Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[gf0012-aust]

If your trying to stop/dispose of say a 4000t (or say 100,000+ t) vessel then Im not sure a 25mm round across its bow or even towards its engine will have much affect.

its about commanders orders - and then the resultant intent....

gunners intent...
round 1 - ahead of the bows (repeat as often as the boss wants)
round 2 - steering
round 3 - wheelhouse/bridge

 

[vonnoobie]

To be honest I was disappointed with the demise of the LCH(R) and I am concerned that we will be focusing on having all of our eggs in three large egg baskets.

Is it fully ended though? Off the top of my head there was a mention of replacing the LCM-1E's, Did they actually mention something with similar capabilities? Or are they thinking of something like an LCU? The British LCU Mk.10 has the right dimensions to carry 4 aboard each LHD and Id imagine 2 aboard the Choules. While not quite the payload or range of the Balikpapan's it is something in between that does warrant at least a glance.

 

[ngatimozart]

Its quite a flexible size. Volcano(40Km) and Dart(anti aircraft) PFF (anti missile). Offers a useful 8km accurate range which may be useful for Naval gunfire support. IMO its probably more useful than the 57mm on the LCS and coast guard (which they are trying to develop guided rounds for).

Given these are designed to be ocean going, I'm not sure a 25mm round will suffice.

If your trying to stop/dispose of say a 4000t (or say 100,000+ t) vessel then Im not sure a 25mm round across its bow or even towards its engine will have much affect.

Australia has previously taken out a illegal shipping vessel with a harpoon (Pong Su 3700t) from a F-111, so I guess while not likely it is possible.I would imagine a 76mm at the water line would be cheaper.

Was that as a target for training?

You have to remember is that your average civilian ship has 1/4in thick steel plate for its hull sides. A rifle bullet will go through that. So a 25mm burst into an engine room has a good chance of disabling the ship, because engines are not partial to high speed impacts from explosive or solid projectiles with an inch diameter. Most ships will stop once a round or two is fired their way, however you do get some who will holdout. The 50cal is a reasonably good persuader. That will stop an engine.

Contrary to GFs ROE ours called for a second burst just past the wheelhouse. If that failed, then the wheelhouse was targeted followed by the engine room. The engine room was seen as a second to last resort because of the probably of fire.

 

[the road runner]

Was that as a target for training?

Off topic ,Pong Su being hit by 2 Harpoon's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQeWD6hm6Ak

 

[ASSAIL]

Was that as a target for training?

You have to remember is that your average civilian ship has 1/4in thick steel plate for its hull sides. A rifle bullet will go through that. So a 25mm burst into an engine room has a good chance of disabling the ship, because engines are not partial to high speed impacts from explosive or solid projectiles with an inch diameter. Most ships will stop once a round or two is fired their way, however you do get some who will holdout. The 50cal is a reasonably good persuader.

You're being a bit ambitious on plate thickness ngati. The average 24 mtr trawler is 6mm at the worst case, slightly larger small ships are 8 a 10 mm and anything with decent tonnage uses thicker plate (12 mm for one 800 tonner that I'm aware of) but Alexsa is more current on larger ships.

It is rather accademic though because a 50 cal is pretty useful. Some of our experts could comment on its lethality and penetration.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Contrary to GFs ROE ours called for a second burst just past the wheelhouse. If that failed, then the wheelhouse was targeted followed by the engine room. The engine room was seen as a second to last resort because of the probably of fire.

I wouldn't take my ROE's as prescriptive

all depends on the approvals after dialling home....

 

[gf0012-aust]

You're being a bit ambitious on plate thickness ngati. The average 24 mtr trawler is 6mm at the worst case, slightly larger small ships are 8 a 10 mm and anything with decent tonnage uses thicker plate (12 mm for one 800 tonner that I'm aware of) but Alexsa is more current on larger ships.

It is rather accademic though because a 50 cal is pretty useful. Some of our experts could comment on its lethality and penetration.

deferring to alexsa here - but when you get to big ships there's also the issue of double skinning.....

we used to have some ex OPV drivers on here but they're been missing for a while. they would have been a good source (where comment was possible.)

