection for Australia and I am having my doubts as to whether the benefits of a newer design outweigh those risks.

 

[Stampede]

Just a thought on our current fleets Frigate / Destroyer numbers.
How many do we have today for actual duty.

If I'm correct the fleet stands at

1 x AWD
8 x Anzac
2 x FFG

Realistically the Hobart ( AWD ) is not ready for active service.
The ANZAC's I'm unsure of, though I remember reading in late 2017 four of the class were in refit or repair over in the west, leaving the remaining four for active service.
The FFG's are fine, but unsure of their time table for departure from the fleet.

Would this mean we have only six ships we can deploy today?
Would this be a typical number available looking back over the last two decades?


Regards S

 

[oldsig127]

Would this mean we have only six ships we can deploy today?
Would this be a typical number available looking back over the last two decades?

I'd imagine that you know the rule of threes as well as any of us. If we have more than four *immediately* available we're doing okay

oldsig

 

[ASSAIL]

Allow me ...
Why will the Royal Navy not have its first Type 26 frigate operational until 2027?

The lack of urgency certainly won't help the Type 26 cause. The Type 26 looks like it would be the riskiest selection for Australia and I am having my doubts as to whether the benefits of a newer design outweigh those risks.

Never mind, as the author states, "it will be the best in the world" obviously worth waiting for just like T45 is the"best AAW destroyer in the world"

But to be less frivolous, we know only too well what government caused delays can do to productivity and cost, we went through that with the AWDs during the reign of the previous government.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The RAN has been furiously working on both HMAS Hobart and Brisbane.

Commissioning (edit: Delivery) of Brisbane has apparently been bought forward. It could be weeks away. Poland better be ready to stump up for the FFG's.

The Anzacs are getting CEAFAR2-L upgrades. I wouldn't be surprised if they could be put back to see in short notice.

Maybe a mega announcement. Maybe while the French president is in town.
Sea5000 winner, Sea1000 announcement, OPV details, Commissioning of Brisbane, FOC of Hobart, sale of FFG's to Poland.
Maybe some airforce and army stuff as well. It just not clear if the dates are matching up.

 

[spoz]

There is an experienced workforce available in South Australia available to whoever wins Sea 5000. The current Navantia presence in the yard is quite small.

Brisbane is scheduled for delivery in a couple of months, but commissioning is some time away. There has been no “speed up” of her build, the current schedule was set a couple of years ago.

 

[aussienscale]

Just a thought, but thinking it is a pitty we are not using the current gap at Adelaide to upgrade or totally re build the ship lift ! Maybe to something that could handle up to the size of the LHD'S ? Then we could truly build any sized ship we need into the future.

Cheers

 

[Meriv90]

The RAN has been furiously working on both HMAS Hobart and Brisbane.

Commissioning (edit: Delivery) of Brisbane has apparently been bought forward. It could be weeks away. Poland better be ready to stump up for the FFG's.

The Anzacs are getting CEAFAR2-L upgrades. I wouldn't be surprised if they could be put back to see in short notice.

Maybe a mega announcement. Maybe while the French president is in town.
Sea5000 winner, Sea1000 announcement, OPV details, Commissioning of Brisbane, FOC of Hobart, sale of FFG's to Poland.
Maybe some airforce and army stuff as well. It just not clear if the dates are matching up.

What are the benefits of a mega announcement like that? Wouldn't it be better from a political side to make a lot of small ones?

 

[StingrayOZ]

The ship lift is large enough to build any surface combatant we could possibly want to build. We could probably build 10,000 t destroyers there. Maybe limited by winch capacity, but that isn't a deal breaker.

There are large ship yards we could have built LHD's in. Cairncross Dockyard comes to mind. It is being closed and sold for residential development. At 33m x 263m it was big enough. As I recall I think that was where the Mistral LHD proposal was going to be assembled.

Moving ship yard work to South Australia (and now WA) has meant that Australia has given up its really large ship capable yards on the east coast.

Australia has given up on large builds. We could have built, 2 x LHD's, 1 x 27,000 ice breaker, 2 x AOR. That would have been 5 nearly 30000t ships. Choules was going to be a new build as well (although it probably would have been a repeat of something else we were building). But the problem then is we probably wouldn't order anything big for the next 30-40 years.

Certainly going into the future I hope the civmec yard is big enough for a larger version of the biggest sea5000 ship. It looked pretty tight with an AWD in there.

 

[StingrayOZ]

What are the benefits of a mega announcement like that? Wouldn't it be better from a political side to make a lot of small ones?

Why not do both?
I think they want to make a big announcement for a couple of reasons.

