Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

SteveR said:

I understand that the Type 26 propulsion is CODLOG - Diesel Electric with mechanical connection to the single MT30 for high speed bursts. See following blog description in Think Defence:
Type 26 Global Combat Ship (GCS) - Capabilities - Think Defence

The diesel generator propulsion is from four MTU 20V 4000 diesels with combined output of 12MW, significantly greater than that on the FREMM, and is the same configuration used on the German Type 125 which is said to make up to 20Kt just on the diesel electric alone.

The Type 45 propulsion tried to go to the bleeding edge with two WR-21 gas turbines with Northrop Grumman (NG) recuperators driving generators directly (42MW total) as integrated electric drive. There were two Wartsila diesels for ship hotel load and backup to the gas turbines. But the WR-21/NG system proved unreliable so that is why Royal Navy backed off full integrated electric drive for the Type 26 and went back to CODLOG.

Click to expand...

From what i’ve read the intercooler and engines met the specification submitted by the UK MOD. Also the UK MOD utilised the WR-21 because it was British built instead of the recommended LM2500? Mention also of the need to make savings in the design.

Seems that some people think that the RAN will be acquiring the CAMM Sea Ceptor missile if the Type 26 was chosen. From publicly available information, it has never been stated that the RAN has any intention of acquiring Sea Ceptor or the Sylver VLS. The RAN from what I have seen, has determined that the VLS will be the Mk-41 and the short range SAM will be the ESSM. So all conjecture being posted here about RAN CAMM Sea Ceptor and Sylver VLS is rubbish. It's your cobbers across the ditch who have acquired the Sea Ceptor.

It is really coming down to the wire:
Down to the Wire

Can't wait to see which way RAN will go. I won't be surprised one bit if RAN ends up with FREMM eventhough my money is with F-5000.

Jack Wyatt said:

From what i’ve read the intercooler and engines met the specification submitted by the UK MOD. Also the UK MOD utilised the WR-21 because it was British built instead of the recommended LM2500? Mention also of the need to make savings in the design.

Click to expand...

The IEP system that RR/NG might have met the specification but clearly the reliability portion wasn't met. Yes, the WR-21 were favoured as they benefited British industry and it was the NG designed recuperation/intercooler component that was causing the problem. After a redesign of this component, it was not sufficiently tested. Furthermore, the diesel power plants were intended for hotel load, not propulsion.

I can't help but think that at the end of the day it may be ASW capability rather than missile load outs that will win the day. The defence white paper clearly states that the new frigates would be optimised for ASW.

This could count against the F-5000 and the Type 26 for all its claims is still a paper ship. The dark horse in this race could be the FREMM. It is the only vessel that is optimised for ASW and is in production. I wouldn't be surprised if it leapfrogs the other contenders and ends up grabbing the prize particularly when you have Fincantieri also offering a whole bunch of other incentives.

I understand that this is the proposed helo for SEA 5000 after our major political parties have finished handing out populist sweeteners before the next federal,election.

NTD Life

ASSAIL said:

I understand that this is the proposed helo for SEA 5000 after our major political parties have finished handing out populist sweeteners before the next federal,election.

NTD Life

Click to expand...

Looks like an opportunity for the RCN if our Cyclones don't work out!

hauritz said:

I can't help but think that at the end of the day it may be ASW capability rather than missile load outs that will win the day. The defence white paper clearly states that the new frigates would be optimised for ASW.

This could count against the F-5000 and the Type 26 for all its claims is still a paper ship. The dark horse in this race could be the FREMM. It is the only vessel that is optimised for ASW and is in production. I wouldn't be surprised if it leapfrogs the other contenders and ends up grabbing the prize particularly when you have Fincantieri also offering a whole bunch of other incentives.

Click to expand...

If ASW is indeed the hot button item then maybe FREMM could be a real contender. If in fact it did win, I can just imagine the $hitstorm the Conservative opposition in Canada will create against junior's government after rejecting Fincantieri's unsolicited bid which was half the estimated cost of of what many expect the other vendor bids will be. I guess such a decision would make for interesting conversations in Australia too.

alexsa said:

Just an observation ..... and noting I don’t have access to a scale model.... based on an 80m LOA, that flight deck is around 30m long. You would still be able to do vertrep and I suspect it could handle light to medium helecopters and UAV even with a container stowed. I will fry to dig out some dimensions

Click to expand...