 

[ngatimozart]

You're being a bit ambitious on plate thickness ngati. The average 24 mtr trawler is 6mm at the worst case, slightly larger small ships are 8 a 10 mm and anything with decent tonnage uses thicker plate (12 mm for one 800 tonner that I'm aware of) but Alexsa is more current on larger ships.

It is rather accademic though because a 50 cal is pretty useful. Some of our experts could comment on its lethality and penetration.

I could be because it was 25 years ago and we were dealing with Taiwanese, South Korean, Japanese and Russian FFVs mostly. The then Soviet ones always stopped and obeyed the rules, the Japanese were generally OK in that they would stop but played games. However the other two lots could be less than cooperative and the quality of the boats, well I wouldn't want to sail across Lyttelton Harbour on a good day in one, let alone the Pacific Ocean.

 

[aussienscale]

Agreed the Sea Axe is designed with the 11m RHIB in mind but there are MOTS arrangements of similar configuration that can launch and recover both large RHIBs and fast interceptor craft. Some fast interceptor craft are basically covered in RHIBs while others are more akin to combat boats. It comes down to what is desirable, affordable and achievable, a combat boat may be too much of a stretch but a fast interceptor craft, able to operate independently for a day or so could be possible, as could a Protector USV.

Then again would the ability to put a landing party, supported by an ATV ashore be a bad thing? Stretching things further, how hard would it be to configure the multi mission bay into a dock capable of recovering a variety of craft? Have an overhead gantry crane to lift the craft onto cradles pr even to lift different cradles into the bay to recover different craft.

And on that, will we take on lessons from the US ? Their Riverine capability would be the one to look to and copy, for our purposes, for the sake of interoperability and some commonality for systems and supply chains.

They have it pretty well worked out with combinations of the Riverine Command boat (CB90), Small unit riverine craft and the Special Operations Craft.

Plenty of options there for transport by sea depending on the tempo of the requirement, with multiple options for all by C-17, C-130, C-27J and CH-47

Just my thoughts

Riverine Military Boats | US Navy Riverine Boat | SAFE Boats International

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CB90-class_fast_assault_craft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_unit_riverine_craft

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Operations_Craft_–_Riverine_(SOC-R)

 

[SASWanabe]

Off topic ,Pong Su being hit by 2 Harpoon's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQeWD6hm6Ak

IIRC Pong Su was hit by 2x 2000lb GBU-10s not harpoons.

 

[Bonza]

Off topic ,Pong Su being hit by 2 Harpoon's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQeWD6hm6Ak

It was actually 2,000-pound Paveway laser guided bombs that did in the Pong Su, not Harpoon.

EDIT: Just saw the post above, sorry to repeat the explanation. Just wanted to be clear on what happened.

 

[Pusser01]

Doesn't Australia have some 76mm guns in storage, if these ships could accept a gun of that size. Would give them some decent firepower without a huge outlay and there not doing anything else.

The RAN had 7x 76mm guns, the 6 from the OHP's and 1 in use at Westhead Gunnery Range.

 

[Pusser01]

Australia has previously taken out a illegal shipping vessel with a harpoon (Pong Su 3700t) from a F-111, so I guess while not likely it is possible.I would imagine a 76mm at the water line would be cheaper.

Sorry, but I seem to remember that the Pong Su was sunk by the use of 2x 2000lb GBU10 Paveway II dropped by F111 though my memory could be wrong

Sorry, just saw previous messages explaining the same.

 

[alexsa]

You're being a bit ambitious on plate thickness ngati. The average 24 mtr trawler is 6mm at the worst case, slightly larger small ships are 8 a 10 mm and anything with decent tonnage uses thicker plate (12 mm for one 800 tonner that I'm aware of) but Alexsa is more current on larger ships.

It is rather accademic though because a 50 cal is pretty useful. Some of our experts could comment on its lethality and penetration.

