Ja WorsleyWhat is this?
A new Super Conducter electrical system being worked on that is 1/3 the size of a similar system using the standard Copper Coil electrical system.
An Astute D/E derivatives ? now that’s interesting. However isn’t the ex RN Upholder class now in Canada also a derivatives of RN nuke’s (if not mistaken the design is derivatives of Swiftsure class).
Still if want to use SSN as based, why not also considered Barracuda ? I know I seems belong to the guys that think Barracuda can be a fit based for next RAN SSK, solely based on assumption that Barracuda design fit (at least from the outset) the parameter that RAN wants. But again it’s only an observation from a fan boy 😀
I understand the compulsion that people have with the Barracuda, it does seem like a nice fit- but the RAN have already started talks with the Poms about designing the next boat. We have a history with great boats from the UK (operating the O-boats), the Swedes haven’t been up to the challenge so Kockums is out, Spain is supplying the AWD’s and LPH’s and the American’s can’t supply what we need. Will be interesting to what the Brits come up with.
Ja Worsley40 years is a long time mate, that takes it back to the 70’s which means the part would have come from stocks of say 50’s surplus- having this in mind, we’d be looking at war surplus stocks, thus I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this was a part for a WW2 machine- though I doubt is would have been a carrier aircraft- maybe more like an airforce plane.
Keep me posted as to any results mate and good luck.
Ja WorsleyIts a pity Ja Worsley isn’t making much of an appearance at the moment as I think he might give us some clarity over the thinking around SEA-1000.
Someone call? :D:D:D
Hey guys, sorry been really busy of late with starting my photography business.
I do have a few pics to share for you all but had to make sure they found print first. See seperate post.
OK so we’re talking about SEA 1000 and what it means.
The project calls for 12 D/E powered boats using the latest and greatest tech (AIP, TLAM, UUV’s).
Firstly let me talk about the propulsion: untill the recent events in Japan- Australia was starting to warm up to Nuke power, calls for it’s use on these new vessels was growing support in government circles with even the Defence Minister even saying it had possibilities. Due to recent political events Steven Smith has been religated to a smaller profile which has caused huge resentment in defence because finally we had a politician who understood his profile. With Fukashima going into melt down, nuke power has been given a back seat again.
The RAN is really watching the development of solid state electrics- the Northrop Grumman MW-1 Super Conductor is really showing promise.
AIP has been touted for some time here in Australia- A Sterling system was trialed in HMAS Collins some time ago (our subs have been built for but not with AIP). It is hoped to install this system on the next class.
TLAM is becoming a must for power projection with navies lacking a carrier. The RAN has had the notion of incorperating this in to the service for sometime (the Collins Class was originally supposed to carry 6 TLAMS in an upgrade but due to the complex issues of these boats, that desire had to fall off the project list).
UUV’s are a new idea, the navy is looking at this development closely due to the areas we operate in. A UUV will be very important in areas like the Great Barrier Reef, or many of the Pacific Island nations shores.
The idea of having 12 vessels in service is interesting. Already there is talk of cutting the requirement down to 8.
The design of these news subs will be massive, we have a vast area to cover, but manning them will be interesting- there is a call for an unprecidented level of automation in the new boats, thus reducing the crew levels from the 72 in Collins down to the same levels seen in the Israeli Dolphins. People talk about the S-80, Barracuda, and others- truth is, the new subs will actually be designed specifically for the RAN as the requirements specified do not reflect any current design. To this end talks have already started with BAE Naval Systems in England (designers of the new Astute class), so from this I can only conclude that the new boats will be an offspring of the Astutes. People are wondering why we aren’t going to the US, truth is that the designs the US have are not flexible enough for modification to RAN standards and the US are not interested in looking at D/E powering options.
The Project is still going through it’s first diffinition stage, it’s reassuring that the person running it has a deep understanding of Sub ops.
A thought just occured. Now that Japan has decided to open itself up to arms co-operation, Australia and Japan could collaborate with Japanese navy who have a similar requirement.
Ja Worsleyone reason the tiger was selected was due to the fact that one crashed with an Aussie crew and although the tiger was totally destroyed the crew escaped without injuries about 6 months before the decision was made for which type. the Ah-1Z was because it was still in early development. the tiger was chosen over others because it was the only aircraft that fitted into replace the gunship equipped Huey’s and the Kiowa’s roll in the role of recon.
