Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Somewhere I saw that the names of the 2nd &3rd Hunter class Frigates were 'Flinders' & Tasman.

:)
Well, yes, all over the place including here a few pages back.

John HUNTER second governor of NSW, Captain of HMS Sirius in the first fleet, explored and mapped the region north of Sydney while Phillip was governor

Abel TASMAN - Explorer and navigator, has a small island named after him somewhere. Important also because his sea keeps the All Blacks away most of the time

Mathew FLINDERS - Explorer and navigator, led the first circumnavigation of the big island

So, all explorer/navigators with Australian regions named after them. As CN said the names were for *regions* I wonder if they'll be able to continue the naval association.

The only other ones I can think of are John MURRAY, Phillip KING and George BASS - both regions and navigators. Beyond that there are other navigator/explorers - Douglas MAWSON for example - without regions and plenty of regions without explorer/navigator names. Time will tell.

oldsig
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
I like the naval association. Australia has a deep maritime history, its fair enough to tap into that. The fact it also links to regions is well done. Not opposed to some new names circulating if they make sense and aren't political.

I see Sydney is being listed as a favourite for a new sub base.
Sydney set to become base for next fleet of submarines
Submarines for Sydney? We've been here before — many times

Even crazy patrick reckons its a goer. There are two giant oceans, we need bases on either side!

SBS gets the worst journalism award for renaming the new submarines as the Hunter class!
New subs could be based in Sydney Harbour
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Well, yes, all over the place including here a few pages back.

John HUNTER second governor of NSW, Captain of HMS Sirius in the first fleet, explored and mapped the region north of Sydney while Phillip was governor

Abel TASMAN - Explorer and navigator, has a small island named after him somewhere. Important also because his sea keeps the All Blacks away most of the time

Mathew FLINDERS - Explorer and navigator, led the first circumnavigation of the big island

So, all explorer/navigators with Australian regions named after them. As CN said the names were for *regions* I wonder if they'll be able to continue the naval association.

The only other ones I can think of are John MURRAY, Phillip KING and George BASS - both regions and navigators. Beyond that there are other navigator/explorers - Douglas MAWSON for example - without regions and plenty of regions without explorer/navigator names. Time will tell.

oldsig
Maybe they could name one "BLIGH" he served on HMS Hunter as well.
 

John Newman

The Bunker Group
Here is the link with the relevant post the last on the page.


Type 26 or FIO5 or FREMM – the winner is?


Janes and “mandate” caught my eye as did the lack the Aegis cms. Perhaps the latter gives some indication of the date of the article noting when the PM announced that requirement?
Ok, so basically what you have there is a 'cut and paste' by someone who is saying that Janes said that, (and they may well have, but still doesn't mean it's accurate or correct).

The difference between DT and some other Defence blog sites, is that DT is populated by a lot of Def Pros and also moderated (by a lot of Def Pros too).

Nothing wrong with posting something that may be a bit 'odd', but it's worth doing a bit of research first, as the old saying goes, "Google, it's your friend, use it!", but if you can't find a reliable and accurate source, then sure, ask the question.

No doubt one of the Mods, Def Pros (or even some of us old hacks that have been around here for a long time will try and help).

Cheers,
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Is Abel Tasman the first non British or Australian citizen to have a Royal Australian Navy ship named in his honour curious to also know how this was reported in Holland
 

hauritz

Well-Known Member
The ship names do seem a bit of a departure from the usual naming conventions.

It also means we probably won't be seeing another HMAS Melbourne until the Hobarts are replaced.
 

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
Is Abel Tasman the first non British or Australian citizen to have a Royal Australian Navy ship named in his honour curious to also know how this was reported in Holland
The wartime RNZN naval base or "stone frigate" in Lyttelton (Near Christchurch) was HMNZS Tasman.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Williamstown was not so warmly remembered in the 1960s 70s and 80s. It was a dump and commonly referred to as Dogtown.
I did a refit, or part of one there in Derwent in 1974 and apart from the total lack of any productivity from the Dockyard (constant demarcation disputes, days to complete work which should have taken hours) the town itself was, to be kind, dreary.

I must confess though, my maternal ancestors migrated and settled there in the 1860s and I’m told it was a pleasant place at that time.