12mm mild steel is pretty common for hull plating with thicker plate around stress areas. The sides of the engine room will generally be 12mm and the top of a slow speed 2 stroke diesel sits well above the water line.

200 rounds of 50 cal (even just 4B1T) is pleanty to make a significant mess of the E/R and stop the ship. Risk is it will also start a fire.

The 25mm round will just do it quicker. Essentially the 50 cal is sufficient to do the job.

 

[40 deg south]

Janes coverage of the Canberra deployment here.

Australia, New Zealand deploy amphibious ships on relief mission to Fiji | IHS Jane's 360

I'm a bit puzzled by the claim that 50 tonnes of relief supplies are on board - maybe a typo? That is less than the amount carried by the NZ OPV Wellington, and an order of magnitude down from the Canterbury's claimed 500 tonnes. From footage of the Canterbury loading, it looks as if they have emptied out the entire contents of the nearest Bunnings timber yard.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Janes coverage of the Canberra deployment here.

Australia, New Zealand deploy amphibious ships on relief mission to Fiji | IHS Jane's 360

I'm a bit puzzled by the claim that 50 tonnes of relief supplies are on board - maybe a typo? That is less than the amount carried by the NZ OPV Wellington, and an order of magnitude down from the Canterbury's claimed 500 tonnes. From footage of the Canterbury loading, it looks as if they have emptied out the entire contents of the nearest Bunnings timber yard.

I'd say its a typo. all the different loading shots add up to way more than 50t

The HADR plans for an event like this include significant material - 50t is only a partial C17 loadout

 

[Volkodav]

12mm mild steel is pretty common for hull plating with thicker plate around stress areas. The sides of the engine room will generally be 12mm and the top of a slow speed 2 stroke diesel sits well above the water line.

200 rounds of 50 cal (even just 4B1T) is pleanty to make a significant mess of the E/R and stop the ship. Risk is it will also start a fire.

The 25mm round will just do it quicker. Essentially the 50 cal is sufficient to do the job.

Modern sighting systems such as EOD/EOS used with 25mm Typhoon also permits hot engines to be specifically targeted and potentially disabled with a single round through its center of mass. Still the danger of fire but this is minimized with a single round, it also (hopefully) permits personnel to be identified by heat signature, further preventing collateral damage.

 

[StingrayOZ]

I would think one of the benefits would be range of the 76mm. Anything you can do with the 25mm could probably be done with a .50 (which you might have one on either side), but the 76mm offers significant range (potentially OTH) and guided munitions.

If we do end up replacing the Huons and the survey ships, with some sort of OPV, then you would be buying more 25mm/something else anyway (nothing). I guess it comes down to cost/benefit. Would the existing guns be compatible with newer rounds?

I'm a bit puzzled by the claim that 50 tonnes of relief supplies are on board

Its being widely reported. But other reports mention its 50 tonnes of equipment, not supplies. Machinery, generators, water storage/purifiers etc. It seems that they aren't that interested in loading Canberra up to the gills with bunnings crap, but use it as a mobile base. We have already deployed 84 tonnes via airlift.

Canberra carried 800 disaster relief personnel, army engineering assets, three helicopters and about 60 tonnes of emergency supplies including water purification equipment and medical supplies.

Its presence has been felt.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop received a text message from Fiji Minister for Foreign Affairs Ratu Inoke Kubuabola on Tuesday morning saying he witnessed HMAS Canberra's arrival.

'The people of Fiji were delighted to see such a physical manifestation of Australian support,

- See more at: Aust Navy arrives to help cyclone hit Fiji

HMAS Canberra arrives to help in rehabilitation work - Fiji Times Online
HMAS Canberra arrives to rebuild Koro after Cyclone Winston | Fiji One
Fijivillage :: Fiji’s Home on the World Wide Web
https://www.newswire.com.fj/nationa...ssel-hms-canberra-out-to-rebuild-our-islands/

She has a lot of G wagons and trucks so its not like she is just loaded with just containers. She will arrive with everything she needs to distribute. I would imagine they will become a pretty visible presence around Fiji. More importantly they are there to rebuild and reconnect, not just hand out tarps.

