Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Re the “large ship”

You would think someone should take the bigger picture view of this. While this would be a real ADF mission a Peace force “branding” would have a lot of positive spin, and it an easy sell to the public by government and adds additional resource to all three services.

1. Resurrect ABC Regional Shortwave & Satellite radio/ TV
2. ABC Regional “part-time” reporters
3. Use extra Satellite TV bandwidth to provide education resources

The Bay /Enforcer LPD is great but it is over kill when visiting a lot of the pacific, 4 x Damen LST120 and retasking the LCM-1E’s would let you use the right tool for the job (population size) or treat multiple villages at the same time.

4. 16,000t Bay class/Enforcer design LPD - RAN
5. 4 Damen LST120 (with pull out hangar) - RAN
6. Attach the 12 existing LCM-1E’s allowing you to upgrade the units on the LHD’s with improved buoyancy
7. 2 x remote Hydrographic drones
8. New Combat Service Support Battalion with Health services and trade supplied with “Marinised Container” pods that can be used on the LST/LPD or taken ashore.
9. A contingent of Gap Year & Reserve personal as required

Air Support

10. 6/8+ new support helicopters – RAAF
11. Disaster support UAV’s

Why not add some community engagement, for extra spin.

12. Consider the use of volunteers, Trainee teachers, and med/tech students, even work for the dole even six months’ service would change most people’s point of view

Make some long term change

13. Build some business bridges with DFAT and Education support contingent

Just my random thoughts, happy to hear other points of view

I came across this article this morning re Lithium batteries and the fact that the Koreans believe they have got a design now that will double the battery range on their subs!
I wonder if and how much the RAN have been studying this subject. I am sure its been under study now for many years just not in the public domain.

New battery can double the operational time of submarines, says South Korea

Richo99 said:

In fact, AFAIK, the government (ie Pyne) actually has never used the word 'large' with respect to this ship. I can find 'new', and 'naval operated', but I cant find the description 'large' anywhere. Whilst large might be a reasonable assumption, like everything else at this stage, it too is just an assumption, based on a mission set that the governement has not yet clearly articulated.

Click to expand...

Defence Minister Pyne gave an interview a few days ago on Sky where he referred to it as a "large-hulled vessel".

Australia could permanently base Navy ships in PNG: Defence Minister | Sky News Australia

The interview ranges across OPVs and the naval base, but also mentions the Pacific support vessel. Particularly from the 7 minute mark in the interview.

So yeah, seems like it will be a "large" vessel.

Sideline said:

Re the “large ship”

You would think someone should take the bigger picture view of this. While this would be a real ADF mission a Peace force “branding” would have a lot of positive spin, and it an easy sell to the public by government and adds additional resource to all three services.

1. Resurrect ABC Regional Shortwave & Satellite radio/ TV
2. ABC Regional “part-time” reporters
3. Use extra Satellite TV bandwidth to provide education resources

The Bay /Enforcer LPD is great but it is over kill when visiting a lot of the pacific, 4 x Damen LST120 and retasking the LCM-1E’s would let you use the right tool for the job (population size) or treat multiple villages at the same time.

4. 16,000t Bay class/Enforcer design LPD - RAN
5. 4 Damen LST120 (with pull out hangar) - RAN
6. Attach the 12 existing LCM-1E’s allowing you to upgrade the units on the LHD’s with improved buoyancy
7. 2 x remote Hydrographic drones
8. New Combat Service Support Battalion with Health services and trade supplied with “Marinised Container” pods that can be used on the LST/LPD or taken ashore.
9. A contingent of Gap Year & Reserve personal as required

Air Support

10. 6/8+ new support helicopters – RAAF
11. Disaster support UAV’s

Why not add some community engagement, for extra spin.

12. Consider the use of volunteers, Trainee teachers, and med/tech students, even work for the dole even six months’ service would change most people’s point of view

Make some long term change

13. Build some business bridges with DFAT and Education support contingent

Just my random thoughts, happy to hear other points of view

Click to expand...