Yes there is a line between nostalgia and reality.
Back then Williamstown was another working suburb and not the desirable residential address it is today.
The ANZAC ship build was the watershed between what was production dark ages in the times you mentioned and hope for the future regarding shipbuilding and maintenance in Melbourne.
The building of a dozen ships for both the RAN and NZ Navy's was a good achievement followed some years later with completion of the Canberra class.
A different sequence of shipbuilding starting a decade ago may of given Williamstown the continuous ship building that Adelaide enjoy.s today.
Cannot turn back the clock and as Melbourne is a growing and productive city it is good for Adelaide that they have a long term manufacturing project.
No hard feelings from this Victorian.

Regards S
 
Ok, so basically what you have there is a 'cut and paste' by someone who is saying that Janes said that, (and they may well have, but still doesn't mean it's accurate or correct).

The difference between DT and some other Defence blog sites, is that DT is populated by a lot of Def Pros and also moderated (by a lot of Def Pros too).

Nothing wrong with posting something that may be a bit 'odd', but it's worth doing a bit of research first, as the old saying goes, "Google, it's your friend, use it!", but if you can't find a reliable and accurate source, then sure, ask the question.

No doubt one of the Mods, Def Pros (or even some of us old hacks that have been around here for a long time will try and help).

Cheers,
Noted and thanks for the advice.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Bring Cockatoo Island back to life - -- although there would be a lot of pushback against using a world heritage listed former shipyard and naval base as a ... naval base.
I think if the resources which have been poured into Osborne SA had not been committed, then there would have been some merit in reactivating Cockatoo Island.

While I would like to see Australia be able to manufacture all the vessels needed for the RAN, one thing I fear happening is that pollies will 'fight' each other to get Defence monies spent on projects built in their respective districts and as a result, will lead to resources being expended and then squandered, duplicating capabilities like naval shipbuilding in various ports, with the facilities then competing with each other for project contracts.

Cockatoo Island Dockyards could likely be made into an effective yard to produce RAN vessels, but that would likely be at the expense of ASC/Osborne, facilities in Henderson WA, wasting the resources spent building up those facilities.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I think if the resources which have been poured into Osborne SA had not been committed, then there would have been some merit in reactivating Cockatoo Island.

While I would like to see Australia be able to manufacture all the vessels needed for the RAN, one thing I fear happening is that pollies will 'fight' each other to get Defence monies spent on projects built in their respective districts and as a result, will lead to resources being expended and then squandered, duplicating capabilities like naval shipbuilding in various ports, with the facilities then competing with each other for project contracts.

Cockatoo Island Dockyards could likely be made into an effective yard to produce RAN vessels, but that would likely be at the expense of ASC/Osborne, facilities in Henderson WA, wasting the resources spent building up those facilities.
This is the problem we have had for decades, had we just concentrated on sustaining one major yard we would have had a sustainable industry for a hundred years now.

Brisbane I and Adelaide I were built at Codoc. Adelaide was delayed due to supply issues with machinery and armaments from the UK during the war, but none the less there was an experienced and capable yard that could have continued building Cruisers for the RAN between the wars and destroyers leading up to WWII.

The common-sense ordering of Australia and Canberra from Codoc would have cost less than building Albatross in compensation and buying the Cruisers from John Browns. Codoc would then have been in a position to build replacements for the retiring Town class light Cruisers in the late 30s instead of having to buy them from the UK.

This production could have continued during the war, while the trained and competent work force would have been better able to support the build of destroyers, frigates and corvettes in other yards. Williamstown for instance could have built more Tribals in less time.

Properly supported the Australian industry could have easily built a couple of Cruisers, several destroyers, and possibly even an Escort or light fleet carrier or two, in addition to the ships actually built during WWII. Maybe the pre-war panic desire to build a battle ship could have been achieved.

Post war all that would have been required would have been to keep ordering ships at regular intervals from Codoc and using other dock yards for commercial works and modernisation. If all two Battle, four Daring (build Waterhen too), three (or four) Perth, six River, six Adelaide, eight ANZAC and three Hobart had been built at Codoc we would already have our sustainable, continuous build.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
This is the problem we have had for decades, had we just concentrated on sustaining one major yard we would have had a sustainable industry for a hundred years now.

Brisbane I and Adelaide I were built at Codoc. Adelaide was delayed due to supply issues with machinery and armaments from the UK during the war, but none the less there was an experienced and capable yard that could have continued building Cruisers for the RAN between the wars and destroyers leading up to WWII.

The common-sense ordering of Australia and Canberra from Codoc would have cost less than building Albatross in compensation and buying the Cruisers from John Browns. Codoc would then have been in a position to build replacements for the retiring Town class light Cruisers in the late 30s instead of having to buy them from the UK.

This production could have continued during the war, while the trained and competent work force would have been better able to support the build of destroyers, frigates and corvettes in other yards. Williamstown for instance could have built more Tribals in less time.

