Shipbucket

The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) is to acquire a 90 m vessel, built by Damen Shipyards, for naval aviation training. Speaking to IHS Jane's at the Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) Asia Pacific 2014 conference on 17 March, Piet van Rooij, Damen's manager for Design and Proposal, Offshore and Transport, said that the vessel will be based on the company's OPV 2400 platform. The full-functional vessel is expected to be used for training RAN aviators on rotary aircraft such as the MH-60R. A contract with Australian company Defence Maritime Services, which will manage the acquisition for the RAN, is expected to be signed towards the end of March.
source here


A bad ? choice for the RAN :
- For a aviation training-ship, the aft flight-deck is much smaller than.....a Austal ship ?
MRV family

JHSV family

LCS


For the RAN, better to build a Austal ship (in Australian shipyard...)

Yes!!!

I disagree with the austals being better
- an smaller deck makes it a bit harder to land on. never a bad thing, if you are training
- the austal vessels are multihull fast vessels, with an completely different way of moving then the frigates, carriers etc the pilots will be trained for.

I have a hunch that they are actually after an OPV to do some general jobsworth roles and ATS is just something that can be added on to get the budget. If that is the case, a conservative steel monohull is probably better than the multihulls. We'll just have to see what the actual design comes out as, though.

RP1

I'd Say you are right RP1, with the whole Operation Sovereign Borders going on, a larger vessel with Heli capability would be very handy. (Why the Armidales didn't have a space to land a heli is a bit beyond me as it would have saved so many problems logistically, plus it would have added more austere space and potential range)

Though I think Austal will get the contract as jobs in the manufacturing sector here are getting rarer and rarer

acelanceloet wrote:I disagree with the austals being better
- an smaller deck makes it a bit harder to land on. never a bad thing, if you are training
- the austal vessels are multihull fast vessels, with an completely different way of moving then the frigates, carriers etc the pilots will be trained for.

RP1 wrote:I have a hunch that they are actually after an OPV to do some general jobsworth roles and ATS is just something that can be added on to get the budget. If that is the case, a conservative steel monohull is probably better than the multihulls. We'll just have to see what the actual design comes out as, though.

Rodondo wrote:I'd Say you are right RP1, with the whole Operation Sovereign Borders going on, a larger vessel with Heli capability would be very handy. (Why the Armidales didn't have a space to land a heli is a bit beyond me as it would have saved so many problems logistically, plus it would have added more austere space and potential range). Though I think Austal will get the contract as jobs in the manufacturing sector here are getting rarer and rarer

My two stupids cents thoughts
1) A "specially-build"/"single-purpose" ship, is now obsolete/expensive (mainly due to $ reasons !!!). Better to build a multi-purpose ship !!!!!!

2) if the RAN wants to keep Australian jobs & strategic industrial skills, it is better to build Austal designs, not the Dutch Damen......

3) in the 21st century, if you build an AVIATION TRAINING-SHIP, the aft-flight deck should be very large/versatile/modular !!!
- It must take several helicopters & UAVs !
- It must have a hangar for up-to two helicopters !
- It must be able to eventually take a mini-catapult for small UAVs !

Hmmm, Ace
In 2014, you can not compare a Dutch Damen aft-flight-deck (OPV 2400 design) & a Austal one (MRVs, JSHVs, Independence LCSs aft-flight-deck aera !!!!!)

In fact, if Australians want to make aviation training onboard ships, they have three options:
- A land/shore training, with airfields & simulators...
- A training onboard existings australian warships (frigates & so...)
- A small training (cheap/civilian-built) ship

I cannot grasp what you are saying, mike.
- the ship is an multipurpose ship with the choice of an OPV as base design.
- damen has an history of building ships of their design on foreign yards (indonesia, USA, vietnam, for example) apart from yards from damen on foreign soil (vietnam, qatar, romenia etc.) which most likely would be the case here.

- in the 21st century, the australian navy will have some destroyers, some frigates, and an LPD. they will not have any austal high speed hulls apart from 2 transports, IIRC.
- the only thing the design cannot do what you say it would have to do is take 2 helicopters. the OPV 2400 is designed with 1 helicopter and some UAV's in mind.
- the OPV 2400 is actually an newer design (2013) then the LCS and other AUSTAL designs. even if we look at the age of it's 'mother' the holland class, it comes out as newer.

in short, you contradict yourself.

acelanceloet wrote:in short, you contradict yourself.

NO,
You think Dutch (warships/shipbuilders)
I think (something else)

I can, however, compare hull shapes. I look at the australian navy, and which hull designs they would need helicopter pilots trained for.
I see very few fast multihulls there.

this and my other points still stand.

I'm all for the decision, especially as it is being built in Australia. Wondering though how the RAN intends to pay for it considering it is struggling to maintain its budget and five year fiscal commitments.