Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Joe Black
Active Member
A good read on the Sea1000 progress:
https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...18/features/sea-1000-meeting-major-milestones
I have noted 3 really interesting comments, one on the propulsion system, AIP and the last on the decision not to go with lithium ion for the first batch.
https://venturaapdr.partica.online/...18/features/sea-1000-meeting-major-milestones
I have noted 3 really interesting comments, one on the propulsion system, AIP and the last on the decision not to go with lithium ion for the first batch.
I wonder if some cleve folks will be able to design a new ducted/pump-jet propulsion system whereby the the ducted propeller can be configured into a Kort nozzle, and transform into a pumpjet configuration at high speed.
I will watch with interested. Same argument as to why Collin class was not fitted with an AIP system. I can understand that the Stirling cycle engines was reject due to the size and the weight involved, but with the Siemens PEMFC I would have thought it would be a lot more feasible but naturally the cost considerations would be taken as well.
Thought the Japanese are already going with Lithium Ion for the upcoming Soryu boats... I would have thought by the time the Shortfin are built, Lithium Ion would be more or less a known quality and we could have leverage Japanese experience on using it.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
As I understand it there are a couple of other issues with AIP systems in addition to the required volumes and displacement for both the various fuel/engine combinations. Two of the more important issues are the overall energy density of the AIP system and what the average and peak power production is for the AIP system.
I would imagine these issues are also applicable to the use of new battery technology. As an example of what I mean, a long-endurance, high-capacity, quick-charge battery with reasonable volume and displacement requirements would seem a perfect fit for use aboard a sub, but would in fact be very inappropriate if the rate at which it can discharge (be drawn upon) is too low to power the various systems used during normal and combat operations.
Another option for ESSM launcher is found on Canadian Halifax Frigates that have 2 MK48 launchers 1 each Port @ Starboard above deck with 16 missiles.
What's the likely fate of the de-commissioned ANZACs? Will they be put on the second hand market as is or will they be broken down for spares? If the later, will some of that equipment find it's way onto the Hunter class ships or are the Hunters getting all new equipment (they should be for the exorbitant price being paid)?
buffy9
Well-Known Member
The vessels are small but will have an at least decent (combat patrol?) capability from 2027-2035. I imagine some SEA nations (I.e. Indonesia) may be interested. Alternatively some African nations are growing at a decent pace and may look towards a quick naval combat capability in the stated timeframe.
I'm not a navy guy but I don't see Anzac-class parts being used all that much on the Hunter-class. Some parts of the Saab combat interface may be used, but I'm not entirely sure.
The Anzac-class is a decent war fighting vessel that is good for naval patrols in a non-contested or mid-contested environment. It uses a lot of American systems/weaponry on board so any nation that potentially buys it second hand will at a minimum be non-alligned with China.
The Hunter-class itself is a long-term investment as is the Shortfin Barracuda and the Lurssen OPVs. All seem to have a high level of flexibility and technological prowess with the ability to change hardware/software on board at a relatively rapid pace, as opposed to replacing them outright or going through mid-life upgrades. Yeah it is pricy and I'm worried about the future of this under a Labor government (regardless of bipartisanship), but it will in the long-term produce a highly flexible and modern navy.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Any sale of ANZACS or any equipment off them would have to be OK'd by the originating Nation, especially the US(MK 41, MK 32, Harpoon, MK 45) Germany(Meko 200 design). Australia(Ceafar,).
All that would considerably cut down the number of potential buyers.
Yeah, I was thinking other potential countries that might be interested could be the Philippines, Chile, Peru.
Potential equipment for the Hunters could be mk45 gun, Nulka launchers, Harpoon launchers (probably not the torpedo launchers), RHIBs and mini-Typhoons. Also, I don't know how different the (eventual)CEAFAR2 version in the ANZACs will be to the version in the Hunters, but there's probably some common components. Maybe.
I'm mostly asking in speculation that there might be the potential for some of that equipment (especially the CEAFAR2) to find it's way, at mates rates, onto the NZ ANZAC replacements.
The Chilean Navy has a capable if not ageing Frigate force that includes T22 and T23s plus Karel Doorman types, they are unlikely to want a smaller ageing Anzac. They are a capable navy and we shouldn't underestimate their aspirations, they are closely watching the USN FFX developments in their search for suitable replacements.
