Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[StingrayOZ]

What price for a second hand FFG.
The unknown until there is a sale and ink is on the contract.

We will wait and see and see if the return is better than what we forgo.

Out of curiosity what would it cost to keep the two FFG's in working order for say 5 years.
Complete with a SINGLE skeleton crew,they would do no more than run the two ships a couple of short tips each year to test the vessels machinery and systems .

Regards S

The price depends on what countries are willing to pay and what we are willing to accept. In Polands case it appears they would be perhaps interested if it was gifted, not so much in paying. With Canada and the F-18, they seem quite happy to pay.

The ADF has a large number of priority projects, keeping FFG's alive is likely to take money and crew from those other projects. I don't really see where the FFG's really fit into those priorities. They aren't exactly low crewing assets. Capability wise, the Anzacs are close approximates. I imagine the FFG's will kept in a condition until they are disposed of.

Again I would say the 4th AWD is a shame not have been ordered. IMO that is one of the real poor decisions regarding the RAN. Something we won't see rectified until we start replacing the Hobarts. As we are building an OPV instead of build an aegis destroyer.

 

[ASSAIL]

The RANFAA has commissioned 822X Squadron as the unit responsible for UAVs.
I can only hope that the Siebel is just the beginning and larger, more capable aircraft will follow.

Royal Australian Navy

 

[Stampede]

The RANFAA has commissioned 822X Squadron as the unit responsible for UAVs.
I can only hope that the Siebel is just the beginning and larger, more capable aircraft will follow.

Royal Australian Navy

UAV's will certainly be part of defence aviations future.
The question will be in what size and numbers.
Crawl, walk, run and now a Squadron formed to foster the journey.

A good move.

Regards S

 

[Stampede]

The price depends on what countries are willing to pay and what we are willing to accept. In Polands case it appears they would be perhaps interested if it was gifted, not so much in paying. With Canada and the F-18, they seem quite happy to pay.

The ADF has a large number of priority projects, keeping FFG's alive is likely to take money and crew from those other projects. I don't really see where the FFG's really fit into those priorities. They aren't exactly low crewing assets. Capability wise, the Anzacs are close approximates. I imagine the FFG's will kept in a condition until they are disposed of.

Again I would say the 4th AWD is a shame not have been ordered. IMO that is one of the real poor decisions regarding the RAN. Something we won't see rectified until we start replacing the Hobarts. As we are building an OPV instead of build an aegis destroyer.

Yep the 4th AWD is now history, but every day we get to make choices about the future.
I wonder what will be said of decisions made this year in ten years time.
I'd suggest that with so many defence projects on going and in the pipeline across the services it will generally be favourable.
Well I certainly hope so.
As to the FFG's, well time will tell.

Regards S

 

[Tasman]

Speaking of Landing craft, has anyone got an explanation as to why our LHDs (certainly Canberra during RIMPAC) only embark 3x LCM1Es plus an LCM8 and that configuration seems to prevail?
Noting that the LCM8 has even less, 57 tonnes, capacity than the newbies.

It was strange to see that at RIMPAC (BTW it was Adelaide at RIMPAC 2018). Pure speculation but I wonder if there was a shortage of operationally ready LCM1Es (unlikely as the RAN has 12) or if there is something an LCM8 can do that a LCM1E cannot! I can't think what that might be! It is certainly not that it has less draft as it draws more than an LCM1E according to the sources I have read (happy to be corrected if that is wrong).

I also wondered why Adelaide embarked only two MRH-90s for RIMPAC 2018, which made her flight deck look very bare until USMC CH-53E Super Stallions, UH-1Z Viper and UH-1Y Venoms landed on her.

IIRC , whilst Adelaide was at RIMPAC Canberra and 5th Aviation were also involved in exercises, which might explain the absence of helos and the presence of only 3 LCM1Es. Hopefully the empty flight decks will become a thing of the past as more Army pilots are cleared to operate from these ships.

Tas

 

[Redlands18]

It was strange to see that at RIMPAC (BTW it was Adelaide at RIMPAC 2018). Pure speculation but I wonder if there was a shortage of operationally ready LCM1Es (unlikely as the RAN has 12) or if there is something an LCM8 can do that a LCM1E cannot! I can't think what that might be! It is certainly not that it has less draft as it draws more than an LCM1E according to the sources I have read (happy to be corrected if that is wrong).

