Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[aussienscale]

I was crossing Sydney Harbor bridge today and noticed HMAS Supply in full tow with a tug towing her from the bow and several tugs at her stern, I thought she would have used her own steam with tug support (but what would I know) also noticed HMAS Choules on a swing mooring in Chowder Bay, seems the fleet is getting moved all around the Harbor of late.

A cold move for a berth change is not uncommon, for the sake of a quick parking spot change there is no need to start up all the systems required to do so under her own "steam", but regardless she would still need tug assistance as well anyway, so cold move it is

Cheers

 

[koala]

A cold move for a berth change is not uncommon, for the sake of a quick parking spot change there is no need to start up all the systems required to do so under her own "steam", but regardless she would still need tug assistance as well anyway, so cold move it is

Cheers

Had me worried she was heading out, but something went wrong and she ended up coming back on a tow truck

 

[Bob53]

Sure. He was an electronics technician who specialised on sonar systems once he joined the submarine branch.

Mind you, if there's not a lot more that isn't in the public record it's a bit like getting expert advice on building skyscrapers from a chippie.

oldsig

I’ve been caught up with work recently and just catching up. Fair enough point you make here but wouldn’t that view invalidate a large percentage of the comments made here?

If we are talking about people in parliament, media commentator, and in dept of defence procurement, then there would not be many that have a clue about how a sub works, have actually been on operations and understand at least some of the sub capabilities being discussed Aside from reading about it or listening to a suppliers brief. So at least give some credit. I’d rather someone with that level of knowledge contributing than say Robert Gottliebson.

 

[oldsig127]

I’ve been caught up with work recently and just catching up. Fair enough point you make here but wouldn’t that view invalidate a large percentage of the comments made here?

If we are talking about people in parliament, media commentator, and in dept of defence procurement, then there would not be many that have a clue about how a sub works, have actually been on operations and understand at least some of the sub capabilities being discussed Aside from reading about it or listening to a suppliers brief. So at least give some credit. I’d rather someone with that level of knowledge contributing than say Robert Gottliebson.

My problem with him is not that he has *some* knowledge, but that he and the press exagerate it to the extent of applying it to matters he's simply not expert in, and to the extent of assuming a small amount of peripheral knowledge will be far more accurate than the opinions of expert professionals.

That's how you get anti- politicians like Trump in power.

Meanwhile, the new Defence Minister has booted out all Defence officials but two Defence Dept. liaison officers from his office. Apparently they only clutter the place up with people who know what they're talking about. Something unnecessary when you're planning to slash the shipbuilding policy which is "late and over budget"

oldsig


PS I enjoy the comments made here but am under no illusion that any more than a tiny percentage are ever liable to affect Defence policy in this country. Especially my own.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Its the old Yes minister thing, do you put people in places where they have passionate views on issues they need to implement that may contradict their own views or even previous policy they had to implement.

The decision process is almost always external to the minister and their office anyway. Given the number of recent shuffling, clearing out some of the people involved is inevitable. Normally these are just shuffled to different portfolios anyway, and change when ministers change. You form a new team, without all the legacy issues.

I'm not Dutton fan, but I don't think this is a huge issue and is fairly standard. I don't believe Dutton is going to slash, lets not get into political speculation. He did not get into this portfolio to slash, the previous minister wasn't going to do that either.

Its in the government interest to light fires to get projects moving and ensure they are moving. What they want, what everyone wants is a constant stream of defence acquisitions and acquisition successes.

 

[KiwiRob]

Light on warships at night - rule of thumb is that on a moonless night, far from land (so you don't get any of that nasty orange haze / light pollution), a sailor lighting a cigarette using a match can be seen as far away as 10 miles. In conflict, that sorta info can make u a target very quickly, even in passive / non-transmission mode.

Over the last 20 years I've spent many a nightshift at sea, sailing round an anchored warship on trials, with an inspection team scanning every door / hatch / air vent jalousie, to see if visible light (usually white) can be seen emminating from the warship, at various ranges from the ship. It's part of the reason the RED lighting is used after dark (usually switching to darken ship mode at sunset). Red isn't as visible at longer distances & I think its probably down to a max range of about 3 miles??

Modern warships may also have to deal with helo ops at night & this has led to Blue lighting being introduced in specific / key areas (it helps with spacial awareness, I believe - there more info here - RED, BLUE & WHITE Lighting). The latest tech is actually using white LED's, & the ability to dim the LUX level down to extremely low levels has proved that they can be even better than RED lights, while still giving operators NVG compatibility.

A masthead navigation light for a vessel over 50m using a 65w bulb has a visible range of 6nm, I cannot see how a match can have a range of 10 miles.

