Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[DDG38]

All builds at Osborne are documented. But a constant feed or some such would make watching grass growing look interesting. Her current appearance is effectively as shown on the navy.gov.au Arafura page with the three personnel standing in front of her; and that was taken three or four months ago. Until the funnel and mast are stepped her external appearance will remain largely unchanged; and, to be frank, not very interesting.

The image you're referring to was taken in March 2020. I get the process is slow but 1 image every year is pretty poor from a PR perspective, and not everyone would find it boring. It's not just imagery of the ship, Navy should be covering all aspects of the build process, people involved, design elements etc. It's not just the Arafuras either, no imagery of NUSHIP Supply's first arrival at FBW was uploaded etc. Just seems like the media relations people aren't on the ball recently.

 

[spoz]

The two hull super blocks, without superstructure, were joined together in March, and I posted a (long distance) picture of that here on 1 Apr (no joke....), the day after it was taken. The bridge structure was added about the end of September. The photo which includes Jon Robarts was taken mid October from memory. OTH, you can still argue that more should be done.

 

[Flexson]

It's not just the Arafuras either, no imagery of NUSHIP Supply's first arrival at FBW was uploaded etc. Just seems like the media relations people aren't on the ball recently.

Concerning Supply and Stalwart, that has been in part a conscious decision considering perceived public opinions regarding offshore builds of naval vessels. There was testing of the waters leading up to announcing the ships ceremonial association with Eden and the wider Bega Valley Shire and how big and public that announcment would be. In the end though COVID put a stop to the preferred announcement when the Eden Whale Festival was cancelled.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Not seen any discussion here on the proposed Western Australian Large Vessel Dry Berth Development, so thought I would post a little info.



Would be located on the Southern end of the AMC in WA.
Capable of building and drydocking large vessels. Unsure how large but clearly big enough to drydock all current RAN vessels so in excess of 240 metres in length to allow HMAS Adelaide to dock. At the industry briefing it was presented as a West Coast alternative for vessels which could currently only dry dock at the Captain Cook Graving dock. Also mentioned that discussions would be held with the US about their potential use of the facility. Not sure if the ability to dock a US Aircraft carrier is being contemplated?
Clearly WA is hoping that all the upcoming large vessels for the RAN will be built there.

 

[Redlands18]

Not seen any discussion here on the proposed Western Australian Large Vessel Dry Berth Development, so thought I would post a little info.


View attachment 47922

Would be located on the Southern end of the AMC in WA.
Capable of building and drydocking large vessels. Unsure how large but clearly big enough to drydock all current RAN vessels so in excess of 240 metres in length to allow HMAS Adelaide to dock. At the industry briefing it was presented as a West Coast alternative for vessels which could currently only dry dock at the Captain Cook Graving dock. Also mentioned that discussions would be held with the US about their potential use of the facility. Not sure if the ability to dock a US Aircraft carrier is being contemplated?
Clearly WA is hoping that all the upcoming large vessels for the RAN will be built there.View attachment 47923View attachment 47924

I d remember they resurfaced a USN Carrier Flight Deck in Fremantle a few years back

 

[John Newman]

Not seen any discussion here on the proposed Western Australian Large Vessel Dry Berth Development, so thought I would post a little info.


View attachment 47922
Would be located on the Southern end of the AMC in WA.
Capable of building and drydocking large vessels. Unsure how large but clearly big enough to drydock all current RAN vessels so in excess of 240 metres in length to allow HMAS Adelaide to dock. At the industry briefing it was presented as a West Coast alternative for vessels which could currently only dry dock at the Captain Cook Graving dock. Also mentioned that discussions would be held with the US about their potential use of the facility. Not sure if the ability to dock a US Aircraft carrier is being contemplated?
Clearly WA is hoping that all the upcoming large vessels for the RAN will be built there.View attachment 47923View attachment 47924

About 6mths ago I posted this PDF:

https://www.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-10/draft-australian-marine-complex-strategic-infrastructure-and-land-use-plan-18-june-2020.pdf

It’s a 115 page PDF of various proposals for the upgrade and expansion of the AMC site.

Bit of a read, but goes into detail of various upgrade options for the site.

Cheers,

 

[MARKMILES77]

Here is a video of the Western Australian Government Industry briefing which is where the above screen shots were taken from:

 

[oldsig127]

Concerning Supply and Stalwart, that has been in part a conscious decision considering perceived public opinions regarding offshore builds of naval vessels.

