Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[vonnoobie]

Like with our air defence between the longest range missiles down to the phalanx same should be done for undersea defence. Should very much stick with ship launched torpedoes because they will be the last line of defence in that area.

In regards to future replacement for the harpoon well I'm of the opinion best thing we can do is buy a couple of each and do some real world tests and find out which gets past defences best and which does the best damage. On one hand the NSM may be more stealthy on the other the otomat has almost twice the range and a warhead almost 50% larger and both are high subsonic. Really both are kept to minimal open source facts so rather then relying on a PowerPoint presentation safest thing to do is buy half dozen of each.

In any case either would be an improvement over the harpoon that really is about a decade or two past its use by date.

 

[spoz]

The RAN use both MU90 (ship launched) and Mk 54 (helo launched). Mk 54 is the more recent acquisition.

 

[Volkodav]

Oto Melara were on the Super Ikara development and there are apparently some systems and software similarities between Milas and Super Ikara.

 

[vonnoobie]

And now I want to slap my self across the back of the head cause stuck in my mind about setting up the Arafura's with a fitted for but not with Mila's system. Don't get me wrong even if we could squeeze it into the budget the ships just don't have the space on them unless you slap it on the flight deck but then no helicopter operations but on the other hand would set them up to provide convoy escort for civilian and or our larger more vulnerable ships from submarines in a OS! scenario. Just got my logical and fantasy sides arguing with my self lol. Sorry

 

[Volkodav]

And now I want to slap my self across the back of the head cause stuck in my mind about setting up the Arafura's with a fitted for but not with Mila's system. Don't get me wrong even if we could squeeze it into the budget the ships just don't have the space on them unless you slap it on the flight deck but then no helicopter operations but on the other hand would set them up to provide convoy escort for civilian and or our larger more vulnerable ships from submarines in a OS! scenario. Just got my logical and fantasy sides arguing with my self lol. Sorry

Without a high end sonar suite and helo with sonar Milas is a waste of space. Makes more sense on a large frigate or destroyer.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The RAN use both MU90 (ship launched) and Mk 54 (helo launched). Mk 54 is the more recent acquisition.

But wasn't the mu90 picked over the mk54 and then the mk54 was purchased because already integrated with mh60r and p8?
I don't think anyone has anything against the mk54 particularly launched from aircraft, the Poms did the same thing, but developed an entirely new torpedo the mod 1 stingray, then acquired the mk54 for the p8.

Britain purchases MK54 lightweight torpedo kits destined for P-8 Poseidon

A $40 million contract has been awarded for the production of MK54 Mod 0 lightweight torpedo kits for the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Taiwan.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Launching it from a helo or a plane means you can pretty much drop it bang on the last contact position and things like underwater range is far less important. In the case of the P8, you can pretty much drop them all day, go back to an airbase, rearm in an hour or two and be back out there causing all sorts of pressure. On a P8 or helicopter, you don't really need any hard kill capability, because, your in the air..

Without a high end sonar suite and helo with sonar Milas is a waste of space. Makes more sense on a large frigate or destroyer.

Unless we are making some sort of antisubmarine corvette that is fast enough to travel with bigger units (or faster) and have some sort of sonar and are able to be cued by other assets. But I'm not sure the RAN needs that, and the OPV selected certainly isn't the right platform for that.

 

[Redlands18]

But wasn't the mu90 picked over the mk54 and then the mk54 was purchased because already integrated with mh60r and p8?
I don't think anyone has anything against the mk54 particularly launched from aircraft, the Poms did the same thing, but developed an entirely new torpedo the mod 1 stingray, then acquired the mk54 for the p8.

Britain purchases MK54 lightweight torpedo kits destined for P-8 Poseidon

A $40 million contract has been awarded for the production of MK54 Mod 0 lightweight torpedo kits for the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Taiwan.

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

Launching it from a helo or a plane means you can pretty much drop it bang on the last contact position and things like underwater range is far less important. In the case of the P8, you can pretty much drop them all day, go back to an airbase, rearm in an hour or two and be back out there causing all sorts of pressure. On a P8 or helicopter, you don't really need any hard kill capability, because, your in the air..



Unless we are making some sort of antisubmarine corvette that is fast enough to travel with bigger units (or faster) and have some sort of sonar and are able to be cued by other assets. But I'm not sure the RAN needs that, and the OPV selected certainly isn't the right platform for that.

I struggle to see the point of Australia having Corvettes, you would need to surrender some Combat capability to give them sufficient range to be useful even if they are only operating in Australian Waters. If you operate them at a distance from Australia then you are probably going to have to increase your crew size or risk fatigue issues, they can’t carry a particularly large load of expendables and it’s a long way back to reload your Magazines, Rations etc.

I’m no expert but to me modern Corvettes are much better suited to Countries with small Coastal Areas, close to or inside the operational zone where they can put to Sea have a relatively quick sprint and be in the Patrol area in a few hours or 1-2 days. conduct operations return to base and re-arm and be back on Patrol again fairly quickly, you can keep your crew relatively small, operate at least 2 Corvettes for the same expenditure as 1 large Frigate.

 

[vonnoobie]

Really depends on how you classify a corvette considering tonnages range from the size of our patrol boats upto and larger than some frigates. That said a decent corvette for us if we had the monyand man power would likely be something more along the lines of Singapore's formidable class frigate.

 

[Redlands18]

Really depends on how you classify a corvette considering tonnages range from the size of our patrol boats upto and larger than some frigates. That said a decent corvette for us if we had the monyand man power would likely be something more along the lines of Singapore's formidable class frigate.

