While it is always a Government, and thus political, appointment, it’s still disappointing that there will now have been three Army and two AF CDFs since the last Navy appointee.
Well they have picked the most suitable person, end of story. If Navy had a more suitable person, it would have been him/her.
Yes, meant what I said, and I do know how the system works, so don't try and lecture me, my opinion, you have yours.
I did my basic para course with Angus Campbell in 1986. He won the sword of honor at RMC in 85. By 88/9 he was a captain in SASR. He is a very capable bloke and EARNT the repect of his men
No, if you said you believed that Ray Griggs was a more deserving recipient, that would be your opinion. However you stated that Angus Campbell only got the job as the result of political interference. That is not a statement of opinion.
“More suitable” in this context means “more acceptable to Government”. If Tim Barrett had left his hat in ring it would have been interesting to see what the result was. But from the perspective of Navy, the constant apparent belief that Army and AF officers are “more suitable” is not a positive motivator. And, BTW, I have directly served with all the officers mentioned in the Minister’s press release except CAF. They are all good.
An interesting development from the West today. Lurssen has chosen Civmec for the major role in building the OPVs. They are redeveloping their facility at Henderson and will be the final assembler of the ships. Despite government direction that Austal will be involved it remains unclear what that actual involvement will be. Civmec snares key patrol vessel role over rival AustalP
Not surprised, it seemed odd when they made the announcement and "everyone is a winner". Civmecs WA facility seems quite impressive. Not just for the OPV but also perhaps supporting the future frigates. I imagine if ASC/techport drops the ball, and someone was looking for a competitive yard to pass work off to, Civmec would be waiting in the wings with the WA mafia. All tooled up and with OPV builds underway. Blocks could come out of there (?), or maybe even final ship assembly (??). A bit of stick to keep things on track. Government can't afford a major clusterfork, there needs to be options. Also balancing the subs and frigates could be tricky, timing might need to be adjusted due to technical or strategic needs. I only see Austal picking up peicemeal stuff. I imagine they will be pestering around all ship builds looking for something bower bird style. Given the current strategic outlook, I see only tremendous pressure on all defence projects to get them up and running ASAP and looking at expansion for the future.
No not the case at all, and I did state that he is capable of the role, along with no doubt others as well, and said he is possibly deserving. My opinion is what is written, don't presume to know what I am thinking because you want to be anal about a few written words as usual, not my concern how you have taken it.
Speaking of the OPV80, does anyone know why the 3 options all have large rectangular spaces/windows in the rear25-35% of the ship? Doesn't that mean water floods the rear when it's a higher sea state, and everything is likely to rust faster?
Mission deck I should think. To provide accessible covered space for specialised equipment, containerised or otherwise, boats and crew. oldsig
The area under the flight deck? That's the upper deck, OldSig suggested it's the "mission deck" for a bunch of activities including boat launching down the stern ramp, container stowage, berthing etc. Many ships are designed that way; a higher forecastle with a break down to what in a merchant ship is called the main deck and in a warship is usually1 deck. Effectively, in the Lurssen design the flight deck is built over that; and it looks a bit more enclosed than they often do. One of the advantages over a flush deck is that it decreases hull weight; but reduced height to the sea surface and a relatively protected work area can also be useful things. Normally you only take significant water inboard in very heavy seas; and it's no more prone to rust than any other upper deck surface. You may notice that there are freeing ports at deck level to clear water which does find its way inboard. If you have a look at a pre ASMD ANZAC, and many other warship classes and ships designed to take helicopters such Coast Guard Cutters you'll see the same design of the space under the flight deck.
A couple of issues: 1. This structure would provide significant strength to the hull in both the support of the flight deck as well as the longtitudinal strength of the hull as a whole. 2. It protects the gear on the freeboard deck from the direct impact of the sea, The structure breaks up the wave. 3. The structure restricts the flow of water onto the deck unless you are silly enough to get pooped. 4. Plating up adds weight. If the ship does not need a greater buoyant volume then this is a weight saving.
Defence industrial plan soon for release Wonder if the defense plan and the sea5000 announcement will coincide.
Makes sense and Christopher Pyne loves making announcements. On a different matter back to SEA 1180, have the specs been made public yet? Any ideas on fit out, armament etc MB
Ah yes. I can see from this perspective. Some OPV's and patrol boats have an open and exposed rear (see how technical my terms are!) where the rigid hull boats are. Compared to them, the area is covered, not exposed.
I think it was announce 40mm gun, 9lv combat, 1,700t on the Darussalam-class offshore patrol vessel - Wikipedia. But with different fitout and weapons and sensors. I think there was talk about a higher speed diesel being fitted and more electrical capability. Part of me hopes they go with small cea radar, but they will probably get more off the shelf opv level kit. Given the Darussalam has frenchy missiles I would imagine there is still some scope to drop on harpoons or NSM if you ever wanted it. Still a hell of a lot more boat than the patrols have ever had. One these of this displaces nearly more than the entire fleet of attack class patrol boats. And it is still armed (in gun) as much as a Bathurst class corvette (even without an Exocet). The rear has a pretty neat setup, there is a nice image from the fleet review on wiki.
With a higher power engine and a greater capacity genset, it is not to hard to imagine that the same OPV frame could turn into an OCV / Corvette when and if the needs arise. As for the radar, looking at the model, it appears the spec only specified navigation radars such as the Kevin Hughes Sharpeye radar. Even if RAN opt to install a Air/Surface search radar, my guess is that the Saab Giraffe AMB will be considered ahead of the CEAFAR as there isn't a rotation model of the CEAFAR radar officially made available. Giraffe 1x would be my next pick if the AMB version is considered excessive for the OPV.
The successful testing of CEC between Hobart and Brisbane has occurred off the SA coast. Confirmation also that CEC will be integrated into the AEGIS combat systems of the future frigates. The lines on the two destroyers are striking! Australia marks new era of air defence - Defence Connect