• Traction. Small announcements tend to get lost in the new cycle. Particularly with events as they are.
• Reinforcing the idea of a national plan. That the government, as Chris Pyne said, has fixed it. There is a long continuous amount of work. Actually this is something that they are really working on, there is a whole ad campaign on defence industries.
• Given current instability, a strong defence force is a priority. Australians are concerned about the actions of China and the actions of the US. Sometimes it feels like (to me) we are the only ones in the west who do. Brexit and the EU seem self absorbed or ineffective.
• There are other problems regionally. Malaysia may be heading down as a failed state. Philippines seems to be struggling with their war. Oh and we will have two new countries in the next 2 years with Bougainville and New Caledonia.
• Future work. With the Americans closing down Holden and Ford factories, and Toyota closing, the mining boom ending in WA there is a genuine concern regarding the future of work underpinning those cities. South Australia is shrinking relative to the rest of Australia, the electoral commission has just reallocated seat away from that state.
• Pressure on China. Announcing a OPV is not enough for China to take you seriously. Building 12 x 5500t subs, the 2nd largest Aegis surface fleet in the world, and generally doubling down on military capability might be. Most/many regional nations are turning more to Australia as the big hope to counter balance China in their region.
• There is increasing pressure on our Prime minister as well from within his own party.

The sea5000 project is a big project. In the end Australia will have more ships than Spain, UK or Italy will have built, of that type. Australia will have the leading big ship program in the world (outside of China or the US).

I don't want to sound alarmist, but there have been some pretty clear statements that we should be preparing for war, as there is a high chance of something flaring up. China is openly contesting the movement of Australian Naval ships, and we have moved P8's to Japan to look for North Korean ships and submarines.

 

[Pusser01]

The RAN has been furiously working on both HMAS Hobart and Brisbane.

Commissioning (edit: Delivery) of Brisbane has apparently been bought forward. It could be weeks away. Poland better be ready to stump up for the FFG's.

The Anzacs are getting CEAFAR2-L upgrades. I wouldn't be surprised if they could be put back to see in short notice.

Maybe a mega announcement. Maybe while the French president is in town.
Sea5000 winner, Sea1000 announcement, OPV details, Commissioning of Brisbane, FOC of Hobart, sale of FFG's to Poland.
Maybe some airforce and army stuff as well. It just not clear if the dates are matching up.

Arunta's not going anywhere soon, she has a few large holes cut in her side. She has also had the cupola mast with existing CEAFAR radar system cut off & removed. This is being replaced with a re-designed mast to accommodate the extra radar faces. Cheers

 

[Pusser01]

Just a thought on our current fleets Frigate / Destroyer numbers.
How many do we have today for actual duty.

If I'm correct the fleet stands at

1 x AWD
8 x Anzac
2 x FFG

Realistically the Hobart ( AWD ) is not ready for active service.
The ANZAC's I'm unsure of, though I remember reading in late 2017 four of the class were in refit or repair over in the west, leaving the remaining four for active service.
The FFG's are fine, but unsure of their time table for departure from the fleet.

Would this mean we have only six ships we can deploy today?
Would this be a typical number available looking back over the last two decades?


Regards S

Perth is currently mothballed, Arunta is a few months away from being re-floated & Stuart is about half way through an IMAV. Cheers

 

[hauritz]

I don't want to sound alarmist, but there have been some pretty clear statements that we should be preparing for war, as there is a high chance of something flaring up. China is openly contesting the movement of Australian Naval ships, and we have moved P8's to Japan to look for North Korean ships and submarines.

While I wouldn't go as far as saying that war is imminent I would say that it is becoming more and more obvious that we cannot necessarily rely on our alliance with the United States to keep us safe. With US influence waning and China on the rise, Australia is going to have to carry a much bigger share of its defence burden for over the next few decades.

I might point out that China isn't our only threat. Australia's relations with most of the countries in this region have been a little bit tetchy over the years.

I would be tempted as prime minister to turn any announcement of the SEA 5000 winner into a kind of a rallying of the troops. We Australians tend to be somewhat complacent about defence issues so it wouldn't hurt to raise people's awareness of the challenges that may face us in the not too distant future.

 

[John Fedup]

I think the other country worried about wanning US commitment in the region has to be Japan. If the two Koreas become reasonably civil with each other it will likely be via Chinese influence. S Korea may not want to upset China in any way down the road and Koreans aren’t warm and fuzzy on Japan.

 

[STURM]

I might point out that China isn't our only threat. Australia's relations with most of the countries in this region have been a little bit tetchy over the years.

To be expected but not to the point where relations get to a point where a conflict or a permanent state of tensions result. Over the years relations [even before East Timor in 1999] have been strained at various times with Indonesia but things have improved a lot. Both countries fully realise it's to their advantage to be chummy with each other.

If the two Koreas become reasonably civil with each other it will likely be via Chinese influence.

I would think that mutual interests and the need to resolve the issues before outside powers complicate things are the driving factors here. Both want to avoid a war which if occurs; will take place on their territory. In the coming decades if [and that's a big ''if''] relations between both Koreas improve; there might be calls in South Korea for a reduced U.S. military presence in South Korea; the U.S. might not like that. Similarly, in the coming years segments of the Japanese population [not just in Okinawa] might be less receptive to having U.S. bases on their soil.