John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Anyone know which drive pods are used by JC/Canberra, are they Schottel, ABB, RR, or other?
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Nick underscore
Member
Quoted elsewhere;
Canberra class is fitted with ABB Azipod-type propulsion systems.
Apparently they have caused problems for Carnival Cruise company in the past.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
I believe one of Norwegian Cruises ships has had multiple problems. Queen Mary 2's RR pods have had some issues as well. As these systems are more complex I guess it is not unreasonable that some stuff will happen and their advantages outweigh for "some stuff". I have used the small version of azipods for recreational boating (Volvo IPS drives) and they sure make boat maneuvering simple.
Don't forget Choules has pods as well. It would be wrong to suggest that all pods are problematic but they are high power units and the power supply arrangements need to be properly managed or you can cause a heap of damage.
In some of the earlier pods there have been issue with seals which require the ships to dock to avoid further significant damage. To be fair if the shaft seal on the stern tube of a 'normal' shaft line is iffy then that ship has to dock as well and this is not unheard of.
In some of the earlier pods there have been issue with seals which require the ships to dock to avoid further significant damage. To be fair if the shaft seal on the stern tube of a 'normal' shaft line is iffy then that ship has to dock as well and this is not unheard of.
Mmm.... just ask Austal about stern tubes and shaft seals, its something they still haven't mastered. Actually don't, they will just deny there is an issue and blame the crews and the maintainers while pointing out they meet cost and schedule during the build phase, keeping the stuff they build working is somebody elses problem.
Part of that may have been the fact that some of the vessels vibrated really badly ... I understand some crew ended up sleeping in the Spartan accommodation aft where the noise was less when at sea.
It is really annoying that we have so called experts in our mainstream media and particularly on the ABC who just seem to sit and wait for every opportunity to sensationalise 'serious' issues in defence management, operations or procurement. We have seen it time and time again in relation to the F-35, the Collins class subs, civilian casualties in a war zone and now the amphibious force. Oldies like me remember it happening with the F-111 until it went from a 'dud' to suddenly being the greatest thing since sliced bread. I thought that the response from the Navy was good but I was disappointed to see opposition politicians attempting to score political points from the issue.
I've complained to the ABC in the past about Greenes quality of reporting
and unfort every ABC news presenter as a follow on injected confected agony over ships not being available
he's quickly earning McPhedrans reputation for sexing up information
I wrote to him about continually referring to Mattis as Mad Dog when Mattis has pointedly asked people not to call him that as it was a name created by the media. His nickname was actually Chaos - “Colonel Has An Outstanding Solution,”
Channel 7 is not much better picking up the story, it was pathetic, and they had Andrew Davies, who should know better, talking absolute rubbish, he is turning into another Goon, who takes any opportunity to get his head on the TV.
Thing that ticks me off about it is the poor people affected in Nth QLD see this crap and get upset and misled about capability and what help is on the way, along with the rest of the country. And they have enough to worry about with what has happened without rubbish reporting adding to their worries !!
t68
Well-Known Member
As we dont know what the RAN's actual problem is with the pods, but it seems to be a problem in commercial shipping and not down to one particular brand. Just a cursory look it seems to be that the main fault lie's with the swivel bearings from what I can see on the net, not saying this is the case with the Canberra's just looking at a few commercial cases.
weegee
Active Member
Here is a bit more information on the matter from a little more mainstream defence media outlet:
Poland eyes frigates from Australia, submarines
If they do in fact buy the ships what if anything will we be taking off them I wonder? We spent a ton of money giving them a bespoke upgrade. Is any of that upgrade tech that we may only want for ourselves?
A real issue is whether we could sell them any of the tech anyway. We might not have the rights to onsell anything other than an empty hull.
I have to wonder if it would be worthwhile taking any of the gear?
The future frigates would likely use new or Anzac class salvaged equipment and the OPV's would be unlikely to be armed with any of the gear from the Adelaide's as they have been scaled back from combatants to upgunned patrol boats with guns likely no larger then a 57mm, no missiles but maybe a Phalanx.
Over all while great equipment not much if any of it would have use to us, Better to help upscale a friendly nation then let it sit away gathering dust in the off chance we might use it one day.
there are FMS elements involved
there are a whole pile of hurdles that need to be addressed by State Dept contraints.
we can't sell anything under FMS constraints without USG blessing
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Assuming these reports are more than just a 'thought bubble' and assuming that the various FMS restrictions for such a sale were overcome too, then why not sell them to Poland?
If we don't sell them, then realistically all I can see happening is that they will be stripped (at a cost too) and sunk as drive wrecks, as happened to 01 and 02.
If a deal could be struck (and again assuming FMS restrictions were overcome), then maybe we could do a 'package' deal (when they are retired from RAN service of course), sell 05 and 06 as operational ships and also sell them 03 and 04 as a source of spares (though I have read that 03 Sydney, has been offered up as a dive wreck).
Again, throwing in lots of assumptions here, but maybe we could also add a 'basic' refit in Australia too, bit more 'value adding' to the deal, plus 'cost' price on the spares holdings for the class too.
The DefenseNews report is suggesting that the Poles said: "A fully equipped frigate is worth about U.S. $700 million." Maybe this is a good opportunity to get a 'fair' return from retired defence equipment?
What would we want to keep from the FFGs? The things that come to mind that wouldn't be included in the sale would be, Phalanx (back into the 'pool' for upgrade and future use on LHD's, etc), ESSM and SM-2, which I have read can be converted back from 'rail' launch to VLS launch.
Sell them and get a bit of return on our investment? Or strip them (again, at a cost) and sink them as dive wrecks?
the poles would negotiate with State
if a yay then State advise what needs to be pulled before transfer etc.....
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Whilst I take your point about 'gifting' them to the Philippines, I seriously doubt that they could actually afford (or be able to), operate ships as 'sophisticated' as the FFG's.
When the USN retired all 51 FFG7s, surely they would have been able to put their hands up for one or more of those, but didn't (as best I know).
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Agree, and talking about 'what needs to be pulled', would there be any little 'black boxes' that would need to be pulled?
TBH I don't know
although they are US allies etc the issue of what they are entitled to keep and see would depend on whether they are covered under ITARs already on component systems....
that doesn't necessarily mean that the US would not want them to end up seeing things but purely an issue of them not being signatory on the approp FMS or TPT docs (third party transfer). where there are systems they aren't covered under ITARS its possible that they are already signed with the vendor/manufacturer on other tech - in that case State can undertake to make a variation to that tech coverage doc.
we'd pull our systems where they could still be used as spares etc unless it just wasn't worth the effort - so indigenous systems are potential targets for harvesting
negotiating TPT is arduous though, so even getting that resolved for one piece of kit could take 6-9 months even if there were no hurdles.
if the poles were after ADF gear covered under FMS and ITARS then they would have out of necessity started the process for TPT ages ago
Last edited:
- Status