Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Joe Black]

Austal signed contract for replacement Pacific Patrol Boats

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence – Contract signed for replacement Pacific Patrol Boats

Great day for Austal and WA in general. As a West Aussie, I'm glad that Austal has won the bid to build the boats. Will be great to see them in Henderson/Freo waters.

Can't wait to see them build the OPVs too. Will be interesting to see how the OPV work will be split between them and ASC though, and if the Commonwealth will own the design rather than either of the shipyards.

 

[Joe Black]

Cheers Raven, Assail & Alexsa.

Wondering what the endurance of the new Fassmer OPV? She is a nice design. Previous Fassmer OPV in service with Chilean Navy - 80m Fassmer OPV

Hope that Damen's 1800 series, will still be in the mix. Both the Standard 83m OPV & the 85m Sea Axe design.

I really like the Sea Axe design, hoping them Damen can scale the 1800 OPV2 down to 80m to meet the requirement. Surely a 85m boat is not that much bigger than 80m boat right? Is the Navy going to disqualify a design if it is 5m over the stated max length?

 

[Volkodav]

What I'm sort of looking forward to sometime in the 2020s in the in service comparisons between ASC built and Austal built OPVs. Having extensive experience with both organizations and their products I would love to see a rocket put up Austal over there build quality, warranty and in service support. Unfortunately reality being what it is any issues with the Austal built ships will be blamed on ASC or someone else.

I suspect the PPB contract has, in part, been awarded to Austal to equip them, at tax payers expense to take over the OPV build once SEA5000 ramps up. To me a smarter move would have been to give block work from all OPVs and future frigates to ASC, Forgacs and BAE (Melbourne and Henderson) increasing and reducing the number of blocks ordered from each based on operational, workload and performance. Consolidation, final assembly and integration of batches or flights of the OPVs and possible follow on OCVs (potential replacements for MCMVs and hydrographic ships) should be competitively awarded based on performance on block work and support of partners and customer, rather than just cost, and never politics.

Do it like this we would have competition and a sustainable industry spread across the country.

 

[aussienscale]

I think the main difficulty maybe in Cairns because berthing for the current10 home ported ships there is tight but a little easier with the departure of the LCHs
The main berth very nearly intrudes into the port main swing basin (an area dredged to allow large ships to be turned 180 degs.
This however will be alleviated by the port development plan which moves the swing basin further into Trinity inlet away from HMAS Cairns, certainly the outside wharf would allow all the proposed OPVs berthing room but until the development takes place they couldn't double up. It is still quite tight however because of the closeness of the sugar refinery wharf (used by about 19 ships pa)
There are plans by ARUP for the redevelopment but I don't have access away from my desk.
The are no length restrictions at DArwin Naval Base that would prevent the OPVs being over length by a few metres

Could not find the reference in the DWP, so just got the link below as stated in DWP for Cairns up-grades

Defence White Paper: HMAS Cairns to get $120m over 10 years, more Navy patrol boats - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Don;t think a few extra mtrs ig going to make one bit of difference

Cheers

 

[Alf662]

Cheers Raven, Assail & Alexsa.

Wondering what the endurance of the new Fassmer OPV? She is a nice design. Previous Fassmer OPV in service with Chilean Navy - 80m Fassmer OPV

Hope that Damen's 1800 series, will still be in the mix. Both the Standard 83m OPV & the 85m Sea Axe design.

Nick, check the Fassmer data sheet, it states a range of 5,500 nautical miles

 

[Nick underscore]

Nick, check the Fassmer data sheet, it states a range of 5,500 nautical miles

Cheers Alf.

I should have been more specific. I was referring to 'Days' endurance, not NM range.

Maybe between 18-21 days? The sheet specs are basic on the new Fassmer design. She's indicated at 18m3 of FW, but Damen 1800 OPV is indicated at 50m3 + FW gen plant.

Addtionally, Damen OPV have a greater designed fuel capacity (~+50m3) whilst possibly more efficient - utilising the 'sea axe' bow.