I also wondered why Adelaide embarked only two MRH-90s for RIMPAC 2018, which made her flight deck look very bare until USMC CH-53E Super Stallions, UH-1Z Viper and UH-1Y Venoms landed on her.

IIRC , whilst Adelaide was at RIMPAC Canberra and 5th Aviation were also involved in exercises, which might explain the absence of helos and the presence of only 3 LCM1Es. Hopefully the empty flight decks will become a thing of the past as more Army pilots are cleared to operate from these ships.

Tas

The Adelaide was away for 3 months on Ex Pacific Endeavour 2018(which included RIMPAC) and with a major Exercise on back here as well, the Army would not have been in a position to send 1/2 Dozen or so MRH-90s away for that amount of time. Whether Exercise planning was for a number of USMC Helos to operate of her I'm not sure as the USN Wasp Class LHD that was supposed to participate was a last minute withdrawal.
The strangest thing I have found with the LHD purchase is that while driven by the Army, no extra Aviation assets have been added other than about 4 Chinooks.

 

[SpazSinbad]

Army Aviation demonstrates new capabilities Four Page PDF from AIR International Nov 2018 by Nigel Pittaway attached.

 

[Tasman]

Army Aviation demonstrates new capabilities Four Page PDF from AIR International Nov 2018 by Nigel Pittaway attached.

Thanks SpazSinbad.

Very interesting overview of developments in Army Aviation. I was especially interested in the way in which Army Aviation is developing its aviation combat elements (ACEs). As well as the Army's ACEs the LHDs have also embarked MH-60R Romeos in recent times which add another dimension to the flexibility that these versatile ships offer.

Tas

 

[40 deg south]

Euronaval 2018: Leonardo’s Oto Marlin 40 selected for Australian Project SEA 1180 Phase 1 OPVs | Jane's 360

The Australian arm of German shipbuilder Lürssen has selected Leonardo’s Oto Marlin 40 mm gun mount to equip the offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) being built for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) under the Project SEA 1180 Phase 1.

Don't think this news has previously been posted. 40mm is at the top end of what I would expect as armament for an OPV.

Navy Recognition online naval defence industry magazine, naval industry, military technology, maritime defense news, navy news, world navies.

While this update is from Janes, there is plenty more Euro-tastic information from Euronaval at the French-based Navy Recognition site.

 

[hauritz]

The RANFAA has commissioned 822X Squadron as the unit responsible for UAVs.
I can only hope that the Siebel is just the beginning and larger, more capable aircraft will follow.

Royal Australian Navy

A little more detail in Australian Aviation.
Navy commissions 822X Squadron to operate UAVs - Australian Aviation
The UAS for the OPVs and new frigates will be decided separately. I know the USN is looking at teaming the MH-60R and MQ-8 Fire Scout together so possibly Australia will follow suit.

 

[SpazSinbad]

The X may be so but the explanation from OzAv seems BOGUS to me (but I could be todally rong and a dancing fool). Consider the 822 badge which appears for new squadron then compare the pair from the old RN 822 Squadron (defunct for a long time).

"...The commissioning service drew together the history and traditions of the RAN while also recognising that the squadron represents a very modern aspect of operations. 822 is a new number, not a revived squadron number as has often been the case in the past. While the ‘8’ in the squadron number indicates its operational status, the ‘22’ stemmed from the number of the unit’s first aircraft. (ScanEagle AV1422 flew with the callsign ‘ScanEagle 22’). Additionally, it is the first squadron to bear the ‘X’ suffix, to mark the developmental nature of the unit...." 26 Oct 2018 Navy commissions 822X Squadron to operate UAVs - Australian Aviation

History making day at HMAS Albatross [South Coast Register story - scroll through photos for badge] Seen in preview on this RANFAAAA opening page: FAAAA | Fleet Air Arm Association of Australia

https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/trans...f5667d.JPG/r0_0_4000_6000_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg

& 822 Naval Air Squadron - Wikipedia

 

[ASSAIL]

The second DDG HMAS Brisbane DDG 41 has commissioned into the RAN.
Two down one to go.