Norwegian car ferries changed from red lighting to blue many years ago, it's much easier to see and improves depth perception.

 

[Git_Kraken]

A masthead navigation light for a vessel over 50m using a 65w bulb has a visible range of 6nm, I cannot see how a match can have a range of 10 miles.

Norwegian car ferries changed from red lighting to blue many years ago, it's much easier to see and improves depth perception.

A match lighting off could be brighter than a 65W bulb. A match burning is not a bright as a 65W bulb. Of course, 65W doesn't actually tell you the lux value of the light, particularly where LED's are concerned, that power could go into light instead of heat.

As for red lighting, the use of red lighting is more to preserve your own night vision than to reduce the signature of the ship. Otherwise, navigation markers and ships wouldn't use red lighting as much as they do for navigation purposes (port running light, RAM lights, NUC etc...). There has been a movement away from red lighting on military ships towards green light as green works better with NVG systems. Green also allows for better detail when doing things that require reading or chartwork. I can see that different spaces on ships could have green or red depending on what the space is used for. Hangars might have green as they need to see tools and do work, as well as not interfere with NVG of the aircraft. The bridge might have red because it preserves night vision better for lookouts.

That being said when I was on watch we used red, and only when we had to read. And you warned the rest of the bridge you were turning the red light on. No light was better than even dim red light.

 

[KiwiRob]

A match lighting off could be brighter than a 65W bulb. A match burning is not a bright as a 65W bulb. Of course, 65W doesn't actually tell you the lux value of the light, particularly where LED's are concerned, that power could go into light instead of heat.

As for red lighting, the use of red lighting is more to preserve your own night vision than to reduce the signature of the ship. Otherwise, navigation markers and ships wouldn't use red lighting as much as they do for navigation purposes (port running light, RAM lights, NUC etc...). There has been a movement away from red lighting on military ships towards green light as green works better with NVG systems. Green also allows for better detail when doing things that require reading or chartwork. I can see that different spaces on ships could have green or red depending on what the space is used for. Hangars might have green as they need to see tools and do work, as well as not interfere with NVG of the aircraft. The bridge might have red because it preserves night vision better for lookouts.

That being said when I was on watch we used red, and only when we had to read. And you warned the rest of the bridge you were turning the red light on. No light was better than even dim red light.

A match lighting would be bright but I still don’t believe it would be visible at 10 miles. LED or incandescent the regulations for visibility are still the same.

NUC lights are red RAM lights are white.

The hanger lights in the Queen Liz class are 5000k LED floodlights, most of them are 18000lm, some are 13500lm.

 

[Git_Kraken]

Yes the visibility requirements for an all round white light are very specific for the size of the ship. The power doesn't actually matter as long as it's the correct range.

As for RAM lights...

International Collision Regulations, Part C. Rule 27 (b) A vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre, except a vessel engaged in mine
clearance operations, shall exhibit:

1. Three all-round lights in a vertical line where they can best be seen. The highest and
   lowest of these lights shall be red and the middle light shall be white;

 

[ngatimozart]

A match lighting would be bright but I still don’t believe it would be visible at 10 miles. LED or incandescent the regulations for visibility are still the same.

NUC lights are red RAM lights are white.

The hanger lights in the Queen Liz class are 5000k LED floodlights, most of them are 18000lm, some are 13500lm.

It's the initial flare up, that's all. But apart from that it's also about blackout discipline. On a clear dark night at sea a naked light can be seen from afar because of the lack of light pollution that's prevalent ashore.

 

[KiwiRob]

Yes the visibility requirements for an all round white light are very specific for the size of the ship. The power doesn't actually matter as long as it's the correct range.

As for RAM lights...

International Collision Regulations, Part C. Rule 27 (b) A vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre, except a vessel engaged in mine
clearance operations, shall exhibit:

1. Three all-round lights in a vertical line where they can best be seen. The highest and
   lowest of these lights shall be red and the middle light shall be white;

For vessels over 50m visibility is 3nm, for vessels under 50m 2nm, however you can use a 3nm lantern for a vessel under 50m, there are no rules precluding this.

In the recent past power was important, for a 50m plus incandescent lantern to give the correct visibility most manufacturers used P28 65w bulbs for 3nm, for 2nm Bay15D 40w bulbs were used, with 24v systems often 40-85w B22 lamps. For modern LED lanterns most manufacturers use the same lantern with the same LED modules and drivers for above and below 50m, the brightness is factory set for above or below 50m.

That all goes out the door when it comes to naval applications, navy vessels will have panels with a dimmer function.