Damen OPV 1800 series ~25 days.

 

[Alf662]

I really like the Sea Axe design, hoping them Damen can scale the 1800 OPV2 down to 80m to meet the requirement. Surely a 85m boat is not that much bigger than 80m boat right? Is the Navy going to disqualify a design if it is 5m over the stated max length?

It depends what length is being applied, ie measured length, water line length or length overall. They are all different.

From my experience most technical professionals would quote a measured length (this is probably what the RAN have specified).

When an organisation is trying to sell a boat or ship they will often quote the length overall. This has frustrated me a number of times over the years and I have come to the conclusion that it is done by marketing type people who like to make some thing look bigger than what it actually is and do not always understand the technical merits of what is being quoted.

I think it was Alexsa who stated in another post that a quoted length could still comply with the specified length.

 

[ASSAIL]

Could not find the reference in the DWP, so just got the link below as stated in DWP for Cairns up-grades

Defence White Paper: HMAS Cairns to get $120m over 10 years, more Navy patrol boats - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Don;t think a few extra mtrs ig going to make one bit of difference

Cheers

It's a Portsnorth redevelopment, not defence money although I assume the redevelopment of facilities at HMAS Cairns will include some changes to the berths.

http://www.portsnorth.com.au/pdfs/csdp/A4ProjectDescription.pdf[

 

[Alf662]

I really like the Sea Axe design, hoping them Damen can scale the 1800 OPV2 down to 80m to meet the requirement. Surely a 85m boat is not that much bigger than 80m boat right? Is the Navy going to disqualify a design if it is 5m over the stated max length?

Have gone back and had a look at the Integrated Investment Plan from the DWP. For clarity it states: "larger patrol vessels of around 70–80 metres in length"

Quote:
Offshore patrol vessels

4 .35 Twelve offshore patrol vessels will replace the 13 existing
Armidale Class patrol boats . Following a competitive evaluation process,
construction will commence in Australia in 2018 as the first element of
the continuous shipbuilding program, with all 12 offshore patrol vessels
to be delivered by 2030 .

4 .36 The patrol vessels will enhance the ADF’s capacity to support border
security, maritime resource protection and military patrol and response
operations . These larger patrol vessels will be primarily focused on
border security and resource protection . They will also be capable of
more extended operations, with enhanced range and endurance to
improve support to operations further afield, particularly across maritime
South East Asia and the South Pacific.

4 .37 The acquisition of a class of patrol vessels with greater capacity than
the Armidale Class should enable the destroyer and frigate force to
concentrate on higher tempo, higher risk tasks beyond Australia’s coastal
areas . These larger patrol vessels of around 70–80 metres in length will
be able to embark unmanned aerial, underwater and surface vehicles and
operate larger sea boats than the existing Armidale Class.

 

[aussienscale]

Cheers Alf.

I should have been more specific. I was referring to 'Days' endurance, not NM range.

Maybe between 18-21 days? The sheet specs are basic on the new Fassmer design. She's indicated at 18m3 of FW, but Damen 1800 OPV is indicated at 50m3 + FW gen plant.

Addtionally, Damen OPV have a greater designed fuel capacity (~+50m3) whilst possibly more efficient - utilising the 'sea axe' bow.

Damen OPV 1800 series ~25 days.

Nick, Fassmer also have this too, might also be of interest ? Others have mentioned an OPV with possible escort and minor ASW capabilities would not go astray

http://www.fassmer.de/fileadmin/use...ding/salesblaetter/SB_74_Naval_OPV_LY5_ma.pdf

Not sure what sized helo they can carry for either of the Fassmer designs, all I can find is reference to hangar for medium sized helicopter ?

Chile in the OPV 80 use the Eurocopter AS365, which is a fair bit smaller than an NH-90 or the Romeo's.