I agree given how large the helipad appears to be, that a container could likely fit with sufficient room for a helicopter or UAV to land & take off safely.

Where I see a potential problem with that arrangement is in one of the following cases. If the container mounts some sort of non-VLS weapons system that is supposed to have a fire arc aft (like a gun, CIWS or RAM/SeaRAM), then a landed helicopter or UAV could very well interfere with the aft fire arc. The other case is if it is decided that a helicopter (not a UAS which could be containerized) needs to be embarked as part of an ongoing operation or deployment, then something like a telescopic hangar would likely be needed. Such a hypothetical telescopic hangar would likely need to be installed in that 'extra' space on the flight deck where containers could go. Therefore the vessel would be in a bind if it needed both a containerized capability and an embarked helicopter.

From my POV, which 40 mm gun actually gets selected would provide insight into the potential scope of operations expected for SEA 1180 vessels. If it turns out the gun is a Bushmaster or based upon one, then I would anticipate little or no planning to use the vessels for threats higher than normally encountered in constabulary roles.

Just curious, correct me but regarding the SEA 5000 you almost never talk about the price tag. Am i wrong?

We talk normally about technical data but at what price?

How much cost a F-5000?
A Fremm? (we bought them at 600-650€)
A T26?

Because at least in my case i make my choices based on the price/quality ratio.


P.s. when should we expect the results?

Meriv90 said:

Just curious, correct me but regarding the SEA 5000 you almost never talk about the price tag. Am i wrong?

P.s. when should we expect the results?

Click to expand...

In just a few weeks. Slated to be announced this quarter.

Meriv90 said:

Just curious, correct me but regarding the SEA 5000 you almost never talk about the price tag. Am i wrong?

We talk normally about technical data but at what price?

How much cost a F-5000?
A Fremm? (we bought them at 600-650€)
A T26?

Because at least in my case i make my choices based on the price/quality ratio.


P.s. when should we expect the results?

Click to expand...

FYI, Fincantieri made an unsolicited bid of $30 billion CDN for Canada's CSC program ( 15 ships) which was rejected. This is only a rough guide as the Sea 5000 and CSC programs could have significantly different priorities with regard to CONOPs

Meriv90 said:

Just curious, correct me but regarding the SEA 5000 you almost never talk about the price tag. Am i wrong?

We talk normally about technical data but at what price?

How much cost a F-5000?
A Fremm? (we bought them at 600-650€)
A T26?

Because at least in my case i make my choices based on the price/quality ratio.

Click to expand...

Part of this is because the cost for a piece of kit can be very difficult to determine, especially for something as complex as a warship and warship building programme.

Per the SEA 5000 project description found here, the estimate is that it will be AUD$35 bil. for acquisition of nine ASW frigates, which are now believed to have a greater than initially planned air defence capability through the CMS being specified to use Aegis. However, part of that AUD$35 bil. is likely going to be devoted to infrastructure to manufacture and support the SEA 5000 vessels due to competition for space to manufacture parts of the SEA 1180 and SEA 1000 projects, as well as to maintain the existing fleet. Then of course there is the costs which would be associated with training both the workforce which would be involved in production and maintenance (which is needed to a degree given the order gaps in Australian warship production) as well as the skilling of RAN personnel who will operate the new frigates.

There is also the potential that the AUD$35 bil. price tag was calculated using the Australian methods, which tend to include whole life-of-type costs, as opposed to just the cost to develop and then manufacture a unit. What all this ends up boiling down to though is that while there is an idea of what the project will cost as a whole, how much of that is 'just' from the cost of individual vessels is presently unknown as there are too few details which have been released.

Meriv90 said:

Just curious, correct me but regarding the SEA 5000 you almost never talk about the price tag. Am i wrong?

We talk normally about technical data but at what price?

How much cost a F-5000?
A Fremm? (we bought them at 600-650€)
A T26?

Because at least in my case i make my choices based on the price/quality ratio.


P.s. when should we expect the results?

Click to expand...