I know rule 27, there are variations of this rule for ROV operations (D), towing (C), the RAM light is also used in 27 C & D is always either a 360 or 2 x 181 degree white lantern. You can see this on the panel diagram below, this vessel will have 2 x 181 degree lanterns mounted on either side of the mast..

 

[Git_Kraken]

Ah I see the confusion, we are in agreement, just different terminology. RAM requires red/white/red but on this panel, it's defining that a white addition to the "NUC" lights as the RAM light. They really are just masthead lights which depending on how you light them off mean different things, at which point they actually become RAM or NUC signals. I'm using RAM as shorthand for red/white/red and NUC for red/red.

 

[spoz]

Which is the norm. For those who don’t know, RAM = Restrictrd Ability to Manouevre (also known as task lights); so fishing, towing, minesweeping et al; but the ship concerned is still under appropriate control and can manoeuvre as determined by her command, albeit with some limitations. NUC = not under command; for some reason (engine breakdown, steering problems) the movements of the ship cannot be appropriately controlled. They are quite different.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

For the shipspotters around Perth: prepare your cameras!

The ship will steam for 30 days towards her homeport, HMAS Sterling, in Western Australia. ‘Stalwart’ will then undergo a final fit-out where the installation and testing of the combat and communications systems, as well as some logistics areas, will be completed in Australia.

Royal Australian Navy’ Second Supply-Class AOR Sails Home - Naval News

The Royal Australian Navy’ second Supply Class Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment ship, NUSHIP Stalwart, departed for Australia from Pier 12 in Navantia’s Ferrol shipyard on Thursday, 20 May 2021.

www.navalnews.com

 

[Geddy]

I’ve been looking for the latest on the LHD’s CIWS upgrade. 4 years ago they were talking about 2-3 Phalanx mounts by 2018 but nothing seems to have appeared.

Could Navy be looking at SeaRam or something similar? Would seem a good time to upgrade given the money flowing around the defence budget and the security environment…

 

[Redlands18]

I’ve been looking for the latest on the LHD’s CIWS upgrade. 4 years ago they were talking about 2-3 Phalanx mounts by 2018 but nothing seems to have appeared.

Could Navy be looking at SeaRam or something similar? Would seem a good time to upgrade given the money flowing around the defence budget and the security environment…

Don’t think so, as far as i have heard the intention is still to fit Phalanx but they are currently going through a upgrade and I’m not sure how many upgraded systems have been returned at this stage. Only Sydney and Supply have upgraded systems fitted, i suspect Stalwart will get one during her Weapons and Comms fit out mentioned in the link provided by @Sandhi Yudha above but when the LHDs will get theirs?

 

[KiwiRob]

Ah I see the confusion, we are in agreement, just different terminology. RAM requires red/white/red but on this panel, it's defining that a white addition to the "NUC" lights as the RAM light. They really are just masthead lights which depending on how you light them off mean different things, at which point they actually become RAM or NUC signals. I'm using RAM as shorthand for red/white/red and NUC for red/red.

Its not just this panel, it's all panels. Masthead lights and the lights which are used for RAM are completely different lights. A masthead has a 225 degree angle of view and a 6nm visibility for vessels over 50m, RAM lights either 360 degree or 181 degree white lanterns have a range of 3nm.

 

[Volkodav]

My 2 cents, it really sucks trying to get a submarine to comply with regards to navigation lights! You simply don't have a mast high enough

 

[KiwiRob]

My 2 cents, it really sucks trying to get a submarine to comply with regards to navigation lights! You simply don't have a mast high enough

You'd be surprised, my previous employer was in the process of designing them for the German Navy. The mast on a sub is about as high as a small fishing vessel, ferry or workboat.

 

[alexsa]

My 2 cents, it really sucks trying to get a submarine to comply with regards to navigation lights! You simply don't have a mast high enough

There are exemption options under Rule 1(e) of the Colregs for vessels that cannot comply with the lighting requirements due to their configuration. They need to comply as far as reasonable practical to the satisfaction of the administration.

(e) Whenever the Government concerned shall have determined that a vessel of special construction or purpose cannot comply fully with the provision of any of these Rules with respect to the number, position, range or arc of visibility of lights or shapes, as well as to the disposition and characteristics of sound-signalling appliances, such vessel shall comply with such other provisions in regard to the number, position, range or arc of visibility of lights or shapes, as well as to the disposition and characteristics of sound-signalling appliances, as her Government shall have determined to be the closest possible compliance with these Rules in respect of that vessel.

The administration in this case is normally the civilian administration (AMSA in Australia’s case). Quite a bit of pragmatism is required for submarines.