This newer design above might be a good candidate for a down sized system from CEA ? Can only dream
Cheers

 

[Nick underscore]

Nick, Fassmer also have this too, might also be of interest ? Others have mentioned an OPV with possible escort and minor ASW capabilities would not go astray

http://www.fassmer.de/fileadmin/user...OPV_LY5_ma.pdf

Not sure what sized helo they can carry for either of the Fassmer designs, all I can find is reference to hangar for medium sized helicopter ?

Chile in the OPV 80 use the Eurocopter AS365, which is a fair bit smaller than an NH-90 or the Romeo's.

This newer design above might be a good candidate for a down sized system from CEA ? Can only dream
Cheers

That's the Fassmer OPV that I'm drawing a comparison against. She looks nice, but I'm questioning her endurance. FW & Fuel capacity may indicate a lower endurance vs. Damen designs.

Hard to say really

Btw - The multi-mission bay & hanger must be a 'plus' for Damen offerings

 

[aussienscale]

It's a Portsnorth redevelopment, not defence money although I assume the redevelopment of facilities at HMAS Cairns will include some changes to the berths.

http://www.portsnorth.com.au/pdfs/csdp/A4ProjectDescription.pdf[

Sorry should have made my post a little clearer, so yep understand one is private, was just highlighting the HMAS Cairns upgrades in reference to the talk of the size of the new OPV's. I have also seen reference that the Gov's intention is to base all 12 OPV's in Cairns too

Will have a good read of the pdf when I get a chance

Cheers

 

[Alf662]

Cheers Alf.

I should have been more specific. I was referring to 'Days' endurance, not NM range.

Maybe between 18-21 days? The sheet specs are basic on the new Fassmer design. She's indicated at 18m3 of FW, but Damen 1800 OPV is indicated at 50m3 + FW gen plant.

Addtionally, Damen OPV have a greater designed fuel capacity (~+50m3) whilst possibly more efficient - utilising the 'sea axe' bow.

Damen OPV 1800 series ~25 days.

I see what you mean, all of the literature is silent on actual endurance.

I did a quick comparison between the new & old Fassmer OPV's. The older OPV has a fuel capacity of 300 cubic metres and a range of 12,000 nautical miles at 12 knots, the water capacity is 48 cubic metres.

The newer version has a fuel capacity of 150 cubic metres and a range of 5,500 nautical miles (half of the fuel capacity of the older version and under half the range). And as you indicated the water capacity is only 18 cubic metres, this can be overcome by installing a decent water maker, but it would need to have a generous generating capacity (if you cannot carry it, then make it).

I know that they are only graphics, but the newer version appears to have the flight deck one deck lower and this may have impacted on the fuel capacity.

 

[aussienscale]

What I'm sort of looking forward to sometime in the 2020s in the in service comparisons between ASC built and Austal built OPVs.

Is that the case though Volk ? I don't recall seeing anywhere that Austal will be taking over the OPV build once moved from ASC ? Have only just seen reference to it moving to WA, but not mention of Austal, have I missed something ?

Austal would still be building the PPB's, with the first being delivered around 2018, do they have the capacity or capability (I use that term loosely) to do both ?

If it does happen, we all know what the comparison will be there mate !!

Cheers

 

[Punta74]

Good news, contracts signed with Navantia yesterday for the two replenishment ships. Anyone know if there was an "option" for a 3rd ?

Tempers flare as Replenishment ship contract signed

 

[Volkodav]

Just a thought on naval shipbuilding. I really do mot trust Austal based on their past performance and behavior but realise that it will be impossible to complete all twelve OPVs at ASCs Adelaide facility with SEA 1000 and 5000 both coming on line as well as the requirement to stay on top of Collins sustainment.

Then the answer came to me, expand ASC West at Henderson. They already have a modern facility able to do everything, up to and including a mid cycle docking for the Collins class, so why not duplicate the hanger to provide space for a sub undergoing FCD. Also existing facilities at the ASC would be more than capable of launching OPV and frigate sized platforms, so why not construct a hard stand, support towers, gantry cranes and building halls at ASCs Henderson site to provide blocks for the OPVs and future frigates (especially hull blocks, such as the ones BAE screwed up so badly) and eventually take over the consolidation and completion of later OPVs.

