Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

Richo99

Active Member
This is the BAE FUZE 3P (Pre-fragmented, Programmable, Proximity- fused) ammo for both 40 mm & 57 mm guns FUZE 3P Ammunition. According to BAE it can deal with anti-ship missiles, aircraft, ships and shore targets, including those with armour protection and is able to deal with threats that previously were impossible to engage, such as small, fast-manoeuvring boats and concealed targets through airburst etc. It's actually a Bofors round.


Quite impressive.
Or maybe the Leonardo version...


 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
I think the 40mm is ok for the OPV's. I put it in the same grouping at the 57mm. In that its a useful mutli-purpose "light" round, able to do several jobs with advanced munitions, and do the OPV job just fine with regular standard rounds.

I wouldn't expect a 40mm gun by itself to deal with multiple Kh-35 missiles all by itself. But then why would a OPV find itself in an environment with that kind of force opposing it. But can I see it having to deal with drones, deter air threats, deter ground targets and sea threats like pirate boats, sure. If you went bigger then it almost becomes a round to big to use on its interaction with civilian vessels. It has horizon reach capability, which is all that is really required. Usefully longer range than the 20/25/30/35 rounds.

The bofors went out of style in the jet age when it was used as an anti-aircraft gun in the cold war. Hence the development of the 57mm. But neither are going to be used as front line air defense against fighters today. Perhaps as a very secondary role. I don't really see any problem with the 40mm calibre and the gun itself is thoroughly modern and does all the advanced things we want guns to do today.

I don't see the advanced munition really a being a requirement for the OPV, it may never be acquired, but its nice to know you can make it a lot more capable through such an upgrade.

In comparison to the 57mm, I find that gun very odd. Its quite a heavy mount (14 tons in the mk3) but doesn't have the range and hitting power of other "large" rounds like 76mm and 5". It's weight really puts its as a primary gun fitout. Where as the 40mm size, could, in theory, perhaps be adapted as a secondary gun, replacing 25/30/35mm mounts. The 40mm can also bit fitted on much smaller ships and on ships with less of a combat focus, like the OPV's.

I think a 76mm or 5" would be a poor choice for a OPV. I find 57mm a bit big for a front line OPV, they tend to be fitted to coast guard type ships that have a home defense type role. Fitting one would like take a lot of top weight margin for upgrades/radar/ etc which you really want on a OPV type vessel.

Also I don't think a 57mm has been fired on a ship as part of enforcement of EEZ or other type policing duties.
Chinese "Research" vessel mapping off the WA coast.

See:-https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-02/chinese-research-vessel-tracked-defence-subs-western-australia/12009708
IMO a lot is being made out of something that other countries deal with all the time. It happened outside our eez. Clearly the Chinese are taking Australia submarine capability pretty seriously. I can't help but see this being released as a response to the media drama around subs. Which again highlights why we are building them.
 

Hazdog

Member
IMO a lot is being made out of something that other countries deal with all the time. It happened outside our eez. Clearly the Chinese are taking Australia submarine capability pretty seriously. I can't help but see this being released as a response to the media drama around subs. Which again highlights why we are building them.
All the more reason to assert the idea to build more submarines than currently planned.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
All the more reason to assert the idea to build more submarines than currently planned.
And how are you going to pay for and crew these extra subs? What other capabilities are you going to deep six to fund these? The ADF doesn't have a never emptying pot of money from which it can just magic out treasure to pay for wish lists. If that was the case they'd have Galaxy class starships, Star destroyers and Battle Stars.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
With the discussion of the ship borne 40mm gun is there any advantage in using these in preference to the 20mm ciws on the other ships , in this Im thinking of a longer range to engage supersonic missiles
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
With the discussion of the ship borne 40mm gun is there any advantage in using these in preference to the 20mm ciws on the other ships , in this Im thinking of a longer range to engage supersonic missiles
I agree about the longer range and not just for the supersonic AShM, but the subsonic ones as well. Both are evil and best kept well away. To me the 20 mm as a CIWS is like taking a knife to a gun fight and is last century's war, not todays or tomorrows. However the 40 mm has to have a very high hit probability, so either that requires a significant number of shells in the target area at the same time, or a shell that can destroy / disable its target with a very high probability everytime. Maybe someone could come up with a 40 mm revolver and combine that with high precision ammo and there'd be the best of both worlds. But until then, we can only have one or the other.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
A difference also between the two is that the 40mm is capable of firing a variety of shells that can be programmed to explode near the target ,the 20 mm places a "wall of steel " in front of the rapidly moving target ,certainly would be interesting if the 40mm was tested in realistic conditions against the gqm-163a "coyote"
 

DAVID DUNLOP

Active Member
The first ships of the National Ship Building Plan were always going to be painful - they were building much more than three ships....

And yes - I think they look damn fine!
Both the people and builders of Australia of these "great ships" should be very proud of what they have accomplished over the last 10 years! Canada could always learn from our Australian brothers. You have made the world just a little safer. Cheers mate!!!
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
All the more reason to assert the idea to build more submarines than currently planned.
I think everyone will be happy if they actually get the 12 submarines built. Its not really the number of subs anymore, its about getting that production line open and pushing them out. Plus the refiting of the Collins class. Theres a total of 18 subs in play here, so sub numbers are not really an issue. its overall capability.