Pricing can be deceptive since you don't really know what is being covered.
Whatever design is chosen will probably have the same CMS, weapons and sensors. The only difference in price will probably be the cost of the hull, machinery and operating costs. While that would probably favour the F-5000 and FREMM over the Type 26 I don't imagine the cost difference at the end of the day will be that great. In fact if crewing levels are anything to go by then the Type 26 may well end up costing less over its entire lifecycle.

hauritz said:

Pricing can be deceptive since you don't really know what is being covered.
Whatever design is chosen will probably have the same CMS, weapons and sensors. The only difference in price will probably be the cost of the hull, machinery and operating costs. While that would probably favour the F-5000 and FREMM over the Type 26 I don't imagine the cost difference at the end of the day will be that great. In fact if crewing levels are anything to go by then the Type 26 may well end up costing less over its entire lifecycle.

Click to expand...

Training, personnel flexibility, commonality of parts, upgrade pathways etc mean there will be significant savings over the life of the ships if a common design is selected. I did post a link to a USNI News article which included comments about the operating advantages of the USN having 26 common San Antonio Class hulls around the world.

As a separate issue, there are ongoing discussions with Poland about the future of the Melbourne and Newcastle.

Adelaide class frigates sale discussions ongoing - Defence Connect

Seems the PLAN intercepted the RAN travelling thru the SCS, Defence not releasing actions taken by either side. On ABC media as the iPhone won't link sites

Australian warships 'challenged' by Chinese navy in South China Sea
Australian warships challenged by Chinese military in South China Sea
Turnbull asserts Australia's 'perfect right' to sail South China Sea

It is in this context the Sea5000 announcement will be made. China contesting the free movement of Australian war ships is no longer a theoretical scenario. What is interesting is that they were travelling on a tour from the Philippines to Vietnam, not just doing donuts around Chinese SCS features, at least that is the current context of the situation. China has also had some significant displays of Naval power recently.

Edit:
The Chinese navy challenged Australian warships in the South China Sea as it conducted its largest-ever naval parade
It looks like the Australian fleet might have been moving across/near the Chinese super fleet.

So I guess what capability is required for Australia to operate in the SCS in this environment? My guess is things are moving upscale, I wonder if future potential isn't becoming an important factor in Sea5000.

I also hear that there is talk of bringing the commissioning of the new DDG Brisbane forward.

This combined with the $200 billion announcement could make for fairly large announcement. Perhaps by the Prime Minister at the end of this month.

I'm not sure why China would aggravate Australia in this fashion.
I have no doubt that the ships were outside the 12 mile limit on passage to VN. What their actions does is to make Australia more likely to begin incursions into the 12 mile zone and to continue their right of innocent passage, it's something that should be considered after this action by the PLA-N IMHO.

Nice to see the Guardian has an up to date photo library

ASSAIL said:

What their actions does is to make Australia more likely to begin incursions into the 12 mile zone and to continue their right of innocent passage, it's something that should be considered after this action by the PLA-N IMHO.

Click to expand...

I think that should the PLA-N wish to make an act of more determined demonstration, it will more likely be against a peripheral entity, like Australia, rather than an action against a power like the USN.

StingrayOZ said:

Edit:
The Chinese navy challenged Australian warships in the South China Sea as it conducted its largest-ever naval parade
It looks like the Australian fleet might have been moving across/near the Chinese super fleet.

Click to expand...

Yea, USN recently sailed their Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier battle group with Singapore Navy in South China Sea while PLAN was having their 40 ships massive fleet parade come exercise with the President Xi onboard their Liaoning carrier.

China Plans Live-Fire Exercises In Taiwan Strait, As Xi Reviews Navy
American aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt sails through South China Sea
Xi Shows Off China’s Naval Power With Fleet Review, Taiwan Drills

Taiwanese Navy also held their own naval exercise east of Taiwan with their own President onboard their Kidd/Kang Ding class destroyer.

Taiwan president joins naval drill a day after huge China exercise

With RAN ships cutting across SCS sailing from the Phillippines and Malaysia towards Vietnam, there were a few nervous PLAN sailors out there.

In fact, the PLAN cut short their training/exercise/parade by a day when the USN/RSN, and now I suspect RAN showed up to "spoil their party".