You have proposed some “noble” ideas but they come with a millions/billion dollar cost which doesn’t fit the government announcement of $200m for the project and there’s no extra cash in the Defence Budget to reallocate.
Your manpower ideas have potential, “Peace Corps Pacific” type organisation but that’s all outside the remit of the RAN.
There are calls for a restoration of the ABC HF service for remote Australia and if that happens it would be an easy extension for the Pacific If indeed that’s still relevent.

As said before by someone this smacks of making feel good announcements, we have to go to the polls no later than 18 May 2019, it will take a miracle to get this assessed and ordered before caretaker mode early next year.

I thought the initial C17 order was quick from first hint early 2005 to first aircraft late 2016, least the only had a choice of C17 or wait for A400M, A Pacfic HADR/ presence ship of a variety of combinations I’d think it would take 5 years just to get a rough capability outline.

Mercator said:

Defence Minister Pyne gave an interview a few days ago on Sky where he referred to it as a "large-hulled vessel".

Australia could permanently base Navy ships in PNG: Defence Minister | Sky News Australia

The interview ranges across OPVs and the naval base, but also mentions the Pacific support vessel. Particularly from the 7 minute mark in the interview.

So yeah, seems like it will be a "large" vessel.

Click to expand...

Is this proposed ship (to be built in Australia according to Mr Pyne) an additional asset for the navy, or is it the third heavy lift type ship that has been mentioned in the past as a supplement to the LHDs?
MB

Jack Wyatt said:

I found this article from the SMH on the purchase of the ship. Regardless of which pool of government funding paid for the ship, the comment about buying national capability is true.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/defence-buys-boat-bound-for-customs-20120319-1vg4u.html

While the timing of the buy has been determined by the short-term needs of the navy, the actual capability is all about the long-term needs of Customs and Border Protection.

Mr Davies said it is an approach that makes a lot of sense. ''I have felt for a long time government should be taking a whole-of-nation approach to these questions,'' he said. ''Defence has way more horsepower in acquisitions [than Customs and Border Protection]. This is a good thing.''

He does not believe using Defence money to buy a ship that will go to Customs when the navy's two landing helicopter docks come on line is robbing Peter to pay Paul. ''It doesn't really matter. One arm of government paying another arm of government is not an issue - it is a question of buying national capability.''

Defence takes the same view. ''The vessel is owned by the Commonwealth and will be transferred from Defence to Customs for use in 2016,'' a spokeswoman said.

Another interesting article from the SMH which is clear that the Government enquired about purchasing a second Bay Class ship for the RAN. Unfortunately, another was not available but it is important in view of Christopher Pyne's recent announcement.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/amphibious-fleet-a-multimillion-dollar-shambles-20120408-1wjtq.html

HMAS Choules: ‘‘Defence inquired at the time as to whether a second (Bay Class) vessel was for sale and was consistently advised by the United Kingdom Ministry of Defence that this was not the case. HMAS Choules has a full crew complement and sufficient training has been carried out to ensure she can carry out any likely operational requirement.’’

Click to expand...

I felt at the time it was announced, and for that matter still feel, as though the purchase of the ex-Skandi Bergen and now ABFC Ocean Shield was done at the expense of the RAN for the benefit of Customs.

Consider that the ex-Skandi Bergen cost AUD$130 mil. when the ex-RFA Largs Bay and now HMAS Choules was acquired for AUD$100 mil. At the time to the purchase of the Skandi Bergen, the RAN was seriously limited in terms of sealift due to the age and amount of deferred maintenance on the RAN's amphib fleet. Part of the justification for the purchase was that the Skandi Bergen could be used for sealift, able to transport 1,000 tons of cargo as part of a HADR response. What was rather conveniently not pointed out is that the Skandi Bergen had no capability to land any vehicles or cargo without functioning port facilities, and that the vessel itself was designed for operations in the North Atlantic, which has rather different sea conditions than any areas around Australia where it might have been sent on a HADR mission.