There has been a reasonable amount of coverage of NUSHIP Supply through their official Facebook page. I'll try to link the post which was added today of their departue from FBW enroute to FBE

No, you don't need to be a Facebook user, or log in to FB in order to see it

HMAS Supply II

HMAS Supply II. 5,583 likes · 139 talking about this. This is the official Facebook Page for the Supply class Auxiliary Oiler Replenishment ship, Supply (

www.facebook.com

oldsig

 

[DDG38]

Concerning Supply and Stalwart, that has been in part a conscious decision considering perceived public opinions regarding offshore builds of naval vessels. There was testing of the waters leading up to announcing the ships ceremonial association with Eden and the wider Bega Valley Shire and how big and public that announcment would be. In the end though COVID put a stop to the preferred announcement when the Eden Whale Festival was cancelled.

On what data was the "perceived public opinions regarding offshore builds of naval vessels" based ? Seems like a weak argument to preclude producing current professionally taken imagery of the ship. Whoever is making that decision is perhaps overestimating the push back from the public, who remain largely ignorant of Defence matters in Australia. Anyway, I shall produce my own imagery and post it here when NUSHIP Supply arrives at FBE.

 

[Aussie Bhoy]

Maybe one of the problems is that until the ship is accepted by the Navy, it's really up to the ship builder to post constructions pictures, keep us updated, etc.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Here is a video of the Western Australian Government Industry briefing which is where the above screen shots were taken from:

Found this interesting regarding future Navy build/sustainment/replacement


So it would seem you could lock in the following:

Sealift/replenishment vessels (Navantia?)
Future army watercraft (? small?)
Large Army Landing Craft (? - bow or stern landing ship?)
Pacific Support Ship
Riverine Patrol Craft
Salvage and repair
Young endeavor
LHD landing craft replacement

quite a few interesting things in there.

 

[John Newman]

Found this interesting regarding future Navy build/sustainment/replacement
View attachment 47926

So it would seem you could lock in the following:

Sealift/replenishment vessels (Navantia?)
Future army watercraft (? small?)
Large Army Landing Craft (? - bow or stern landing ship?)
Pacific Support Ship
Riverine Patrol Craft
Salvage and repair
Young endeavor
LHD landing craft replacement

quite a few interesting things in there.

You can add a few more to the list too:

* Replacement for the 8500t ADV Ocean Protector
* Up to eight (8) additional OPVs, possibly based on Arafura, for mine warfare and hydro, noted in the 2020 Strategic Update
* Replacement of the Cape class for Border Force, noted in the 2017 Shipbuilding Plan

The piece of the puzzle we need to see is the 2021 update for the 2017 Shipbuilding Plan, which was supposed to be released late last year, but now planned for early this year.

Once that is released we should have a much clearer picture of ‘what, where and when’ for construction of all these different classes of ships and boats.

I suspect the delay in the release of the update is due to the lack of decision/announcement (in the public domain at least) for the future of Collins class FCD, will it stay in SA or move to WA? That is a rather big discussion point for a separate post.

Cheers,

 

[John Newman]

I think it’s a good plan to build a large dry dock in the West, good to have one on each coast.

Couple of questions I have, how large will it be? The Captain Cook Graving Dock is approx 345m long x 45m wide x 14m deep, can accomodate one very large ship, or multiple smaller ships, or can be sectioned off, split in half so to speak.

Depending on the size and configuration, it may only be able to be used for shipbuilding ‘or’ ship repair, not necessarily both at the same time, great if it’s used to build the two proposed JSS, Choules replacements, etc, but does that also prevent it from docking a Supply class AOR at the same time if urgently required?

If into the future a significant number of large ships are to be built at Henderson (the ships mentioned above, and potential future replacements for AOR and LHD classes), I would hope that a significant upgrade of the infrastructure matches those future shipbuilding and ship sustainment plans.

Large dry dock, larger capacity floating dock, high load capacity transfer systems, etc.

Anyway, hopefully some of these questions will be answered sooner than later.

Cheers,

 

[alexsa]

Maybe one of the problems is that until the ship is accepted by the Navy, it's really up to the ship builder to post constructions pictures, keep us updated, etc.

Where are you getting your information from. That is simply not true noting, that while imagery and videos are few and far between, DoD has provided such media for the OPV, AWD and AOR projects. Unless there is something very unusual in the build contract (which it is pretty clear it is not the case) the folk paying for a ship have a right to provide media on its progress.