This would tie in nicely with ASC building the first four or five OPVs in Adelaide ad Henderson could ramp up the number of blocks they provide to Adelaide so they are fully up to speed when the project team, including supply chain, engineering, test and trials, relocate to Henderson for subsequent hull, significantly reducing the risks and costs that would be involved with moving the project to a new prime. WA and SA still get their promised work share but there will be no need to duplicate project overheads.

 

[vonnoobie]

Is that the case though Volk ? I don't recall seeing anywhere that Austal will be taking over the OPV build once moved from ASC ? Have only just seen reference to it moving to WA, but not mention of Austal, have I missed something ?

Austal would still be building the PPB's, with the first being delivered around 2018, do they have the capacity or capability (I use that term loosely) to do both ?

If it does happen, we all know what the comparison will be there mate !!

Cheers

Just poking my nose in, with out going into Austal's capabilities as I have no experience with it based purely on there infrastructure they can. From past media images I have noticed they do build multiple PB's in a single bay at any one time. having 4 bay's with a combined area exceeding 10,000 sqm they have the room.

From media report's builds are meant to start around H2 2017 with first boat's finished in Q4 2018, Final boats done in 2023 giving me the rough impression of finished product being completed in 18 month time frame allotments (ie: 4 - 5 boats in each batch) so they could get away with using there two smallest bay's leaving the two largest ones to builds OPV's if it ever comes down to it.

 

[vonnoobie]

Just a thought on naval shipbuilding. I really do mot trust Austal based on their past performance and behavior but realise that it will be impossible to complete all twelve OPVs at ASCs Adelaide facility with SEA 1000 and 5000 both coming on line as well as the requirement to stay on top of Collins sustainment.

Then the answer came to me, expand ASC West at Henderson. They already have a modern facility able to do everything, up to and including a mid cycle docking for the Collins class, so why not duplicate the hanger to provide space for a sub undergoing FCD. Also existing facilities at the ASC would be more than capable of launching OPV and frigate sized platforms, so why not construct a hard stand, support towers, gantry cranes and building halls at ASCs Henderson site to provide blocks for the OPVs and future frigates (especially hull blocks, such as the ones BAE screwed up so badly) and eventually take over the consolidation and completion of later OPVs.

This would tie in nicely with ASC building the first four or five OPVs in Adelaide ad Henderson could ramp up the number of blocks they provide to Adelaide so they are fully up to speed when the project team, including supply chain, engineering, test and trials, relocate to Henderson for subsequent hull, significantly reducing the risks and costs that would be involved with moving the project to a new prime. WA and SA still get their promised work share but there will be no need to duplicate project overheads.

Judging by the lack of available space there they would have to buy some one out, Idealy buy out CIVMEC. Allow's you to build (in full or partially) what they wanted to do along with diversifying ASC's business capabilities.

In regards to Austal if it's as poorly managed as I have been informed then usually means lot's of room for improvement ($$), Perhaps buy them out and scrap there current management?

 

[oldsig127]

Judging by the lack of available space there they would have to buy some one out, Idealy buy out CIVMEC. Allow's you to build (in full or partially) what they wanted to do along with diversifying ASC's business capabilities.

In regards to Austal if it's as poorly managed as I have been informed then usually means lot's of room for improvement ($$), Perhaps buy them out and scrap there current management?

Publicly listed company with a market capitalisation in the half billion dollar area, with subsidiaries in other countries, one building warships for the USN? At the same time as we likely will be selling part of ASC to DCNS?

Hardly anything to cause an Australian government to think twice, is there? Just as soon as we nationalise the banks.

oldsig

 

[alexsa]

Good news, contracts signed with Navantia yesterday for the two replenishment ships. Anyone know if there was an "option" for a 3rd ?

Tempers flare as Replenishment ship contract signed

According to the white paper, not in the immediate future noting the investment strategy states:

​

2 new replenishment vessels with an additional vessel (a replenishment ship or logistics support vessel) to be acquired in the late 2020s