Thanks I was trying to find that article.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Shipbuilding plan confirms skilled foreign workers 'essential' to rapid naval expansion - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
"The document predicted by 2026 more than 5,200 workers would be needed in South Australia, but acknowledged foreigners would be "essential" to "fill middle management and supervisory roles".
It seems those french and Spanish/Italian restaurant(s) in Adelaide would have a reasonably good business by 2020s.
15 pages on workforce plans, requirements and developments, really comprehensively covered and then Andrew Greene from the ABC singles out one paragraph mentioning foreign workers, and I paraphrase;
Selected shipbuilders are expected to bring foreign workers from their home companies who are familiar with their specific production techniques and processes.....they are essential to the process of knowledge transfer and they will declines as the Australian workforce becomes familiar.....
That was all! This is typical ABC sensationalism when it comes to IR and defence,
A guided tour of the Hobart on the verge of her commissioning.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeyM9_aEULY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeyM9_aEULY
meatshield
Active Member
Thanks for posting but I found the Minster acting as tour guide nauseating.
unfortunately dog and pony shows are a fact of life
Not to mention that he was also wrong about the Hobart being Australia's fastest ever destroyer.
Pretty sure that the previous Hobart was faster.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jivOCDahCc
ever since the US Dept of Commerce did an assessment of the health of UK Shipbuilding as part of the Astute and QE build proposals - and that report was filtered back to AustGov/RAN - the need for progressive and persistent builds has been well known. Attached to achieving that is the need for progressive upskilling to maintain the ability - so importing skills or foreign expertise is not the issue - its always been about degree of acceptance and how the govt of the day chooses to deal with it
Its not hard to punch holes in the decision making of various govts in the last 30 years - and govts which have over ridden service recommendations. unfort the attitude of some govts is to see force planning as window shopping wish lists and that they are without merit
the reality is that everytime you dismiss force dev items (not just platforms) then you start t influence the future force structure and its future content as well as its dev path
no amount fo political sophistry from govts gone before the current one can change that fact of life. they inherit the nightmares of decisions past unless they make a stand
service chiefs can either confront the bear in the room, or they acquiesce and compromise
so you can end up like VADM Chris Barry - or like MajGen Peter Cosgrove - the writing is on the wall for all to see.
One of the things that has always impressed me about RAAF as a service and SOCOMD as a major capability, is that they stand their ground on their decisions. and they are demonstrating the benefits of having been able to achive that position and purpose
Interestingly enough - the very same problems that are going to impact on future major capital projects here are also bedeviling the US as they try to work out how they achieve Trumps USN dreams
so skill resourcing is not unique to Australia - but the world wide shortage of engineers has been a problem from way back - and I can recall meetings in 1995 where the shortage was already regarded as high risk to NATO and 5I's
Last edited:
Thanks for posting but I found the Minster acting as tour guide nauseating.
Me also: but as he went to great lengths to secure his political future by demanding that Adelaide was the base for all future submarine (and the first two frigates) construction he has a reason to crow.
After all AFASK he has had no real work experience outside politics.
:devil
Me also: but as he went to great lengths to secure his political future by demanding that Adelaide was the base for all future submarine (and the first two frigates) construction he has a reason to crow.
After all AFASK he has had no real work experience outside politics.
:devil
Yep, but that is a lot of them how are in cabinet or in senior positions in the opposition. We are in the unhappy world of a political class where factionalism and tribe (party), rather than good policy, often decides who does what and where things are done.
Hence the current deficit and amazing ground work done by the previous administration of getting the debt to ramp up.
So we the policy of posturing rather than actually making a real difference .... sorry fed up with the utter drivel that sprouts from our pollies and the Press
Trackmaster
Member
The vision is of interest, but the home-town, gee-whiz commentary by the reporter is embarrassing.
And she's not HMAS anything yet, is she?
On another note, with the shipbuilding plan now public, any thoughts on the timing of the announcement of the successful bidder for the OPV?
Yep - unless this new Hobart can do at least 37 knots she won't take that title from her predecessor.
Even the venerable old HMAS Anzac II could do 31 knots.
Nuship Hobart is capable of 28+ knots according to her specs
MB
Love that video, just look at the wake the beast is generating, imagine how fast she would go with a new smooth and barnacle free hull (noticed a lot of wake lines at the stern) I would imagine though, the new Hobart would also be as quick without a full missile, ammo and stores load out.
Love the yippy I aye music too, anyone know the actual song title?
That would be Spiderbait's version of the old (Ghost) Riders in the Sky.
I was in the Battle Class Anzac in September ? 1968 in the Vitiaz Strait between New Guinea and New Britain. We were on exercise and had to redeploy which meant nearly 8 hours at max speed. IIRC we spent most of that at 32 kts plus, I was petrified ( Midshipman training cruise) the entire boiler front was panting like a shagged out elephant.
I think you mean that the first two OPVs will be built in SA. All nine frigates are to be built in Adelaide followed by the construction of the new submarines.
The government has released very expensive animne of the naval shipbuilding plan.
Have a look here https://youtu.be/E8K_BXDQsqQ
Have a look here https://youtu.be/E8K_BXDQsqQ
Not a whole llot for the Eastern states in that plan.
The only real issue I have with a long term plan like this is a lack of competition.
I think that my brother was on that deployment of HMAS Anzac, as he has spoken of it as well - unless it was another time that she was sailed at speed for an extended period. He said that he thought that the ship was going to shake itself to pieces.
MB
I think you mean that the submarines and frigates will be build concurrently. We're starting a continuous build of frigates AND a continuous build of submarines, not one then the other.
And for that matter, the OPVs are intended to be the beginning of a continuous build program too - but in this case it may be OPVs followed by MCM (or Hydrographic or whatever) and back to OPVs keeping the yard continuously in operation
oldsig
- Status