John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Given the huge decline in oil prices, Vlad is looking for new revenue. Contracting a couple Russian icebreakers might be an option assuming the OZ political blowback is manageable.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Russia and China are two countries we are trying to keep out/restrict/manage of our Antarctic claim. In no way would we do that. While other countries have contracted Russian gear at times, I don't think OZ has ever done that.
I assume we will push Aurora into service one more time. We might try to resupply with just aircraft. Or use an amphib mid summer and utilize the helicopter capability? Non-icebreakers can visit during summer. Particularly if you can get another ice breaker to cut a path earlier and the ice has cleared/favorable weather/winds. I wonder if ADV Ocean Protector/Ocean Shield could make it down there in ice free conditions. They would be able to handle the big wave stuff at least.
The wider pacific is underlock down, it seems to be working, hopefully they won't be required for that role. Could easily happen later.
I assume we will push Aurora into service one more time. We might try to resupply with just aircraft. Or use an amphib mid summer and utilize the helicopter capability? Non-icebreakers can visit during summer. Particularly if you can get another ice breaker to cut a path earlier and the ice has cleared/favorable weather/winds. I wonder if ADV Ocean Protector/Ocean Shield could make it down there in ice free conditions. They would be able to handle the big wave stuff at least.
I can see them being used like hospital ships like the US is using mercy, taking in non-covid patients, say in Sydney. People are still having car accidents, heart attacks, need to remove appendix etc. Being able to take them to a venue that isn't wall to wall with covid would be a very good thing.
The wider pacific is underlock down, it seems to be working, hopefully they won't be required for that role. Could easily happen later.
I think that isn't a very good argument at all. Even if the ships were built in Australia, what makes you certain that an Australian build would not be delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic? What's happening in Spain can quite easily happen in Australia. It doesn't take much for it all to turn to custard quickly. The Australian lockdown isn't as thorough as the Australians portray it to be. Us Kiwis are shaking our heads in bewilderment at looseness.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
I have a sneaky suspician that the Storks are going to be very busy in 9 months time
It was announced today that the Australian Antarctic Division will use the MPV Everest to resupply its Antarctic stations and sub-Antarctic Macquarie Island next summer.
www.antarctica.gov.au
Tas
New plan for Australian Antarctic shipping
<p>The Australian Antarctic Division will use the icebreaker MPV <em>Everest</em> to resupply its Antarctic stations and sub-Antarctic Macquarie Island next summer.</p>
www.antarctica.gov.au
Tas
I think the argument is they were delayed before COVID19 kicked in, but now delivery has been delayed indefinitely. That's the thing the average punter doesn't get, it doesn't mater where ships are built, if there is a break in building, or major changes to what is being built, there will be delays and cost over runs. Australian yards are crucified for delays and blowouts on unrealistic schedules and budgets for first of class builds, with continually improving performance and delivery of world class products being ignored, yet overseas yards are forgiven.
Except it will be the Spanish taxpayer, not the Australian taxpayer, that will foot the bill for the cost overrun as both Navantia and ASC are taxpayer (Govt) owned enterprises. I think we are getting 40,000 tonnes combined AORs for something like $700m cost to the Australian taxpayer whereas we are getting about 20,000 tonnes combined AWDs for >$5B cost to the taxpayer.
Please! Do not conflate the Supply class build with the AWD programme.
Building modern sophisticated combatants is a vastly different body of work and not comparable.
Electronics cost a hell of a lot more than fuel bunkers. I think it was Alex who stated here a few years back that tankers are also a lot easier and cheaper to build in general than proper warships of any size. On another site I used to frequent one bloke used to harp on ad nauseum about how cheaply Daewoo could build tankers verses Australia building Aegis destroyers, he too was put firmly in his box as he was comparing apples to sauropods.
This is a very touchy matter for me as I firmly believe at least one of the AORs should have been built in Australia and that had successive governments actually done this little thing called "planning" two or three could have been built locally. No black hole, no run down of the local work force, no rundown of local infrastructure, no additional cost to rebuild what we failed to maintain, no repeat of the mistakes made every several years since we started building naval vessels.