Very interesting to see how this is getting reported around the pacific. Tonga, PNG, within Fiji.

 

[ngatimozart]

I would think one of the benefits would be range of the 76mm. Anything you can do with the 25mm could probably be done with a .50 (which you might have one on either side), but the 76mm offers significant range (potentially OTH) and guided munitions.

If we do end up replacing the Huons and the survey ships, with some sort of OPV, then you would be buying more 25mm/something else anyway (nothing). I guess it comes down to cost/benefit. Would the existing guns be compatible with newer rounds?



Its being widely reported. But other reports mention its 50 tonnes of equipment, not supplies. Machinery, generators, water storage/purifiers etc. It seems that they aren't that interested in loading Canberra up to the gills with bunnings crap, but use it as a mobile base. We have already deployed 84 tonnes via airlift.



Its presence has been felt.



HMAS Canberra arrives to help in rehabilitation work - Fiji Times Online
HMAS Canberra arrives to rebuild Koro after Cyclone Winston | Fiji One
Fijivillage :: Fiji’s Home on the World Wide Web
https://www.newswire.com.fj/nationa...ssel-hms-canberra-out-to-rebuild-our-islands/

She has a lot of G wagons and trucks so its not like she is just loaded with just containers. She will arrive with everything she needs to distribute. I would imagine they will become a pretty visible presence around Fiji. More importantly they are there to rebuild and reconnect, not just hand out tarps.

Very interesting to see how this is getting reported around the pacific. Tonga, PNG, within Fiji.

Yes, the Canberra and Canterbury will be there for a while rebuilding basic infrastructure to help the locals restart. I believe that Canterbury has been tasked to one of the outer islands hence it clearing a Bunnings depot. This is already been stated as NZs largest HADR Op offshore and I think that it has only just started.

I agree that it will be interesting how this is being reported in Samoa, Tonga, Vanuatu and the Cook Islands.

 

[John Newman]

12mm mild steel is pretty common for hull plating with thicker plate around stress areas. The sides of the engine room will generally be 12mm and the top of a slow speed 2 stroke diesel sits well above the water line.

200 rounds of 50 cal (even just 4B1T) is pleanty to make a significant mess of the E/R and stop the ship. Risk is it will also start a fire.

The 25mm round will just do it quicker. Essentially the 50 cal is sufficient to do the job.

Which sort of turns this debate about armament levels on the 12 future OPV's full circle.

Does anyone really believe that the OPV's will have a greater level of firepower above and beyond the ACPB's? I don't.

I would expect to see them fitted with a main 25mm Typhoon mount (or similar, maybe even recycled from the ACPB's) and a couple of 50 cal too, I'd be pretty surprised to see them with a 57mm, let alone a 76mm main gun, just can't see a 76mm happening.

The OPV's will certainly be much more capable ships that the ACPB's, much larger, greater endurance, greater range, etc, but to me that says more about the ACPB's not being up to the job at hand rather than an expectation of a more significantly heavily armed larger OPV and evolving them into OCV's.

At the very sharp teeth end of things, the RAN is going to end up with 12 large AWD's / Frigates (up from 11), and lets not forget the doubling in size of the submarine fleet too.

Do we actually need more 'combat' capable ships? And if the answer is yes, then what would be suitable to increase the combat capabilities of the RAN?

The most obvious answer to me would be to increase the size of the AWD / Frigate fleet beyond the current planned 12.

The next level down would be to introduce a class of Patrol Frigate / LCS type ships, and that would probably mean a class of ships of at least 3000t, be large enough to carry a reasonable amount and variety of armament types (and this is where the potential to 'recycle' equipment from the FFG's and possibly Anzacs could happen).

To me that is still a 'very big if' that is unlikely to happen, my other concern is that such a move could also see a reduction in the larger AWD / Frigate fleet to be able to afford that new capability.

Anyway, just my opinion!!