Also consider that part of the reason why the RAN had so many issues with the sealift and support vessels was due to reduced/deferred maintenance, partially due to limited funding IIRC, and partially due to limited time to conduct maintenance due to operational tempos. Diverting AUD$130 mil. in RAN/ADF funding to purchase something which is/was not really 'fit for purpose' for a few of years of service in the RAN, then giving it to Customs does not sound like a wise use of RAN funding. If Customs wanted it that badly, it should have been purchased with Customs funding, however it sounds as though Customs wanted a sistership as a replacement for the chartered Ocean Protector, but lacked the funding resources to pay AUD$130 mil.

Todjaeger said:

I felt at the time it was announced, and for that matter still feel, as though the purchase of the ex-Skandi Bergen and now ABFC Ocean Shield was done at the expense of the RAN for the benefit of Customs.

Consider that the ex-Skandi Bergen cost AUD$130 mil. when the ex-RFA Largs Bay and now HMAS Choules was acquired for AUD$100 mil. At the time to the purchase of the Skandi Bergen, the RAN was seriously limited in terms of sealift due to the age and amount of deferred maintenance on the RAN's amphib fleet. Part of the justification for the purchase was that the Skandi Bergen could be used for sealift, able to transport 1,000 tons of cargo as part of a HADR response. What was rather conveniently not pointed out is that the Skandi Bergen had no capability to land any vehicles or cargo without functioning port facilities, and that the vessel itself was designed for operations in the North Atlantic, which has rather different sea conditions than any areas around Australia where it might have been sent on a HADR mission.

Also consider that part of the reason why the RAN had so many issues with the sealift and support vessels was due to reduced/deferred maintenance, partially due to limited funding IIRC, and partially due to limited time to conduct maintenance due to operational tempos. Diverting AUD$130 mil. in RAN/ADF funding to purchase something which is/was not really 'fit for purpose' for a few of years of service in the RAN, then giving it to Customs does not sound like a wise use of RAN funding. If Customs wanted it that badly, it should have been purchased with Customs funding, however it sounds as though Customs wanted a sistership as a replacement for the chartered Ocean Protector, but lacked the funding resources to pay AUD$130 mil.

Click to expand...

The link provides some insight to the purchase.
Publicly, CN VADM Griggs supported the Minister decision which was an embarrassment for him and the RAN.
Others heavily criticised the buy.

Smith under attack from ship critics

weegee said:

I came across this article this morning re Lithium batteries and the fact that the Koreans believe they have got a design now that will double the battery range on their subs!
I wonder if and how much the RAN have been studying this subject. I am sure its been under study now for many years just not in the public domain.

New battery can double the operational time of submarines, says South Korea

Click to expand...

I did a post a couple of months ago regarding this, there is plenty happening in Australia, centred around Adelaide, for new tech batteries.

I can't find the reference now, but do remember some time ago PMB Defence, who currently make the Collins batteries and IIRC some stuff for the AWD's was researching Lithium, pretty sure the Gov put some money in at the time, was maybe 5 years ago now ?

PMB Defence

Also the French are all over it as well

https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/m...a-french-led-lithium-revolution-for-australia

And the German company Sonnen will be making home lithium battery systems, and have indicated an interest in the submarine game as well

Cheers

Milne Bay said:

Is this proposed ship (to be built in Australia according to Mr Pyne) an additional asset for the navy, or is it the third heavy lift type ship that has been mentioned in the past as a supplement to the LHDs?
MB

Click to expand...

The Brits forward deploy one of their Bays to the Caribbean for the hurricane season. An upgraded Enforcer with excellent habitability for continuous service in the islands would be good value.

RFA Mounts Bay helping British territories prepare for Caribbean storm season

Todjaeger said:

I felt at the time it was announced, and for that matter still feel, as though the purchase of the ex-Skandi Bergen and now ABFC Ocean Shield was done at the expense of the RAN for the benefit of Customs.