Their may be some buyers for the Anzacs but I suspect that by the time they begin to decommission Anzac herself will be approaching a 30 year life and any FMS/proprietary equipment will be removed or recycled so potential buyers will be restricted to developing nations only.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
If Anzacs going to be decomissions on their 30's age..it will be hard to gained buyers, considering now the Chinese shipyards can produced relatively cheap hulls on fast deliveries.
Look at how Italian now have difficulties to find buyers for their Frigates. Their effort to attract Philipines to bought them so far has noy gave positive results.
When Indonesia bought Dutch Van Speijk class frigates in the 80's..practically they are still in the 20's of age and Indonesia bought them with practically nearly all the weapons system included. I believe similar conditions also applied to Chile's when they bought UK's type 22 and 23.
Now with Navies try to keep their frigates up to the 30's even 40's of ages by keep upgrading them, they will be in relative 'tired' conditions when decomisioning. This is what i heard that made Indonesia choose to take relatively new ex Brunai Nahkoda corvetes then more capables ex RN Type 22 batch 3 that being offered in similar prices.
If RAN sold those Anzacs with much of advance systems taking out, then it left with only relatively 'tired' hulls to disposed. Then similar situations that Italians faced when disposing their Frigates can happen.
Again, China can provide new hulls with cheaper costs and faster deliveries. That's in my opinion one of reasons Pakistan that used to take used Frigates from Western Navies, now decided to take deliveries on new hulls from China with weapon systems combination from various sources.
Look at how Italian now have difficulties to find buyers for their Frigates. Their effort to attract Philipines to bought them so far has noy gave positive results.
When Indonesia bought Dutch Van Speijk class frigates in the 80's..practically they are still in the 20's of age and Indonesia bought them with practically nearly all the weapons system included. I believe similar conditions also applied to Chile's when they bought UK's type 22 and 23.
Now with Navies try to keep their frigates up to the 30's even 40's of ages by keep upgrading them, they will be in relative 'tired' conditions when decomisioning. This is what i heard that made Indonesia choose to take relatively new ex Brunai Nahkoda corvetes then more capables ex RN Type 22 batch 3 that being offered in similar prices.
If RAN sold those Anzacs with much of advance systems taking out, then it left with only relatively 'tired' hulls to disposed. Then similar situations that Italians faced when disposing their Frigates can happen.
Again, China can provide new hulls with cheaper costs and faster deliveries. That's in my opinion one of reasons Pakistan that used to take used Frigates from Western Navies, now decided to take deliveries on new hulls from China with weapon systems combination from various sources.
My guess is that by the time Australia is finished with them they will be ready for the breakers, sinkex, dive wreck ... or perhaps the Canadian navy.
The first of the replacement frigate won't enter service until at least 2027 by which time HMAS Anzac will be over 30 years old. The delivery rate of the new frigates would probably see the entire Anzac class having to serve between 30 to 35 years.
What could be interesting is whether or not the ongoing build program will result in an early replacement for the Hobart class.
Thanks for information
Just talking space and weight without wanting to anger too many people in the turn the OPV into a battleship debate; but would it be structurally feasible to mount a couple of these Single cell systems on our future Lurssen OPV.
Would suggest the only place would be around the funnel, either to the side, or front, as I would not want to compromise the ability of using the flight deck for medium sized helicopter operations.
Thanks and Regards S
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The Hobart replacement is planned to follow the 9th FFG and due for Commisioning in 2042 according to the Shipbuilding plan, so it's about 25 yrs
We all think of the ANZACS as ageing ships due to there replacement already being chosen but as a class they are barely past 1/2 life. The Perth won't see her 30th B/day till 2036.
Last edited:
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
When you put them up against the Frigates being built at the time Type 23, Halifax, Brandenburg classes they look small, give away 1500-2000t, 20m. They were only ever meant to be a Light Patrol Frigate and yet basically replaced 3 Rivers, 3 DDGs & 2 FFGs,
3500t & 118m armed with a Med Gun, a 8 Cell SAM system, up to 8 SSM(more often than not, less) 6 Torpedo Tubes and 1 Helicopter. Ships of this size are increasingly being called Corvettes.
The Anzacs now displace 3,800t which is not so small when you compare them with what they replaced, Rivers 2,700t, CFAs 4,500 and FFGs 4,000t so they sit in the middle for size.