The Tiger crash had no bearing on the choice. It crashed while trying to go inverted… The pilot ws showing an Aussie pilot what it could do, many had see it do a loop over the Sydney opera house. The crew didnt let a full crew fly the bird as that is just silly, it was a French pilot and an Aussie in the gunners seat.
Bell brought a mock Viper down and a Whiskey which was new off the line. Even then the RAN and the government had issues with the skids. Bell was asked if they could put wheels on the airframe instead of the skids, this was when Bell challenged the competition and said it was biased against Bell for offering a skidded helo. Air87 was susspended pending the court outcome. The court found in favour of the government and Bell refused to participate again.
Ja WorsleyWitcha: not yet mate but there is a lot of interest in the podded system.
John Symons: carefull planning and management of projects can illiminate issues that cause problems that we had with the Super Seasprites… Notice how all the other operators of the SH-2G haven’t had issues, including the kiwis. The main problem we had was that we didn’t really know what we wanted from this system, we should have settled on a path, locked in a project definition and set to work from there.
Tribes: is it wonder?
Badger: email me mate- gotta keep threads on track 😉
Ja WorsleyCdG’s deck is coloured as such to assist pilots in a night landing. I asked a French Pilot once, apparently the NVG’s they use show the deck and pilots aim for the dark strip between the lighter bits as that is the landing strip. Makes sence to me, same reason why the Imperial Japanese Navy painted their decks really light colours which aided the USN during the battle of Midway… Aim for sand coloured deck in a dive and you cant miss!
Ja WorsleyWitcha: thats right.
Wan: hahaha. If anyone missed me more than you, I don’t know them
Badger: mate check out a book called Australian Forces of the 80’s. It has the info you are after. I have it, but it is in storage atm, so no ISBN… sorry.
John: indeed, but the NFH offered job creation, so its surprising that the government would throw votes like that.
Comoford: mate the Battlehawk offered for Air87 was not a kit, but an actual attack helo, one of two “wide body” attack helos proppsed, (the other came from Kamen with a beefed up version of the SH-2G, later dropped). I’ve looked at the kits the Israelis have, impressive, but it’s not like what we had offered.
Ja WorsleyBatman: you are correct- the Apache was overkill, even without the Longbow radar. To let you in on the plan… The Tiger was also planned to be fitted with a millimetre radar. The plan has slipped a little, but the Army does still hold hopes of it being fitted later.
We all like different things- personally I don’t like the AH-64 in any varient, though I wish they had of went with the Sea Apache.
I don’t mind MOTS, but you can’t deny that some COTS systems are of acceptable standards.
Ja WorsleyBadger you salty old seadog, how you been mate?
Yeah just been reading about the Turks buying the T129 for ATAK. Interesting deal, they now own the entire program- though they propse a few changes over the Italian models and that differs again from what was offered in AIR87.
That reminds me; has Sikorsky offered the Battlehawk to any other customer or did they shelve the idea after Australia refused it in the first round?
Ja WorsleyWitcha: to my knowledge, the mine hunters will be a specific version fitted with the LANTIN II equipment. Though the LANTIN III equipment will be in pod form available for almost all helo fits.
Wilhelm: at the time the Redhawk was still being built form the SAAF, it was felt that there was a lot of risk in this design and with only 12 built for one customer, the ADF felt that the Redhawk offer represented a poor choice . One was tested here in Australia and it did score very high in the competition. Perhaps if Malaysia bought their 40 as they originally planned to, we would have them in service here now.
The A-129 was aslo tested down here, and though scoring very well, the lack of a gun at the time, it was thought that this machine was noting more than a slight step up from the Kiowas currently in service. Incidently the Italians took this on board and retro fitted all their machines with a gun under the nose with the amo pack running along the outside of the cockpits along the port side and tweeked the engins for better hot and dry performance. Finally they also changed from a four bladed main rotor to a five bladed one. The lessons learnt from the Australian deal were put in to effect with Itally so quick that they made two offeres to the Turkish for their original competition… The A-129A and the A-129I.