Consider that the ex-Skandi Bergen cost AUD$130 mil. when the ex-RFA Largs Bay and now HMAS Choules was acquired for AUD$100 mil. At the time to the purchase of the Skandi Bergen, the RAN was seriously limited in terms of sealift due to the age and amount of deferred maintenance on the RAN's amphib fleet. Part of the justification for the purchase was that the Skandi Bergen could be used for sealift, able to transport 1,000 tons of cargo as part of a HADR response. What was rather conveniently not pointed out is that the Skandi Bergen had no capability to land any vehicles or cargo without functioning port facilities, and that the vessel itself was designed for operations in the North Atlantic, which has rather different sea conditions than any areas around Australia where it might have been sent on a HADR mission.

Also consider that part of the reason why the RAN had so many issues with the sealift and support vessels was due to reduced/deferred maintenance, partially due to limited funding IIRC, and partially due to limited time to conduct maintenance due to operational tempos. Diverting AUD$130 mil. in RAN/ADF funding to purchase something which is/was not really 'fit for purpose' for a few of years of service in the RAN, then giving it to Customs does not sound like a wise use of RAN funding. If Customs wanted it that badly, it should have been purchased with Customs funding, however it sounds as though Customs wanted a sistership as a replacement for the chartered Ocean Protector, but lacked the funding resources to pay AUD$130 mil.

Click to expand...

And to rub salt into the wounds the Ocean Protector was later purchased as a Naval Auxilary at a fraction of the price paid for the Ocean Sheild. Added to this 1000 tonnes of cargo is really small beer .... but the deck space available on the Sheild would have made any decent load (noting the potential need to carry vessels to transfer cargo ashore) improbable. It was a fantastic OSV with a very comprehesive ROV and dive capability (which is not usable at the moment due to modifications - these could be reversed) and a heave compensated crane ....... all pretty useless in a vessel for chasing boat people and illegal fishing boats.

I just figure swapping a LSD for a LHD would be a winner. This would be an easy way out, as the Aus Gov would still keep the capability if they ever needed it. It could be operated as it was originally designed, with a small civilian crew, and be available almost instantly. It could be operated by border patrol or there could even be the establishment of an auxiliary type service. Reporting through to Border patrol. As in the future we may want to man a civilian patrol boat for more policing duties overseas, specifically not a military ship. Maybe they get rid of some of their other stuff and role that into something else. Choules might be useful as a mother ship in that kind of role too. The UK already operates this type of ship in this type of HDAR/mercy role, so training, conops, direction, methology is already there, and can be benchmarked/observed, even possibly acquired trained staff OTS. If we need more, there is even the possibility of organizing a leasing of these type of ships from them (or Spain with crew, or the dutch).

Also the LHD can operate as a sea lift ship, and in its original spec even has some minor AOR capability (not ideal but could act in a relieving role for a short period to some smaller vessels). BAE could then do the same as they did for the original LHDs, but at Adelaide so you can even tick the local build content there. All based off the existing proven and developed LHD support network, the in service date would likely be as quick as anything else, and the capability would be as much as an additional single vessel could ever have in that type of role. My personal preference is for a plus sized LHD, some 10-15m longer, with increase bunkerage, hangar, deck, crew quarters, etc, as you would then have something more suited for our ARG type formation making the backbone of it deliverable with just two LHD's (the plus and a normal LHD). With 3 ships, deploying 2 at the same time becomes way more likely and plausible.

With 3 you get much greater projection effect, with more time at sea, more visits, more operational activities (like actually sustaining our Army amphibious capability), etc.

It will need to be a serious attempt and a serious ship and it needs to happen now. Part of why China is winning projects in the Pacific, is they can do now, not 10 years in the future.

A new ship of a new class/type? Local build (when? After the OPV/before the hunters?) Proven FOC type or clean sheet? You might as well make Choules the Pacific ship, because clearly it will be doing that job for the next 5+ years until this new ship built/is FOC.

Spitballing/Throwing a curve ball in there, what about Japan, NZ, US and Australia all partnering on a Pacific ship? We are apparently all doing so for the electrification of PNG.

Japan is looking at building a mercy ship.
USS Mercy docks in Tokyo for show-and-tell visit with LDP lawmakers | The Japan Times
Maybe Japan is looking at divesting itself of a Ōsumi class and is willing to civilian crew such a ship. But that is a very different type of ship, and is likely to be crew intensive and not very focused on that type of role.

