Government's future vision for Navy

[MikeJames]

Minister for Defence – Boosting Australia’s maritime capabilities
6 June 2014

The Minister for Defence David Johnston today announced the first set of key initiatives in the Abbott Government’s long-term strategic naval plan.

Within a year of taking office the Government is moving decisively to tackle Labor’s Defence mess and to ensure that Australia does not face major capability gaps as a result of Labor’s defence cuts and failure to take crucial decisions, including on maritime capability.

As a result of our plan, Navy will be properly equipped in the years ahead and Australian industry will have the long-term strategic direction that has been lacking for the last six years. Further steps in our strategic naval plan will developed as part of the White Paper process.

We are moving now to address the most urgent capability shortfalls created by Labor.

Replenishment vessels

Replenishment vessels are essential to support sustained naval deployments. Navy’s current replenishment ship HMAS Success is in urgent need of replacement. And HMAS Sirius only provides limited replenishment capability.

In light of the urgent need to forestall a capability gap in this crucial area; the current low productivity of shipbuilders involved in the AWD program; and value for money considerations, the Government has given First Pass approval for Defence to conduct a limited competitive tender process between Navantia of Spain and Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) of South Korea for the construction of two replacement replenishment vessels based on existing designs.

“Navy is in urgent need of large support vessels that we assess are beyond the capacity of Australia to produce competitively at this stage. In this instance it would not serve anyone if we were to provide a challenge to industry that was beyond its capabilities.”

“Competition between these two experienced shipbuilders is the best way to ensure delivery of capable, cost effective vessels in the time frame required,” Senator Johnston said.

Bringing forward work on future frigates

The Government has also agreed to bring forward preliminary design work to ensure Australia maintains the necessary capabilities to retain the option of building the future frigate in Australia. This work will focus on continued production of the current AWD hull, suitably adapted and utilising capabilities from the cutting-edge Australian companies CEA Technologies Australia and SAAB Combat Systems. Further decisions on the future frigate will be taken in the context of the 2015 Defence White Paper.

The Government has committed $78.2 million to bring forward preliminary engineering and design work necessary to keep open the option of building the future frigate in Australia. In parallel, the Government is reviewing Australia’s shipbuilding requirements, capabilities and capacities in order to inform a long-term strategic naval plan that provides the ADF with leading-edge capabilities and Australian taxpayers with value for money.

“Naval shipbuilders and Unions must understand that naval shipbuilding in Australia is at a critical crossroads. Demonstrating that the AWD Program is able to provide value for money will be a crucial test for the Australian shipbuilding industry. No responsible Government could consider providing further work to an industry that is performing so poorly,” Senator Johnston said.

Pacific Patrol Boat

The Government has brought forward an open competition with Australian industry to construct more than 20 replacement Pacific Patrol Boats. This important project will boost the maritime security and resource and fishery protection capabilities of partner countries in the South West Pacific and generate additional work for yards around Australia.

“These will be steel hulled vessels designed to support fisheries, Exclusive Economic Zone enforcement and other maritime security missions,” Senator Johnston said.

Naval Capability Plan

As part of its 2015 Defence White Paper the Government will announce further steps in its Naval Capability Plan. This plan will provide for an enterprise level shipbuilding plan that will bring together navy capability requirements, available resources, and recommendations around Australian industry requirements.

“The decisions announced today move us in the right direction in working towards a revitalised naval shipbuilding industry in Australia, but this is just the first step to fix the problems we have inherited from Labor, and more work needs to be done.”

[MichaelB]

Is the Daewoo one the RN's new Tide Classs vessel?

http://www.naval-technology.com/news/ne ... -completes

[MikeJames]

Yes, it seems even the UK can't build ships anymore.

The same class has been offered to Norway and Canada as well, though the Norwegians are internationally renowned procrastinators and the Canadian's can't make a decision and stick to it, they keep moving the goalposts.

[RussF172]

This is the one. We did the model for ASC who are somehow involved in the project?

[MikeJames]

ASC have been chosen as local partners for BMT (UK design) and DSME (South Korean builders) for the Aegir class.

Their proposal is the RAN ponies up the money and collects the ships from the dockside in Pusan in Korea. They are proposing that a third ship should be funded from the savings to be had from buying off a production line in South Korea, this third ship to be built in Australia at the ASC facility in South Australia (which is basically crumbs thrown to ASC).

The upside of this bid is that it is likely to be very competitive financially as the South Korean shipyards are well known to be very efficient. The downside is that the RAN is basically buying a paper project, as they will have to commit to the project before the first Royal Navy ship hits the water.

The biggest issue is that ASC's reputation within Government and Defence is basically crap. I was told ASC were selected as BAe Systems had previously agreed to team with Navantia before BMT and DSME came knocking. They saw ASC as their second option, BAe Systems having developed a better reputation with the RAN based on the work on Canberra and Adelaide.