Ja WorsleyThanks guys, I have missed being here and thought of you guys often- wishing it was yoi huys here in the dreadful heat and humidity instead of me… Especially Wan hahaha jokes mate. Hows the bub- getting big now I bet.
I don’t know about correcting any nautical matters…. I just provide the logic and experience that I have to recount and pass on. (please note the huge slice of humble pie I am eating here… Tastes like apples).
Just a quick personal note if I may be permitted; I am no longer in the security game. I left that in June and have finished a course in small business management and will open my own photography service in the next week or two. You can find my work in facebook, just lpok for Eye Products International.
Now back to work. The dwal gor 24 Romeos will allow for complete coverage of RAN vessels at sea. These are broken down as such
Current
4x FFG’s with 2 helos each.
8x FFH’s with 1 helo each
[b] Future [/]
3x DDGH`s with two helos each
8x FFGH’s with a single helo and finally
20x POC all with a single helo.
Ja WorsleyOhhhh great, just what we need… The Chinese with a new excuse to buy a carrier!
Ja WorsleyHey guys… Who’s missed me?
Please allow me to clear up some fog here.
The initial order for the SH-2G(A) was for 11 aircraft to provide the fleet with a helo force for the 8 Anzac class FFH’s we bought after it was feared that the current S-70B-2’s MAY be too big to operate safely off the small flight deck. This fear was later found to have been unfounded and lead to other navies bying their Seahawk varients for use off their MEKO 200 class vessels.
Had the original OPC entered service, Australia would have placed a second order for a further 18.
New Zealand joined Australia about a year later in the competition to find a suitable helo for the Anzac class. This was brought about by the tragic accident in which a Westland Wasp crash into the sea killing the pilot. The cause was later attributed to the aircraft litterally being worn out. The RAN and RNZAF agreed to form a commitee to list their specifications, both Australia and New Zealand agreed to keep the original commonalities with respect to these vessels. The two final aircraft short listed were; August Westland Lynx and the Kaman Super Seaspirte… Which as weall know, won. Well the rest is now history.
Now, on to the AH-1Z issue.
The reason it failed in the Air 87 competition was simply because it didnt have wheels. Thats the simple truth of the matter. It was felt that the new Armed Reccon Helo should have wheels to allow easier opeartion when aboard vessels at sea. This idea was most out of the idea of operating from allied vessels and not our own. Since the selection, we bought the new LHD’s and now have theopertunity to implimet our own operations… Hence the decission to have them marinised. The Zulu was never going to be the right choice simply because of three main factors:
1. The skids
2. Old airframe/ new gadgets. The operational growth of the airframe was deemed far too limited. Finally
3. Apart from the USMC, no other operator was even looking at this machine.
Personally, my choices for the AIR 87 competition were:
1. Augusta A-129i Mongoose
2. Denel AH-2 Redhawk
3. Eurocopter Tiger.
Now for a chat on the current order of Romeos…
I was shocked to hear this deal had gone through, the Romeos were seen by the RAN as too small. But the truth the matter comes down to the cost. Sikorsky offered us everything we wanted for a cheaper price, meaning that we could buy the full 24 needed and not cut the order due to funding problems. Frpm what I also hear, this was a deal influenced by Gillard and Obama “having a chat”. Anyone who knows me, knows I was backing the NH-90 NFH. Sure its got issues, but they would have been worked out by the time of acceptance. So far only 2 countries have received theirs… Norway and the Netherlands and both only have a few- so it is too early to write off this machine. The RAN liked it because of the troop movement capability without the need to remove the dipper, polies liked it because it was keeping jobs going in Australia and would have produced a few more jobs. As for the size difference, it was decided by NHI that the Australian offer would include pneumatic susspension to allow the helo to lower itself to fit better in the hangers- as pointed out, this helo is slightly taller tham the Romeo.
Finally, what swung the deal in favour of the Romeo,was the offer to divert current production craft to the RAN in order to allow us an earlier entry to service- this also being part of the chat between the two heads of state.
I have flowen in Seahawks-both RAN anf USN models and they certinally are a capable machine, I just feel that we have given away a good thing with not going for the european model, not to mention giving up on the original scope of the requriement to reduce airframe types in service.