.

Redlands18 said:

I don't think they are talking about Ships that are deployed for Natural Disasters as req. But a Ship that will spend 6 months a year every year touring the Pacific Islands providing Medical Services, Building infrastructure projects as well as HADR Missions as req. This is in response to China.

Click to expand...

I agree that Australia will still be using other HADR assets during large disasters. The new OPVs could be useful HADR assets. I am coming around to thinking that the best solution would be to simply acquire a basic hospital ship and boost the rest of the navy's HADR assets rather than spend huge amounts of money on a single highly capable ship.

We could build several LST120 sized landing ships that could support the hospital ship when it is operating in regions where it has limited port access and act as part of the amphibious fleet when they are not required.

There is so little certainty about the 'large ship to be built in Australia' that I don't think it is worth speculating. In his inteview (thanks to Mercator) Pyne was unable to confirm anything substancial about the ship include whether or not it wouel be armed ... and to what degree if it is.

Australia could permanently base Navy ships in PNG: Defence Minister | Sky News Australia

One thing may be for certain is that it will not be a vesel in the 17000 tonne range (i,e LSD-A) built in Australia (notng that is the stated intent) without infrastructure upgrades. This really does appear to be minsterial spit balling at this stage and wild speculation about getting a third LHD for an LSD-A swap does not connect with any reality I can see.

hauritz said:

.
I am coming around to thinking that the best solution would be to simply acquire a basic hospital ship and boost the rest of the navy's HADR assets rather than spend huge amounts of money on a single highly capable ship.

Click to expand...

Where is the justification for a one trick pony of a vessel? Is there a great groundswell of medical issues in our Pacific neighbours that isn't and can't be solved in the usual way, by using local hospitals - and assisting in upgrades though foreign aid - with more difficult cases sent overseas? Are the HADR issues mostly to do with medical assistance? If so, will the hospital ship be able to access the patients where port facilities are few or poor?

Sure, make it a vessel with significant medical facilities, but also able to support an engineering team ashore repairing infrastructure in the HADR role - or buildng/improving it in an ongoing role - and have enough capacity for it to provide emergency supplies and to distribute them.

IMO it doesn't need to be an LHD/LPD, but it certainly needs to be more than a glorified LCH or Medecins Sans Frontieres afloat. Of course, MY opinion won't be important. Expect the Government to decide, whatever we speculate.

oldsig

oldsig127 said:

Where is the justification for a one trick pony of a vessel? Is there a great groundswell of medical issues in our Pacific neighbours that isn't and can't be solved in the usual way, by using local hospitals - and assisting in upgrades though foreign aid - with more difficult cases sent overseas? Are the HADR issues mostly to do with medical assistance? If so, will the hospital ship be able to access the patients where port facilities are few or poor?

Sure, make it a vessel with significant medical facilities, but also able to support an engineering team ashore repairing infrastructure in the HADR role - or buildng/improving it in an ongoing role - and have enough capacity for it to provide emergency supplies and to distribute them.

IMO it doesn't need to be an LHD/LPD, but it certainly needs to be more than a glorified LCH or Medecins Sans Frontieres afloat. Of course, MY opinion won't be important. Expect the Government to decide, whatever we speculate.

oldsig

Click to expand...

A hospital ship, perhaps with some RORO cargo capability, is the simplest, lowest risk option. I suspect most of the time it will operate out of a port. The times that it doesn't it will need to be supported by a specialised landing vessel such as the LST120 or something similar. In the case of full on HADR you are probably going to need something like the Choules or one of the LHDs. Fortunately, those sorts of disasters don't come along very often.

If you have a huge floating swiss army knife of a ship operating several helicopters, workshops and with its own fleet of landing craft then where are you even going to find a crew to man that thing?

It is all about a proportional response to a crisis.