I agree about the longer range and not just for the supersonic AShM, but the subsonic ones as well. Both are evil and best kept well away. To me the 20 mm as a CIWS is like taking a knife to a gun fight and is last century's war, not todays or tomorrows.
I think there might be a space for both. We certainly shouldn't be relying on just a 20mm CIWS to fend off modern peer missile attacks.

The italians had DARDO which was a twin 40mm AA system.
I wonder if you replaced the two 30mm guns on say a type 26 with two 40mm turrets with overlapping arcs at the rear, if you would get a DARDO light type system. 140 rounds, 600 rounds a second. Giving a bubble out to around 4,000m. This would still leave the 20mm CIWS as an inner layer and against lighter, closer, softer targets.

20mm/40mm/ESSM/SM-2/6 would seem to then provide a reasonable layered approach. But there is a lot happening in this space. New threats and new ways to counter them.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
I think everyone will be happy if they actually get the 12 submarines built. Its not really the number of subs anymore, its about getting that production line open and pushing them out. Plus the refiting of the Collins class. Theres a total of 18 subs in play here, so sub numbers are not really an issue. its overall capability.



I think there might be a space for both. We certainly shouldn't be relying on just a 20mm CIWS to fend off modern peer missile attacks.

The italians had DARDO which was a twin 40mm AA system.
I wonder if you replaced the two 30mm guns on say a type 26 with two 40mm turrets with overlapping arcs at the rear, if you would get a DARDO light type system. 140 rounds, 600 rounds a second. Giving a bubble out to around 4,000m. This would still leave the 20mm CIWS as an inner layer and against lighter, closer, softer targets.

20mm/40mm/ESSM/SM-2/6 would seem to then provide a reasonable layered approach. But there is a lot happening in this space. New threats and new ways to counter them.
More than happy to immediately swap out the Typhoons across the fleet for the Leonardo OTO Marlin 40 mm.
Hobart and Canberra class to start with, while introducing to others within the fleet with the appropriate size and weight. eg HMAS Choules and the new Supply Class.


If only the ANZAC's could find the weight margin of 2.2 tonnes for a single fully loaded system above the hangar.
There must be a way

The surplus 25 mm Typhoons may look good on the "Cape Class"
After all, is their role any different to that performed by any of the Attack ,Fremantle and Armidale Class patrol Boats, regardless of what uniform is crewing these ships?



Regards S
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
You're not going to be able to mount a Leonardo 40mms on the bridge wings of a Hobart; not sure what the weight and moment issues might be (although it's twice the weight of a Typhoon mount) but the physical space isn't really there.
 
Last edited:

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The surplus 25 mm Typhoons may look good on the "Cape Class"
After all, is their role any different to that performed by any of the Attack ,Fremantle and Armidale Class patrol Boats, regardless of what uniform is crewing these ships?

Regards S
I hope you mean 'just' the Navy Capes. While it is claimed the Capes have the space and weight for a 25mm it should be noted this will also require the electo optical system. Neither is an easy fit.

Given the Border Force vessels are commerically certified under AMSA it is not a case of just strapping these things on. The arrangement will need to be designed, assessed and approved..... then there is the operator training. I don't see the point for these on the Border Force vessels where a 50cal is more than adequate.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
In comparing the weight of the Phalanx 20mm at 5,700 kilos versus the Leonardos dry weight of 2100 kilos it might suggest you could swap the Phalanx with the Leonardo if there was an advantage in capability is there any feasibility to this
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
There appears to be a difference in perception between the French and the Australians about the design of the Attack class submarines Designing and Building the Barramundi Submarine: Is Naval Group Up to the Challenge? | Defense.info. The French appear to think that they are providing the Australians with a basic French designed Barracuda submarine and the Australians will be happy to take what they sell them. The Australians however do not want a Barracuda submarine, because they see it only as the foundation for the Barramundi submarine that they are building, and the French just don't seem to get that. As Robbin Laird says, the French believe it's a one way transaction: France -> Australia, master -> pupil; whereas Australia sees the relationship differently, it being a two way transaction: France <-> Australia. VADM (RTD) Tim Barnett explains it well in this interview: The Re-Set of the Royal Australian Navy: The Perspective of Vice Admiral (Retired) Tim Barrett - Second Line of Defense. Robbin Laird seems to think that this misperception is only going to widen and will create added risk for the program. One other thing to note is the cultural and technological differences between the two enterprises; Australia is providing a digital shipyard for the French, however Naval Group, the French company, are still paper based. How many problems is that going to create if Naval Group get all Gallic and go stubborn about going digital?
 

mickm

New Member
Chinese "Research" vessel mapping off the WA coast.