Last edited:
Sorry, let me clarify, all three were delayed before COVID19. Certainly if the delay was due to covid19 that would be completely understandable. I really hope Australia doesn't have as significant COVID19 issue as spain. It may take years for spain to get over this.
The Australian media seems quite keen to bash local builds (which have actually had a lot of success lately) but seem to ignore issues on overseas builds. Building ships isn't easy, particularly if they are unique and advantageous in design.
In a country the size of Australia we could have easily build all the ships here. Certainly some sort of price premium compared to lowest bid offers from other countries, but then again, the money stays here, your investing locally in skills and capabilities. If there is one thing coming out of the COVID crisis, is local manufacturing capacity is everything and is a strategic national priority.
They look similar to the ADV's ships. Oh well, at least something has been booked. Looks like 2021 is going to be a better year.
There's an intriguing possibility if Aust had decided to build their own AOR's. Perhaps building only 2 , with each only needing replacement every 25 years, might be difficult. But What if New Zealand joined? You'd work out if what both want, and you'd stagger the build, eg 1st- Aust, 2nd NZ, 3rd Aust, then repeat..... If you can find a design that can be modified to suit both countries.
And if you really wanted to push Australia's naval industry, build some ships for Taiwan
(though I don't think what we have would suit them)
Group your fat ships together, i.e. a continuous build of fat ships at say five or six year intervals, interspersing one between other builds, ie. between the last Hobart and first batch of Hunters. That is three DDGs and an AOR, followed by three FFGs and another AOR, then a second batch of FFGs to an improved design and a replacement for Choules, three more FFGs and a replacement for Canberra. Carry on indefinitely building three major surface combatants and a fat ship that shares as many systems as reasonable practicable, every five to six years.There's an intriguing possibility if Aust had decided to build their own AOR's. Perhaps building only 2 , with each only needing replacement every 25 years, might be difficult. But What if New Zealand joined? You'd work out if what both want, and you'd stagger the build, eg 1st- Aust, 2nd NZ, 3rd Aust, then repeat..... If you can find a design that can be modified to suit both countries.
And if you really wanted to push Australia's naval industry, build some ships for Taiwan
(though I don't think what we have would suit them)
No more block obsolescence, no more resource sapping black holes, no more orphan designs, no more uniquely qualified and experienced sailors who come to believe they are above the law because they believe they are irreplaceable. Above all, a modern effective navy with at least 40% of the fleet being pretty close to state of the art and none of it being obsolescent, let alone obsolete, and all of it seaworthy and fully supported.
Spread block and systems work around the country to ensure a broad base of public support (i.e. make sure plenty of dollars go to QLD and WA). With a requirement for eight GTs, multiple diesel generators, switch boards, control systems, water tight doors, pipes, valves, hotel services, accommodation blocks and everything else that goes into a ship, every several years, a thriving local supply chain would grow around this guaranteed work that would give them an economy of scale to invest in other (potentially) more profitable and exportable ventures.
Good day folksThere's an intriguing possibility if Aust had decided to build their own AOR's. Perhaps building only 2 , with each only needing replacement every 25 years, might be difficult. But What if New Zealand joined? You'd work out if what both want, and you'd stagger the build, eg 1st- Aust, 2nd NZ, 3rd Aust, then repeat..... If you can find a design that can be modified to suit both countries.
And if you really wanted to push Australia's naval industry, build some ships for Taiwan
(though I don't think what we have would suit them)
The main issue we have is having a shipyard with a building way big enough for and AOR at the time the decision was made. Even now this is an issue as the facilities that used to build ships are shut and we have a lack of dry docks as well.
Certainly ASC could be evolved to to this but it will be pretty well subscribed (but not completely) with the Hunter Class meaning any AOR build would need to be in the old common user facility and the syncrolift would need to be upgraded. So no AOR could have been built while the DDG's were in production.