Ja WorsleyThe queen of the United Kingdom is separately queen of Australia. She’s as much your queen as ours. If we depose her tomorrow, she’ll still be queen of Australia. Australia has never been ‘a colony of England’, & the separate states haven’t been colonies of the United Kingdom since midnight on 31st December 1900, a moment before Australia came into being as a nation.
We didn’t sell cheap to you specifically. Australia put in the highest bid. The floor for bids was only £45 mn.
Australia’s minister of defence announced on 1st February that Manoora would be decomissioned, and that work to make her fit to resume service would not be carried out, because it’s not worthwhile for the short period she would remain in service. Only Kanimbla will be repaired.
This seems very unlikely. The point of buying her now is to get her into service quickly. Adding a permanent hangar would negate that, since it would mean major rebuilding, probably taking a couple of years. It would also compromise her functionality in her primary role (what she was bought for, in the long-term), i.e. sealift. The LHDs will have plenty of helicopter capacity.
Swerve: my old friend, guess I have been out of the loop for some time, I’d better get back in it!
The LPA’s were a bad idea from the start, what we did to them was incredible and it will be interesting to see who puts in a bid to take them on- even given their current poor state, remember these vessels have a capability that is found in bigger vessels and many countries that operate former Newport class LST’s have expressed a deep interest in our LPA’s (if only to effect the changes to their own vessels locally and without paying Australian industry to do it).
We may not make the changes straight away, but I can tell you that those changes will happen.
Oh and I know all about federation, regardless mate- Australia is still a colony of England.
Ja WorsleyConfirmation in the news today that Australia is intent on buying the RFA Largs Bay for the price of A$100 million(around 65 million pounds)-apparently it should be worth 130 million pounds brand new
Inspection is said to have already happened, and waiting on a sea trial to confirm everything
So just a few questions arising from this
1- why so cheap? is british MOD underselling it? if so why?
2- considering the ship is 5 years old, will it continue in service after Canberra and Adelaide are fully in service? And if so does this kill the possibility of a third LHD?
3- will the RAN conduct any kind of modification on it? either more space for troops or other specific australian kind equipment?
4- is there any point repairing kanimbla anymore? Or is it a matter of just stripping manoora for kanimbla ie make 1 good ship from the 2?
cheers guys
It is well documented that the Australian Amphibious capability has suffered for many years, back when I first joined up HMAS Tobruk was know as HMAS TooBroken and was classed Cat 9 U/S.
Purchase of Largs Bay had been touted for some time, to actually finally hear of it is welcome news indeed- so on that note allow me to share my knowledge of RAN plans:-
1.The UK MoD is cash strapped and the Aus$ is performing so well on the market- we are in a boom and our currency is only going to grow. As to why selling to us so cheap- we have a mutal pact, unlike certain other countries we will not turn on England as we are still a colony of theirs and still bow to their queen.
2. A third LHD was never really part of any realistic plan for the RAN, that was some idealogical theologian sprouting a dream that could never realistically work. As for this vessel remaining in service after Adelaide and Canberra come on line- yes it will. The two LHD’s were to replace the LPA’s and this vessel was purchased to replace HMAS Tobruk as per the Defence White Paper and current RAN planning.
3. Yes they do plan on adding various modifications to the vessel. For starters, addition of an organic air componant: hangar capacity for up to four MRH-90’s has been spread around- though I can only see two being carried (but hey, look what we did to Kanimbla and Manoora)! Tropical aircon will be added and crew size with increase slightly. Oh anf troop lift capacity will be increased thanks to an Aussie designed and made cargo container that can house bunks for troops.
4. Untill this vessel is fully ready for RAN service, both LPA’s will be repaired and maintain service. The Amphibious Squadron of the RAN is currently the most active (out doing the hydrographic squadron who have always been the busiest, by a tidy number of days at sea).
I am glad this move has happened as it sets a standard down here that keeps the traditions of the past alive and running
Yes the cost is for one F-35, but for what the Air Force does with one fighter and what this ship will do for the region- it’s a no brainer (give me the ship any day)!
I too am a banner waver for a fourth AWD, but we must also look at the replacement FFG program and the new subs we’re going to be investing in (though I fully believe that we won’t be getting 12). Add to this all the other equipment the RAN will be getting in the next ten years and you really have to draw a line at some point (refer my threads on RAN replacements).
Sign In