I don't know if I have been reading too many Tom Clancy or David Poyer books but what is the possibility that they could be laying something like SOSUS buoys similar to those the USA deployed in the GIUK gap during the cold war
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Anzacs are so top heavy, they have to count hats on heads on the bridge to stop it from becoming a Collins class. ;) Would be nice if they could fit a 40mm which is lighter than phalanx. At least some sort of gun based CIWS would be a nice addition.

Anzacs are legacy and on the way out. But the type 26 is in design phase. Would not be surprised if they looked at this before they actually get in service or perhaps in the next batch.

There appears to be a difference in perception between the French and the Australians about the design of the Attack class submarines Designing and Building the Barramundi Submarine: Is Naval Group Up to the Challenge? | Defense.info. The French appear to think that they are providing the Australians with a basic French designed Barracuda submarine and the Australians will be happy to take what they sell them. The Australians however do not want a Barracuda submarine, because they see it only as the foundation for the Barramundi submarine that they are building, and the French just don't seem to get that. As Robbin Laird says, the French believe it's a one way transaction: France -> Australia, master -> pupil; whereas Australia sees the relationship differently, it being a two way transaction: France <-> Australia. VADM (RTD) Tim Barnett explains it well in this interview: The Re-Set of the Royal Australian Navy: The Perspective of Vice Admiral (Retired) Tim Barrett - Second Line of Defense. Robbin Laird seems to think that this misperception is only going to widen and will create added risk for the program. One other thing to note is the cultural and technological differences between the two enterprises; Australia is providing a digital shipyard for the French, however Naval Group, the French company, are still paper based. How many problems is that going to create if Naval Group get all Gallic and go stubborn about going digital?
The french were touting their capabilities, they know what they signed up to, however, it is a different type of partnership to what they usually have and they will play hardball the whole way along. We have been there before with french procurement (Mirages etc).

French were talking about sharing the crown jewels of submarine development with australia. France offers stealth sub tech to Australia to bolster contract bid

Australia also isn't naive when it comes with submarines or submarine projects. We got our sovereignty design out of the Swedes and we can now sell that capability back to them for use on the A26. We have also played with the Spanish on the AWD project. I don't think the Australian government or the RAN is going in with anything less than alert and wide eyed into this. The media will also be jumping on this every two seconds as well.

The Barracuda was arguably the most ambitious of the designs, and potentially the most capable. But with a fair amount of challenges. But this is why we needed a solid contract and to really nut out the details. Which we spent years doing.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Anzacs are so top heavy, they have to count hats on heads on the bridge to stop it from becoming a Collins class. ;) Would be nice if they could fit a 40mm which is lighter than phalanx. At least some sort of gun based CIWS would be a nice addition.

Anzacs are legacy and on the way out. But the type 26 is in design phase. Would not be surprised if they looked at this before they actually get in service or perhaps in the next batch.



The french were touting their capabilities, they know what they signed up to, however, it is a different type of partnership to what they usually have and they will play hardball the whole way along. We have been there before with french procurement (Mirages etc).

French were talking about sharing the crown jewels of submarine development with australia. France offers stealth sub tech to Australia to bolster contract bid

Australia also isn't naive when it comes with submarines or submarine projects. We got our sovereignty design out of the Swedes and we can now sell that capability back to them for use on the A26. We have also played with the Spanish on the AWD project. I don't think the Australian government or the RAN is going in with anything less than alert and wide eyed into this. The media will also be jumping on this every two seconds as well.

The Barracuda was arguably the most ambitious of the designs, and potentially the most capable. But with a fair amount of challenges. But this is why we needed a solid contract and to really nut out the details. Which we spent years doing.
Just take an eastern brown, tassy devil and a salty along with you when negotiating. That should keep the frogs in line.
 

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
In comparing the weight of the Phalanx 20mm at 5,700 kilos versus the Leonardos dry weight of 2100 kilos it might suggest you could swap the Phalanx with the Leonardo if there was an advantage in capability is there any feasibility to this
My understanding is that the 20mm does have potential lethality advantages over 40mm in that it relies on striking the incoming ASM directly with armour piercing 20mm rounds rather than using smaller fragments generated by a 40mm shell detonating nearby. I imagine that the slower ROF for the 40mm would make the use of such fragmenting ammunition a necessity so as to put enough metal in the path of the inbound weapon to stop it in time. Range strikes me as possibly the biggest advantage of the larger calibre weapon (?).
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
I don't see 40mm Leonardo's replacing Phalanx in most situations. I think in many cases, RAN would be quite happy with Phalanx mopping up after essm rather than just a 40mm. But in some cases it could be complimentary. Not only that, in some constabulary functions the 40mm would be better suited than the 30 or 20mm. I don't think the 40mm is the chosen replacement of 20mm Phalanx.

Range is a key factor, particularly if you are dealing with faster and bigger threats. DARDO 40mm systems were able to switch between HE rounds and sabouted tungsten penetrators for up close.
Just take an eastern brown, tassy devil and a salty along with you when negotiating. That should keep the frogs in line.
Maybe they will wheel Chris Pyne out again to keep it on track? Australia has all sorts of odd creatures to use against the french.

Maybe take a page out of the French book and conduct some special forces operations on French territory.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top