Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
hauritz said:
I believe that they are aiming for the pricing to be closer to that of the Blackhawk than the V-22. If it goes into production and the price is right it would be a contender for replacing a number of different helicopter types in the Army and Navy.
Click to expand...
Any claims like that are dream dust. The V-280 is just a demonstrator at present, so there is no real data to base any pricing trends on. IF the Pentagon decides to proceed with the V-280 then actual pricing data won't be known until the first LRIP is negotiated. Not much point trying to extrapolate the prototype costs. If you look at the history of most defence procurement projects from initial design through to FOC, the initial cost projections bear no relation to the final costs apart from the currency and the project.
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
OK, back to the RAN!
RIMPAC is over and by all accounts it was successful for the ADF, they have practced a level of amphibious warfare that could only have been dreamed of ten years ago and it gives a real,purpose for the RAN which went through a crisis of identity when reduced to a frigate Navy for so long after the ASW Hunter Killer years pre 1982

ADF successfully completes Exercise RIMPAC 2018
 
oldsig127

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
ASSAIL said:
OK, back to the RAN!
RIMPAC is over and by all accounts it was successful for the ADF, they have practced a level of amphibious warfare that could only have been dreamed of ten years ago and it gives a real,purpose for the RAN which went through a crisis of identity when reduced to a frigate Navy for so long after the ASW Hunter Killer years pre 1982
Click to expand...
More impressive still when you realise that almost in the same time frame Canberra and Choules were completing the Sea series exercises off the Qld coast and then the RAAF busy in the far north with Pitch Black. When I pulled the pin in the late 1980s we'd fallen so far most of us never imagined a way up again - something that certainly informed my decision - for any of the services

oldsig
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
oldsig127 said:
More impressive still when you realise that almost in the same time frame Canberra and Choules were completing the Sea series exercises off the Qld coast and then the RAAF busy in the far north with Pitch Black. When I pulled the pin in the late 1980s we'd fallen so far most of us never imagined a way up again - something that certainly informed my decision - for any of the services

oldsig
Click to expand...
I was on a exercise about 1990, we were issued 2 Blank Rounds each and expected to run around going Bullets, Bullets, Bullets(lots of Bullets if you had a MG). How they expected us to take that seriously i've got no idea, absolute WOFTAM..
 
weegee

weegee

Active Member
I came across this article this morning. It seems the marines were very impressed with Adelaide. I am not sure if it was tongue and cheek or not but apparently they recovered and launched their AAV's in record times. In any case the new fat girls really look like they're going to be a fantastic acquisitions in the long run. As they say in the article together (Marines & AUS forces) could launch a lot of troops on a beach in one go at full capacity.
It's got a nice little launch video too.

VIDEO: U.S. AAVs, Australian Amphib Make Effective Pairing in RIMPAC 2018 - USNI News

Thanks
 
StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Though the Australian Navy isn’t setting its eyes on a major amphibious battle – most of its current international Indo-Pacific Endeavour 2018 deployment is focused on partnership-building and humanitarian assistance/disaster relief types of missions – Jardine noted how the U.S. and Australian forces could pair up for a very effective first wave of an amphibious assault: Adelaide can carry 15 AAVs as normally configured, or 30 if the heavy tank deck were cleared out. If the tanks were removed and 30 AAVs were loaded on, the 30 AAVs would bring 620 men ashore. If followed by the four landing craft Adelaide carries – similar to the landing craft utility (LCU) on the American amphibs – which could bring 120 troops apiece, that creates a landing force of 1,100.

I got a feeling Talisman sabre will likely further look at high end operations. Both for insertion by water and by air. The size of the Amphibs I think opens a lot of opportunities, and the recent commitment to the US actually meeting their Darwin deployment max size seems to indicate things are lining up.

While I don't think AAV's are on the Australian shopping list, their replacements certainly could/should be. It wouldn't have to be a huge number, much like the LARCV, a total buy of ~ 30 with only ~10 perhaps regularly deployed.

I think that might take some of the pressure off trying to land M1A1's and the whole landing craft focus. Give a bit more operational flexibility.
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
oldsig127 said:
More impressive still when you realise that almost in the same time frame Canberra and Choules were completing the Sea series exercises off the Qld coast and then the RAAF busy in the far north with Pitch Black. When I pulled the pin in the late 1980s we'd fallen so far most of us never imagined a way up again - something that certainly informed my decision - for any of the services

oldsig
Click to expand...
Yes I pulled the pin after they canned the carrier replacement and then watched in dismay as the cookie crumbled.
If we can ignore the disaster which befell the East Timorese people, E Timor did the ADF a real favour. Politicians who were totally indifferent to the ADF were shocked at the lack of resources that were available to react with and it was like a veil being lifted.
Let’s hope the veil remains up and that we never again sink so low due to a torpor of indifference regarding our national security.
 
StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
It wasn't just national security, it was foreign policy, our place, direction, it was everything.

ET should be taught as a major nation defining event. Australia before ET and Australia after ET.

Everyone assumed that our big and powerful friends would solve our problems. Or that our policy would always be in alignment with theirs.
Or that peacekeeping would be easy. It wasn't just Australia, the rest of the region also learnt a lot from what happened. That solving problems is hard, and takes a long time even under good circumstances.

Right time too. Look at the world now. Weaking ties and alliances. Rising powers. Divisive threats. Declining influences. Weak futures.