So, in short, there is no point day dreaming about 'what if' as we would have had to build a new yard .... before we built the ships. The delays we are seeing now would have been nothing compared to building 'another' facility and manning it. Can we please drop that subject.
Whether or not in the future we could replace the large hulls is a different subject and worth considering noting there will (we hope) be an increase in skilled staff coming from the initiation of the current projects.
DAVID DUNLOP
Active Member
Hi Volkodav! Sounds like a great fix for our own Canadian National Shipbuilding Strategy (NSS). This idea would certainly fix for good the "Boom & Bust Cycles" we are going through now in Canada!!
All comes down to that P word, planning. A decision to build new AORs would have to have been made in the mid 2000s and ASC facilities built large enough to handle AOR blocks as well as DDG one. Didn't happen, so cant happen unlesl the investment is made before the next fat ship build.
As requested, a photo of Arafura - however, it is taken from about a kilometre away using a long lens, and the angle on the port quarter is not great, but it's about the best that can be done from a public location. It's probably the only public place from which she is visible; ships moving down the river would have a better view (of the bow at least) but I think the angles over the shiplift would mean she is invisible to pleasure craft
Attachments
Agree mate, to an extent
I would have a degree of hesitance in tying larger builds into the main surface fleet timeline and possible front line capability gaps. I would rather see a separate build program on the large fleet, LHD's, LPD'S, AOR, with maybe LCH, LCM's etc in between each build program.
If you add into that the possible Pacific Support Ship, hell why not add into the future planning an ice breaker for the Nuyina replacement, Submarine rescue vessel, larger survey ships etc would be more than enough for one yard to have a full rotating program ?
Thoughts ? Question is where ? From a strategic POV does make sense that we need something closer to the west coast, Williamstown ?
Cheers
Australia suffers from a strategic deficit by only having one large ship drydock.Agree mate, to an extent
I would have a degree of hesitance in tying larger builds into the main surface fleet timeline and possible front line capability gaps. I would rather see a separate build program on the large fleet, LHD's, LPD'S, AOR, with maybe LCH, LCM's etc in between each build program.
If you add into that the possible Pacific Support Ship, hell why not add into the future planning an ice breaker for the Nuyina replacement, Submarine rescue vessel, larger survey ships etc would be more than enough for one yard to have a full rotating program ?
Thoughts ? Question is where ? From a strategic POV does make sense that we need something closer to the west coast, Williamstown ?
Cheers
The location of the building yards is a seperate matter but we are constrained as a maritime nation, not just naval, by not having a large ship facility in the west which could be utilised in the same way as the Captain Cook dry dock at FBE.
Graving Dock continues to serve the nation at 75
The RAN is growing in both numbers and tonnage.
Since the closures of Cockatoo Island in Sydney which had two dry docks, one capable of docking a Majestic class light carrier, and a large building slipway, the closure of the large Cairncross dry dock on the Brisbane River (medium cruise ship capable), the State Dockyard in Newcastle and the loss of Williamstown, we are in poorer shape to react to marine incidents involving large naval and civilian ships.
Both Osborne and Henderson can handle ships up to around 12000 tonnes displacement this creates a ridiculous situation where anything larger must transit to the eastern seaboard to carry out either routine or emergency dockings.
It would be a sensible investment to build (drydock) or buy (floating dock) and give the West a much needed strategic asset.
I won’t post here but if you search for large dockyards online the number of them in ROK, Japan and China is gobsmacking, makes us look like the Hobbit Shire.
It’s not a huge undertaking to provide a dock as some may think.
Here’s one small example from the Netherlands Antilles.
Takao
The Bunker Group
It's not a technical issue - its a political issue (internal and external to the RAN). To outsiders it's clearly a sensible idea worthy of funding, but picking where (not even just a location, or a State, but even a coast) and what to give up to fund is a challenge. Hopefully that'll change soon...
- Status