If the Chinese experience is anything to go by it will mostly be used for goodwill purposes. They will pull into a port, treat some patients, drop off a couple of aid packages, shake hands with a few officials and be off to the next port of call. In an actual crisis, you will still need to get your proper warships involved.

hauritz said:

A hospital ship, perhaps with some RORO cargo capability, is the simplest, lowest risk option.

(snipped for brevity by oldsig127)

They will pull into a port, treat some patients, drop off a couple of aid packages, shake hands with a few officials and be off to the next port of call. In an actual crisis, you will still need to get your proper warships involved.

Click to expand...

I am yet to be convinced that a hospital ship has more than minimal utility as a week on week proposition. The Pacific nations are not malaria infested backwaters populated by hundreds of people dying for want of 1st world medical assistance.

Just how many people do you envisage it treating? More than MsF could handle with a bit of financial support?

There are better and cheaper ways to vacuum up the patients than might be seen than having a ship on permanent rotation and tried and tested ways to build diplomatic, bureaucratic and economic bridges that won't cost millions every year to treat a few hundred people

oldsig

hauritz said:

A hospital ship, perhaps with some RORO cargo capability, is the simplest, lowest risk option. I suspect most of the time it will operate out of a port. The times that it doesn't it will need to be supported by a specialised landing vessel such as the LST120 or something similar. In the case of full on HADR you are probably going to need something like the Choules or one of the LHDs. Fortunately, those sorts of disasters don't come along very often.

If you have a huge floating swiss army knife of a ship operating several helicopters, workshops and with its own fleet of landing craft then where are you even going to find a crew to man that thing?

It is all about a proportional response to a crisis.

If the Chinese experience is anything to go by it will mostly be used for goodwill purposes. They will pull into a port, treat some patients, drop off a couple of aid packages, shake hands with a few officials and be off to the next port of call. In an actual crisis, you will still need to get your proper warships involved.

Click to expand...

This is really getting beyond a joke. We have next to no information what is required except some glib comments about supporting our neighbours with a large hull vessel. So far this has been linked to regional security, training and HADR and the fact it will 'cruise the pacific!!'

To determine the best option is a hosptial ship based on this is simply unsuportable. Until the PM and Defence Minister are prodded to provide more details this is all getting a bit silly.

Noting you expect the 'warships' to deal with the real emergencies the way you describe the 'hospital ship' makes it sould like a complete waste of time...

• pull into a port, treat some patients - unless there is a paucity of medical faciliates and a lot of patients then you be best to fly them to Australia or NZ, it will cost less
• Drop off some aid packages - again if there is no emergecny this can be done using the regular cargo vessels ... at less cost
• Shake hands and move on ........... not sure what to say about that

alexsa said:

This is really getting beyond a joke. We have next to no information what is required except some glib comments about supporting our neighbours with a large hull vessel. So far this has been linked to regional security, training and HADR and the fact it will 'cruise the pacific!!'

To determine the best option is a hosptial ship based on this is simply unsuportable. Until the PM and Defence Minister are prodded to provide more details this is all getting a bit silly.

Noting you expect the 'warships' to deal with the real emergencies the way you describe the 'hospital ship' makes it sould like a complete waste of time...

• pull into a port, treat some patients - unless there is a paucity of medical faciliates and a lot of patients then you be best to fly them to Australia or NZ, it will cost less
• Drop off some aid packages - again if there is no emergecny this can be done using the regular cargo vessels ... at less cost
• Shake hands and move on ........... not sure what to say about that

Click to expand...

You are pretty much making my point. We are not in a state of continual emergency in this region.

Spending inordinate amounts of money on a specialised HADR ship is making less and less sense to me. No other country does this. Australia already has HADR resources.

If you are suggesting that I think that this is some ill-conceived idea to counter Chinese influence in the region then yes ... you are absolutely correct.

Bit of a change of topic. With the new hunters having only 1 bird, just curious as to it's ability to prosecute sub contacts? If the Romeo is unavailable due to maintenance/replenishment would it would need to call in help (which I understand is not unlikely since sub hunting takes teamwork) It just seems to me you wouldn't want to take on heavyweight torpedoes with only MU90s? Maybe ASROC would be a good idea?