I don't know how anyone can forget. There's no US ambassador, and China is making sure DFAT is kept busy to requests from nations around the SEA and pacific region to what the hell are we doing to help them.
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Milne Bay said:
I don't think that HMAS Darwin was ever considered in the possible acquisition by Poland.
Since only HMAS Melbourne and HMAS Newcastle are left - perhaps it is these two that are up for consideration.
MB
Click to expand...
Of course they are both the best part of a Decade younger so were always the most likely if Poland does buy them which is still to be decided.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Tasman said:
Canberra actually had 7 helos on her flight deck during the SEA Series exercises earlier this year (2 CH-47F, 4 army and 1 navy MRH-90). I believe this may be a record for the Aussie LHDs so far. It is pleasing to see Canberra, Adelaide and 2 RAR developing what is becoming a very good amphibious capability.

I agree with the comments by many others in this and the Australian Army thread that the ADF could definitely do with more helicopters for both land and sea based operations. It looks like the LHDs have now moved from crawl to walk but to get to the run stage where their full potential is reached they will need, IMO, to operate larger numbers of helicopters on a more regular basis. Whilst their primary role is to support the army for amphibious operations (and HADR to keep the media and pollies happy) I am certain we will eventually see the RAN exploit their potential in other areas like ASW. Of course this would mean that more MH-60Rs and/or future unmanned assets would need to be acquired.

The attached image of Canberra during Sea Explorer 2018 is from the Australian Government Defence Image Library:

View attachment 46062

https://images.defence.gov.au/assets/archives/5003-All Defence Imagery/DefenceImagery/2018/S20181211/20180602USAF00000_001.jpg.info

Tas

Apologies for including the same image posted earlier by Assail (couldn't track it down when I was posting though I was certain I'd seen it recently!)... Senior moment!
Click to expand...

Thanks again
Looks like the ADF is past the crawl stage.
I'm sure there's still a lot to learn and skills to be consolidated but the forward momentum seems to be there.
It will be interesting when some serious numbers of helicopters are deployed occupying both the flight deck and hangar / garage spaces.
Tactical lift and ASW at the same time..........Maybe?
Much to look forward to .

Regards S
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Redlands18 said:
Of course they are both the best part of a Decade younger so were always the most likely if Poland does buy them which is still to be decided.
Click to expand...
Also from what I understand much better put together than the US built ships, I could be wrong, but I believe Melbourne and Newcastle are considered to be the best two FFG7s, in terms of build quality, bar none.
 
H

hairyman

Active Member
Would it not be in Australia's best interest to hang onto the two Australian made OHP's, until at least the future frigates start to arrive? Otherwise we will be left with 3 AWD's, 8 Anzacs, a total of 11, replacing 6 OHP's and 8 anzacs?
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
hairyman said:
Would it not be in Australia's best interest to hang onto the two Australian made OHP's, until at least the future frigates start to arrive? Otherwise we will be left with 3 AWD's, 8 Anzacs, a total of 11, replacing 6 OHP's and 8 anzacs?
Click to expand...
According to Wiki back in 1992 the plan was that the 3 new AWDs were to replace the Perth class and the first 4 Adelaide FFGs.

I suspect that the unordered 4th Hobart might have originally been intended to replace the remaining 2 Adelaides.
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
hairyman said:
Would it not be in Australia's best interest to hang onto the two Australian made OHP's, until at least the future frigates start to arrive? Otherwise we will be left with 3 AWD's, 8 Anzacs, a total of 11, replacing 6 OHP's and 8 anzacs?
Click to expand...
We never really had 6 & 8 at the same time Canberra was decommisioned in 2005 and Perth commisswoned in 2006 and the Adelaide would have been retained till 2008 while the other 4 went through the FFGUP.
Can't see the RAN wanting to retain 1 OHP to keep the numbers at 12 it would cost a fortune to retain 1 Orphaned Combatant in service full of Orphan Systems like the Sensor fitout, MK 13, 76mm etc.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
We never really had 6 & 8 at the same time Canberra was decommisioned in 2005 and Perth commisswoned in 2006 and the Adelaide would have been retained till 2008 while the other 4 went through the FFGUP.
Can't see the RAN wanting to retain 1 OHP to keep the numbers at 12 it would cost a fortune to retain 1 Orphaned Combatant in service full of Orphan Systems like the Sensor fitout, MK 13, 76mm etc.
Click to expand...
If the surface fleet is to be expanded to 12 or more escorts the easiest way to do it would be to extend the service lives of the Anzacs.
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
hauritz said:
If the surface fleet is to be expanded to 12 or more escorts the easiest way to do it would be to extend the service lives of the Anzacs.
Click to expand...
The Anzacs commissioned over a decade from ‘96 to 06 and according to the shipbuilding plan the final SEA5000 won’t be commissioned until 2038.
Assuming that the Anzacs will be replaced on a one for one basis all of them will be 30years plus when they decommission so it’s hard to imagine any of them being life extended. The added expense of keeping them going can’t be justified, the capability lost can easily be exceeded by a new build with greater capability.

http://www.defence.gov.au/NavalShipBuilding/Plan/Docs/NavalShipbuildingPlan.pdf
Page 15
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I know it’s a few months too late but the video linked gives a nice historical perspective to the launch of the new HMAS Sydney DDG42.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top