A perfect example of what i was talking about above, a Formidable sails out of Singapore Harbour and its already in the SCS, the distance from Sydney to Singapore is 6300km from Perth 4000 odd Ks as the crow flies. Its that distance that drives up the size of Australia’s major Warships and Submarines, you need decent Range, you need to be able to carry a bigger Crew and that means carrying more expendables, the Anzacs are 121m and 4000t and they are proving to have limitations due to their size.

 

[Volkodav]

The corvettes for the RAN were planned when the world was a safer place, there were no AEGIS DDGs planned, let alone high end ASW frigates, it was numbers to provide sea control in choke points to the north. New type FFGs, perhaps stretched ANZACs to replace the DDGs and early FFGs (though the RAN was hoping for proper DDG replacements for the Perth's), the ANZACs themselves, and the corvettes to replace the Fremantle's.

This was a sea control / trade protection mission. The world is more dangerous now, requiring DDGs and high end frigates, while Timor showed the need for not just big amphibs but command and control. Corvettes would still be nice to have instead of OPVs but twelve major combatants, each more capable than anything considered in the 90s is more sensible considering the current strategic situation.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Again I don't think ASW corvettes are a good fit for the RAN, I think their time has come and gone and dismounted and autonomous systems are the go for a lot of their roles.

But Japan did make the Abukuma-class destroyer escort - Wikipedia. ~2500t. ASROC and torpedo tubes. But they even cut that build run short when proper destroyer/frigates were being built. Crewing, between them is much the same and you quickly run out of space on small ships. Where you put the towed array etc..

Then you get to something like the 30DX. Which then starts to look very much like a regular Frigate.

 

[ASSAIL]

The RAN has learned its lessons.
In the 1960’s when it was structured as an ASW Hunter/Killer force we built 4 improved Rothesay class Type 12 frigates that today would be classified as a large ASW “Corvette”. 2,500 tons, short legs, competent ASW hulls and weapons but severely limited in Su and AA.
And then we built two more, why?
Their employment options were few after the CVS was retired. Sure they could be sent to join the RN FEF in Singapore and the odd SEATO Exercise but that was it.
Let’s not go down that path again, modern naval warfare and the current strategic circumstance dictates a different and more competent capability.

 

[DDG38]

Meanwhile, back in the working Navy, an 816 SQN MH60 prepping to load a Mk54 (see above discussion) (Image credit - ADF Image Library : 816 SQN MH60 loading Mk 54)

 

[spoz]

The RAN has learned its lessons.
In the 1960’s when it was structured as an ASW Hunter/Killer force we built 4 improved Rothesay class Type 12 frigates that today would be classified as a large ASW “Corvette”. 2,500 tons, short legs, competent ASW hulls and weapons but severely limited in Su and AA.
And then we built two more, why?
Their employment options were few after the CVS was retired. Sure they could be sent to join the RN FEF in Singapore and the odd SEATO Exercise but that was it.
Let’s not go down that path again, modern naval warfare and the current strategic circumstance dictates a different and more competent capability.

But they were great ships to serve in....

By the standard of the day (the 60s) the T12s were very competent in their assigned functions but they were always seen as the second tier; the Darings and later the DDGs being the top tier of escorts.

 

[Volkodav]

But they were great ships to serve in....

By the standard of the day (the 60s) the T12s were very competent in their assigned functions but they were always seen as the second tier; the Darings and later the DDGs being the top tier of escorts.

I've heard it said many times that the Brits were great at platforms but not so good at systems. Individual systems were ok but never developed / perfected or integrated to the degree the USN did.

 

[ASSAIL]

But they were great ships to serve in....

By the standard of the day (the 60s) the T12s were very competent in their assigned functions but they were always seen as the second tier; the Darings and later the DDGs being the top tier of escorts.

I agree entirely, I was the PWO ASW in Derwent, Achilles and Bacchante.
They were veritable gin palaces compared with the DDGs but their lethality and self defence was almost zero.
Only 4 Leander’s and 2 Rothesay were sent to the FI conflict and played relatively minor roles, two, Argonaut and Yarmouth were badly damaged from air attack and that’s a salutary lesson for those who advocate for small escort/corvette type platforms. The T21s didn’t fare much better although 7 of them were sent and were deployed closer inshore.

 

[Pusser01]

I agree entirely, I was the PWO ASW in Derwent, Achilles and Bacchante.
They were veritable gin palaces compared with the DDGs but their lethality and self defence was almost zero.
Only 4 Leander’s and 2 Rothesay were sent to the FI conflict and played relatively minor roles, two, Argonaut and Yarmouth were badly damaged from air attack and that’s a salutary lesson for those who advocate for small escort/corvette type platforms. The T21s didn’t fare much better although 7 of them were sent and were deployed closer inshore.

Going slightly off topic, how effective were the Broad-beamed Leander Seawolf conversions? Would these have capable enough to provide a goalkeeper role if more had been converted prior to the Falklands conflict? Cheers

 

[ASSAIL]

Going slightly off topic, how effective were the Broad-beamed Leander Seawolf conversions? Would these have capable enough to provide a goalkeeper role if more had been converted prior to the Falklands conflict? Cheers

HMS Andromeda was the only Seawolf conversion Leander ready to serve in the FI war and she was used as the critical “goalkeeper” escort for HMS Invincible.

 

[Pusser01]

HMS Andromeda was the only Seawolf conversion Leander ready to serve in the FI war and she was used as the critical “goalkeeper” escort for HMS Invincible.

Thanks for the info Assail, after the Falklands are you aware if there was ever a plan to fit the Type 21 with Seawolf? Cheers

 

[StingrayOZ]

https://venturaapdr.partica.online/apdr/apdr-oct-2020/features/ignore-the-rumours-the-hunter-class-frigates-are-still-the-same-size

The hunters are the same physical dimensions as the Type 26.

But there is also a piece on improving the aviation capacity of the OPVs.