Navantia have teamed with BAe Systems (who took over Tenix's Defence business, including the shipyard in Melbourne) tio supply two sister ships to Cantabria

Their pitch is that they will build and supply the ships either as a turnkey solution (the RAN turns up at the dock in Ferrol in Spain and drives them away similar to the deal for the Aegir class BMT / DSMA / ASC are proposing) or delivery along exactly the same lines as the Canberra and Adelaide (build hulls in Spain, ship out to Australia for fitting out).

The upside of this is that the RAN knows exactly what they are getting, having operated Navantia in 2013. They are fully comfortable that Cantabria is a completely acceptable replacement for Success and an infinitely better ship than Sirius, which has never really worked as intended.

The downside is that the costs will be higher for two Cantabria's than two Aegir's (though definitely far less than the 2+1 Australian built Aegir ASC is pushing), though the exact difference between the two proposals is still to be determined. The shipyard at Ferrol is eager for the work however the Korean yards are probably more efficient and cheaper.

My personal thought is that Cantabria is probably slightly less capable as a pure tanker than Aegir as she is 6,000 tonnes smaller, offering less cargo capacity. If that or a lower price was the sole determinant the answer is easy.

However there are other considerations. The Aegir remains a paper project coming from a commercial shipyard in South Korea, an unknown quantity to a navy that has become somewhat risk averse after bad experiences with the AWD, the Super Sea Sprite, the Armidale class and a few other fiascos.

The Aegir is a bigger ship, some 6,000 tonnes more, 180m vs 170m overall for Cantabria, 25m v 23 m beam, however Aegir draws more water, a lot more. 17 metres draft v 8 for Cantabria. That's 7 metres more than Sirius and double the draft of either Success or the new Amphibs. That draft will limit berthing at both Fleet Bases without massive dredging and regular work to maintain the berths. I am not even sure if she could berth in Darwin or Cairns with that draught.

The area that Cantabria leads is the relationships between Navantia and BAe Systems, they have worked together on the amphibs and have proven they can make it work. In addition the RAN was happy with Cantabria during her deployment with the RAN and know that the ship works in the real world, rather than on the drawing board. Lots of RAN personnel cycled through Cantabria during her deployment, plus she will share a lot of similar systems across both the amphibs and the AWD's, so the chance of a nasty surprise is greatly reduced.

I think the thing that will determine the final choice is just how much cheaper the Aegir offer is and just how ironclad those price guarantees are.

The RAN has a choice between a cheaper but riskier paper design vs a more expensive but proven design they know will work for them.

Mike

[rritchie71]

As you say both choices have ups and downs, but both are actually good, it just comes down to the priorities. Finally it looks like a government is starting to get it ‘right’ by defense.

Robert

[MikeJames]

It didn't stop both the unions and the Opposition attacking them for "offshoring Australian jobs"

Seriously though, I was told that ASC promised the cost premium for building the AWD in Australian rather than the build in Spain and fit out the hulls option Navantia also offered, would be 50% higher.

The reality is that it's running somewhat closer to 250% higher, with no sign that the premium is coming down

Mike

[MikeJames]

Posting this here because it doesn't fit anywhere else.

Nothing yet on potential designs. I note that they specify steel hulls, suggesting that Austal is not only out of contention but in the dog house post Armidale class.

Mike

Maritime Security Strengthened Through Pacific Patrol Boat Program

(Source: Australian Department of Defence; issued June 17, 2014)

A new $2 billion Pacific Patrol Boat (PPB) Program unveiled today by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Defence Minister David Johnston aims to significantly strengthen security in our region.

“The Pacific Patrol Boat Program is an important pillar of the Australian Government’s commitment to working with our regional partners to enable cohesive security cooperation on maritime surveillance, including in fisheries protection and transnational crime,” Minister Bishop said.

“Defence will replace the current fleet of patrol boats for all current PPB members with the addition of a new member, Timor-Leste (East Timor), which has been invited to join the program, evidence of Australia’s growing defence cooperation program with that country,” said Senator Johnston.

“The current fleet of 22 patrol boats gifted to 12 Pacific Island countries from 1987 to 1997 are now approaching their end of service life.

“This new program will involve the construction of more than 20 steel, all-purpose patrol vessels that will considerably enhance the maritime security of our Pacific and regional partners,” he said, adding: “Australia has a fundamental strategic interest in the security and stability of Pacific island nations.”

Senator Johnston said the rugged Australian-made patrol boats are worth $594 million with through life sustainment and personnel costs estimated at $1.38 billion over 30 years.

In the coming months discussions will be held with PPB states on the individual allocation of patrol vessels.

Replacement patrol boats will be offered to all current participating states including Papua New Guinea, Tonga, Solomon Islands, Fiji, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Samoa, Vanuatu, Federated States of Micronesia, Palau, Republic of Marshall Islands, Cook Islands and new member Timor-Leste.

Under the program, Defence will undertake an open tender for the procurement which includes an option for ongoing sustainment and crew training.