Royal Australian Navy

 

[Stampede]

Euronaval 2018: Leonardo’s Oto Marlin 40 selected for Australian Project SEA 1180 Phase 1 OPVs | Jane's 360



Don't think this news has previously been posted. 40mm is at the top end of what I would expect as armament for an OPV.

Navy Recognition online naval defence industry magazine, naval industry, military technology, maritime defense news, navy news, world navies.

While this update is from Janes, there is plenty more Euro-tastic information from Euronaval at the French-based Navy Recognition site.

If the Leonardo 40mm is as good as "advertised", it may be a good replacement for not only the 25 mm Bushmasters across the fleet, but also the Phalanx CIWS.
The question is, can this one system improve upon the range of contingency's provided by the existing systems?
If so, it may prove to be the way forward for an individual ships close in defence.

Regards S

 

[ASSAIL]

If the Leonardo 40mm is as good as "advertised", it may be a good replacement for not only the 25 mm Bushmasters across the fleet, but also the Phalanx CIWS.
The question is, can this one system improve upon the range of contingency's provided by the existing systems?
If so, it may prove to be the way forward for an individual ships close in defence.

Regards S

It is a very futuristic looking gun I just hope it’s a little more accurate than the Bofors 40/60 I used to play with.

https://i1.wp.com/worldnavalnews.co...018/03/marlin-40-gun-02.png?fit=800,535&ssl=1

 

[Joe Black]

It is a very futuristic looking gun I just hope it’s a little more accurate than the Bofors 40/60 I used to play with.

https://i1.wp.com/worldnavalnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/marlin-40-gun-02.png?fit=800,535&ssl=1

This gun is originally called the Forty Light. We can find more on the Leonardo website:
FORTY LIGHT - DETAIL - Leonardo - Aerospace, Defence and Security

It has a PDF link with the specs and details: http://www.leonardocompany.com/documents/63265270/67172137/OTO_Forty_Light_LQ_mm08749_.pdf

 

[Flexson]

I'm on Adelaide right now.

Remember the LCM-8s along with their Army crews were the primary deployable landing craft for Kanimbla, Manoora and Tobruk. The LHDs deploy with one to keep the Army boat crews happy, they'd never get to go overseas anymore otherwise .

Also they never use the rear ramp on the LCM-1Es, they have load restrictions which prevent an MBT and some of the other heavier kit from transversing. Also there are now 3 life raft pods bolted to the deck in front of the aft ramps which would need to be moved to use the ramp.

 

[Richo99]

possible lcm1e replacement...not sure the length of these and how many could fit in an lhd, but seems to have a good pedigree

Land Forces 2018: BMT Offers Ship-to-Shore Connector

 

[Redlands18]

possible lcm1e replacement...not sure the length of these and how many could fit in an lhd, but seems to have a good pedigree

Land Forces 2018: BMT Offers Ship-to-Shore Connector

The rear Ramp looks a tight fit for that Tank

 

[oldsig127]

possible lcm1e replacement...not sure the length of these and how many could fit in an lhd, but seems to have a good pedigree

Land Forces 2018: BMT Offers Ship-to-Shore Connector

That's a peculiarly confused article. The first sentence says that the BMT proposal is for an LCM1E replacement

The third paragraph reads

Navantia’s LCM-1E is likely to be a contender as it has built landing craft for the Spanish LHD JUAN CARLOS I, to the same design as the CANBERRA-class.

Will Navantia propose to replace them with more of them? Or is Monch Publishing also unsure where we use LCM1E or LCM8 ?

oldsig

 

[ASSAIL]

I'm on Adelaide right now.

Remember the LCM-8s along with their Army crews were the primary deployable landing craft for Kanimbla, Manoora and Tobruk. The LHDs deploy with one to keep the Army boat crews happy, they'd never get to go overseas anymore otherwise .

Also they never use the rear ramp on the LCM-1Es, they have load restrictions which prevent an MBT and some of the other heavier kit from transversing. Also there are now 3 life raft pods bolted to the deck in front of the aft ramps which would need to be moved to use the ramp.

Thanks for that, it had me wondering, gotta keep the swatties happy.