The increased in size for escorts is a progression which started when the USN FRAMs began being replaced with Knox, CFA era then grew again with Spruance and finally the ABs
In the RN the Leanders lingered on until the T22 and T42 (disregard T21 as an aberation) so size is really a late 20th century development.
So although the Anzacs were a compromise and often criticised for their lack of lethality in their early life their size was nothing unusual for the RAN.
The current iteration is a useful escort with a very competent ASM defence.
No intelligent commentator could call them a Corvette.
Government of Trinidad & Tobago Announces Future Acquisition of Two Austal Cape Class Patrol Boats
(Source: Austal; issued July 29, 2018)
Austal Limited (Austal) is pleased to report that the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (GORTT) has announced its intention to purchase two Austal Cape Class Patrol Boats. The vessels will enhance the border protection capabilities of the country in conjunction with the existing Coast Guard fleet, and will join six Austal Fast Patrol Craft acquired in 2009.
This announcement is further to a comprehensive proposal submitted by Austal to GORTT in recent weeks. The sale is likely to be supported by the Australian Government via the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC), and follows a demonstration by the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) of the capabilities of the Cape Class vessel to a delegation of senior Trinidad and Tobago officials, which included the Chief of Defence Staff.
The order is likely to be valued at circa AU$100m plus a multi-year ongoing maintenance and support package. Austal expects to establish a Service Centre in Trinidad to support these vessels, the Austal supplied Fast Patrol Craft, and any additional vessels requiring maintenance as determined by GORTT.
The new Cape Class vessels will be built in Austal’s Henderson shipyard based in Western Australia. Austal have already built 10 Cape Class vessels in Henderson for the Australian Border Force and RAN. Delivery is expected to be in mid-2020.
Designed and built by Austal, the Cape Class is a 58 metre all aluminium monohull patrol boat specifically produced to combat the full range of maritime security threats. The vessel has a long 4000 nautical mile range and 28-day patrol cycle with a crew of up to 22. The vessel also supports two high speed 7.3 metre Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats used for intercepting other vessels.
(Source: Austal; issued July 29, 2018)
Austal Limited (Austal) is pleased to report that the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (GORTT) has announced its intention to purchase two Austal Cape Class Patrol Boats. The vessels will enhance the border protection capabilities of the country in conjunction with the existing Coast Guard fleet, and will join six Austal Fast Patrol Craft acquired in 2009.
This announcement is further to a comprehensive proposal submitted by Austal to GORTT in recent weeks. The sale is likely to be supported by the Australian Government via the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (EFIC), and follows a demonstration by the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) of the capabilities of the Cape Class vessel to a delegation of senior Trinidad and Tobago officials, which included the Chief of Defence Staff.
The order is likely to be valued at circa AU$100m plus a multi-year ongoing maintenance and support package. Austal expects to establish a Service Centre in Trinidad to support these vessels, the Austal supplied Fast Patrol Craft, and any additional vessels requiring maintenance as determined by GORTT.
The new Cape Class vessels will be built in Austal’s Henderson shipyard based in Western Australia. Austal have already built 10 Cape Class vessels in Henderson for the Australian Border Force and RAN. Delivery is expected to be in mid-2020.
Designed and built by Austal, the Cape Class is a 58 metre all aluminium monohull patrol boat specifically produced to combat the full range of maritime security threats. The vessel has a long 4000 nautical mile range and 28-day patrol cycle with a crew of up to 22. The vessel also supports two high speed 7.3 metre Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats used for intercepting other vessels.
Name inflation. I hate it.
Many frigates from 50 years ago were smaller & more lightly armed. I recall destroyers of that size.
Indeed, the Anzacs displace more than both the Battles and Darings
Nocookies
For those that can't get through the paywall here is an abridged version ...
Minewarfare seems to be the unsexy part of the navy and perhaps it is being somewhat neglected. Now that the decisions on the new subs and frigates are out of the way some more time and effort will be spent on developing Australia's mine-hunting capabilities.
For those that can't get through the paywall here is an abridged version ...
I am not sure why these two ships need to be sold. They probably aren't worth very much and could easily just be left in mothballs or used as parts for the other four ships.
Minewarfare seems to be the unsexy part of the navy and perhaps it is being somewhat neglected. Now that the decisions on the new subs and frigates are out of the way some more time and effort will be spent on developing Australia's mine-hunting capabilities.
- Status