 

[Volkodav]

Where are you getting your information from. That is simply not true noting, that while imagery and videos are few and far between, DoD has provided such media for the OPV, AWD and AOR projects. Unless there is something very unusual in the build contract (which it is pretty clear it is not the case) the folk paying for a ship have a right to provide media on its progress.

Spot in, infact photography on site at Osborne was explicitly banned and could only be undertaken by authorised individuals with the photos being reviewed by security before internal, let alone external release.

 

[ASSAIL]

Spot in, infact photography on site at Osborne was explicitly banned and could only be undertaken by authorised individuals with the photos being reviewed by security before internal, let alone external release.

I snuck down to Osborne and was totally unaware of those rules. I snapped this just as a couple of security guys came running over from the Gatehouse. It was a bit of a farce because I simply moved to a small jetty outside the gate and snapped plenty more.

 

[Stampede]

I snuck down to Osborne and was totally unaware of those rules. I snapped this just as a couple of security guys came running over from the Gatehouse. It was a bit of a farce because I simply moved to a small jetty outside the gate and snapped plenty more.

View attachment 47928

Nice Pic of HMAS Brisbane

Given all three of the Hobart Class were in FBE only a couple of weeks ago, I'm wondering what is the sail time to FBW from Sydney.

Regards S

 

[ASSAIL]

Nice Pic of HMAS Brisbane

Given all three of the Hobart Class were in FBE only a couple of weeks ago, I'm wondering what is the sail time to FBW from Sydney.

Regards S

It’s about 2,185 nms following the rhumb line across the Bight so at 16kts (around 400nms/day) about 6 days if they go direct which rarely happens.
Some smart arse Navigating Officers have tried the Great Circle route which takes you a long way South in the Bight and have been bitten on the bum by bad weather, HMAS Supply I in 1980 but that’s another soggy beer storey.

 

[ADMk2]

Spot in, infact photography on site at Osborne was explicitly banned and could only be undertaken by authorised individuals with the photos being reviewed by security before internal, let alone external release.

Yes, you wouldn’t want too many people ’in the wild’ knowing HMAS Brisbane is equipped with a Mk45 5 inch gun, as observable in Assail’s photo...

 

[Systems Adict]

Spot in, infact photography on site at Osborne was explicitly banned and could only be undertaken by authorised individuals with the photos being reviewed by security before internal, let alone external release.

In fairness (speaking from a generic warfare point of view), taking pics while on Govt / MoD Property can be deemed as a criminal act.

Criminals & terrorists, as well as the ' Weapons to ploughshares' brigade are all keen to gather info in hopes of exploiting weaknesses for various reasons from embarrassing the site / govt security, to learning timetables / routines for planning attacks on sites. Working within the defence community on many different sites, including Naval bases & manufacturer's shipyards, as well as non-MoD jetty's, it has always been the case that Photography has 99% of the time been 'Prohibited', or is only allowed after formal request, with explicit explanation of what is being imaged & why.

The proliferation of mobile phones & digital cameras mean that good quality imagery can be obtained, which in turn allows 'non-allies' or industrial competitors can gather data that may help highlighting weaknesses in the design / allowing content to be used in improving their products.

While it is appreciated that getting a good pic of a ship while berthed is a 'big thing' for the photographer, it could be deemed more onerous than a long distance shot from a jetty / area out with the dockyard.

Secrecy is often a key element of the operational capabilities of the fleet, not letting too many people know when a ship is coming alongside for provisions / bunkering is key to the ship being able to get in & out, without 'non-allies' being aware.

Sometimes when a warship turns up randomly at a Port, it maybe part of an activity relating to ongoing issues in a conflict, so that they can get specific items / staff on board the ship. Often members of the general public are not as 'aware' that posting pics / comments on social media platforms can have negative consequences. Stating a large warship is taking on stores at a specific port, at a specific date & time can allow 'non-allies' to 2nd guess things, possibly compromising a specific mission.

I have fallen foul of these sort of regulations a couple of times over the years (mainly due to have a camera & taking pics for work reasons, but not having the appropriate paperwork to do so). Being sat in the security hut, waiting on a dressing down, even though it is for non-nefarious reasoning, is no fun.

The other side of the coin is also true, watching a security team effectively getting 'punished' (by the team being split up / put onto different shifts / other job-sites), for not being pro-active when a group of "foreign tourists" proceeded to spend an hour walking round the outskirts of a particular job site I was on, taking photos & video of the facility, concentrating on the numerous entrances & emergency exits from associated buildings. The group where later picked up after visiting another nearby facility, where they were challenged & police where called. It wasn't until the security services reviewed the images that things were flagged...

SA