Properly supported the Australian industry could have easily built a couple of Cruisers, several destroyers, and possibly even an Escort or light fleet carrier or two, in addition to the ships actually built during WWII. Maybe the pre-war panic desire to build a battle ship could have been achieved.

Post war all that would have been required would have been to keep ordering ships at regular intervals from Codoc and using other dock yards for commercial works and modernisation. If all two Battle, four Daring (build Waterhen too), three (or four) Perth, six River, six Adelaide, eight ANZAC and three Hobart had been built at Codoc we would already have our sustainable, continuous build.
Volk do you think that scenerio could have made the DDL project work?
 

Massive

Well-Known Member
Is Abel Tasman the first non British or Australian citizen to have a Royal Australian Navy ship named in his honour curious to also know how this was reported in Holland
Could we end up with an HMAS Hartog or a HMAS Janszoon?

Regards,

Massive
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I had some (very slight) involvement in the DDL Project - quite frankly, by the end nothing could have made it work. It was not a matter of the shipbuilding capability, it was about the lack of clarity and control around the requirement set. The original approval was probably flawed and there was never any real possibility that the incoming Whitlam Government would allow it to continue.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Cockatoo Island Dockyards could likely be made into an effective yard to produce RAN vessels, but that would likely be at the expense of ASC/Osborne, facilities in Henderson WA, wasting the resources spent building up those facilities.
Not so long as it's UNESCO World Heritage listed it won't. The Navy has already dismissed it as a site for the East coast subs on those grounds

oldsig
 
Last edited:

hauritz

Well-Known Member
I had some (very slight) involvement in the DDL Project - quite frankly, by the end nothing could have made it work. It was not a matter of the shipbuilding capability, it was about the lack of clarity and control around the requirement set. The original approval was probably flawed and there was never any real possibility that the incoming Whitlam Government would allow it to continue.
One of the promises BAE made was to develop a national capability to eventually design and develop our own large complex naval warships. At least that is the way I read it. The same thing is planned for the submarine industry.

Whether or not this will happen remains to be seen as it seems to me that we are entering an era where the costs of developing your own defence equipment are becoming so prohibitively expensive that soon only the largest and most powerful nations will be able to afford to do it.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Not so long as it's UNESCO World Heritage listed it won't. The Navy has already dismissed it as a site for the East coast subs on those grounds

oldsig
The UNESCO World Heritage status would not really give me pause. In the scheme of things, the island's history apart from possible pre-First Fleet use, is all recent history, unlike Uluru of Kata Tjuta.

The part I would be most concerned about is the costs required and likely negative impact upon other Australian shipbuilding concerns. In point of fact, I still have some concerns about the National Shipbuilding Programme since IMO there is still the chance that gov't could, for political reasons, once again opt to change course with orders and builds and it seems that this inconsistency has been a large part of why Australian naval shipbuilding has had boom and bust cycles.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I had some (very slight) involvement in the DDL Project - quite frankly, by the end nothing could have made it work. It was not a matter of the shipbuilding capability, it was about the lack of clarity and control around the requirement set. The original approval was probably flawed and there was never any real possibility that the incoming Whitlam Government would allow it to continue.
Yes a 2000ton corvette / sloop that evolved into a 4000ton destroyer that was quite literally superior to anything being built or planned outside the US. Would have been nice to have seen happen but realise cost and requirements creep really got out of hand.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I think if the resources which have been poured into Osborne SA had not been committed, then there would have been some merit in reactivating Cockatoo Island.

While I would like to see Australia be able to manufacture all the vessels needed for the RAN, one thing I fear happening is that pollies will 'fight' each other to get Defence monies spent on projects built in their respective districts and as a result, will lead to resources being expended and then squandered, duplicating capabilities like naval shipbuilding in various ports, with the facilities then competing with each other for project contracts.

Cockatoo Island Dockyards could likely be made into an effective yard to produce RAN vessels, but that would likely be at the expense of ASC/Osborne, facilities in Henderson WA, wasting the resources spent building up those facilities.
The problem now is that the work force which used to live in the dormitory suburbs of Balmain and surrounds is gone. Balmain used to be a thriving industrial hub with a close by power station, a number of commercial yards, and some other large industrial sights eg CSR, now it is an inner urban domain for latte sippers and smashed avacado wankers so any thought of rejuvenating Codock is just that.
Further the inefficiencies of getting personnel and stores to an island give it a positive disadvantage to other yards on the efficiency scale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top