Up-Gunning the Arafura Class OPV
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 мар 2022
- The Arafura class OPV is the Royal Australian Navy’s newest class of minor vessel. Intended to replace the Armidale class Patrol Boats, the Arafura will be a substantial increase in capability across the primary roles for which it was procured; border protection, maritime constabulary, fisheries protection and humanitarian and disaster relief. However, ever since the OPV program was announced there have been questions as to what other roles these warships could fulfil, especially in a high end warfighting scenario. This video explores the possible ways in which this class of minor vessel, if equipped appropriately, could substantially add to the ADF’s high intensity warfighting capability, specifically in the areas of surface warfare and anti-submarine warfare.
They're basically the modern equivalent of the WW2 Corvettes that we used to operate.
They weren't massively armed, some more than others, but were invaluable in their contribution especially around New Guinea. The Arafura is almost 3 times as big, (displacement), I'm sure it can handle a bit of extra weaponry.
No they aren't. RAN Bathurst WW2 corvettes had a 76 or 102mm main gun in a smaller package of about 1,000t and have much more in common with the huon class then the arafura. All these WW2 ships being compared to Arafura's are much more evolved as fighting ships.
Yeah a 30mm Goal Keeper would fit nicely.
Yes our government has disarmed it's Royal "Subjects" by making gun ownership extremely difficult. Yes our government pays you if you don't feel like working, yes our government pays for child sex crimes by rewarding 13-14 year old girls with single mothers pensions. Yes we pay carreer criminals with multiple emergency $1000 payments per year after being arrested again & again. Yes we spend 1/3 of our total National GD&P on social welfare payments that still has the looney leftest demanding more payments. So it doesn't surprise me at all that we seek to produce "Inoffensive" warships. After all harsh words on the interwebs should be a deterent enough to any foriegn aggressors.
They are the equivalent of the US Coast Guard cutters - useful for fisheries patrols and search and rescue.
Direct combat is however a step beyond its capabilities.
If it was faster it at least it could have deployed mines...
Very informative and balanced video, unlike many others which look only at OPVs trading fire with Chinese Type-54 frigates and the likes! The author has taken a very different view of naval warfare, which is more expansive and technologically integrated (from different platforms and devices)! The analysis is top-notch, and incorporates many different independent sources. I really enjoy and learn something from this presentation.
Does Australia have a Coast Guard service? It would seem the navy shouldn't be removing capabilities from their vessels unless these are envisioned as coast Guard duty vessels, meaning that they are never meant for combat but boarder and law enforcement operations
Might have been worth mentioning that we ended up with 60 Bathurst class corvettes during WW2 - dad served on one of them. The destroyers got all the glory, but the corvettes did all the work. They were slow and lightly armed, but not all tasks require a big, expensive warship. Although classed as minesweepers, they didn't do much of that.
Nice video. Thanks for referencing my ASPI report on options to upgun the OPV - and also my defence budget data. BTW, as a historian I really like your historical videos. The one on the battle of the Bismarck Sea shows why we still need long range strike aircraft. We've looked at the B-21 a few times - maybe you could do a video on the pros and cons. Cheers.
Just a comment to help bump this up. Good to see such a well known analyst is across these topics and the good work this channel does.
Something about the B-21 would be pretty great. But, how much can you actually do with the limited info available? Everything, publicly known, about it is basically summed up in a 10 minute video, if that. For now at least.
Very good man. Unexpectedly fast release. I must admit I do prefer these types of videos showing current and future capability of certain assets over the historical battle videos (which are still outstanding and are clearly a labor of love for you). Keep up the outstanding work mate
The others get WAY more views dude. Its more like the contemporary stuff is the labor of love. If I was smart i'd just do WW2 history 24/7.
@@hypohystericalhistory8133 True. You & Perun are 2 outstanding Australians, both providing deep, superb analysis. (love you too Chieftain)
Please, for our sake, inquire to Perun for a collaboration: "Ukrainian drone navy" or other topic video colab/ interview, something of that sort ❤
@@hypohystericalhistory8133 your purpose and calling is beyond just viewcount and i think you know that too deep down. the views are only down because this is cutting edge. covering the other stuff is just faffing about at this point.
I should watch some of the historical episodes but I wind up searching for more information on the OTO Melara naval guns (76mm vs. 127mm, STRALES, DART, VULCANO?). Keep up the great work dude!
Excellent work. I to think a Mk3 - 57 mm Bofors gun should be installed from the start as the programable ammunition's would give you some air defense. Add the 11 round SeaRAM (which can be re-loaded at sea) and some extra missiles stored below for longer range and just one of these sitting off a major port area should be able to defend any commercial shipping tied up from 4 to 6 incoming missiles. This should all be part of the original construction. (And the 21 cell launcher needs to be added to all Hunters and Hobarts.)
I hadn't thought about the anti Sub role but you're right there, just adding the towed array would give much better performance if escorting a fleet in addition to a Hunter on the other side of the convoy. It would also allow the sailors/boat captain working on these craft some valuable experience learning this equipment before they move up to the Hunters or Hobarts.
I don't mind not having an anti shipping missile on the OPV during normal operations, as long as they have the systems installed to allow shipping container launching systems to be bolted onto the landing deck. In this case I'd want to be adding 4 or 6 containers with as many missiles as possible, kind of like the air forces missile truck idea with targeting provided over the data link from another asset such as that MQ4C or the P8. Having an enemy looking at a P8 out of range to the east of them might take their eyes off the missiles launched at them from behind a small island to the west of them.
Also, all the 25 mm Mk 242 Bushmasters in the Navy and Army need to be upgraded to the 30 mm Mk44 Bushmasters throughout ADF with Mk310 ammunition manufacturing on mainland Australia (in my opinion anyway).
Couldn't agree more. Patrol boat in peacetime. Escort corvette in wartime. The Arafura has the potential to be WWII Bathurst class.
If you want to defend a port then why wouldn't you use land based options instead?
@@carisi2k11 In some locations in North Australia the jetty can be 2 km long, a land based system with a 5 to 10 km range would thus have it's engagement range reduced by 20% to 50% which might mean there is no time for a follow up shot if the first SeaRAM missile fails. Also, Ingham has a sugar terminal, 100 km south Townsville has a goods port and another 200 km south Bowen has the coal jetty. It is unlikely that ships will be in all three ports at once so a Patrol boat can move up and down the coast being at each port as a ship comes in so one boat in place of 3 land based systems. A ship sunk while tied up to the loading facility is going to be more disruptive then a ship sunk 150 m away or a single broken Conveyor Belt. Also, I'm not saying the patrol boat in place of land based systems, but rather to compliment them in larger ports such as Darwin. Also, a moving boat will make it harder for an enemy to lunch a first strike on a static defense system taking it out to make it easier for aircraft to have freedom of the sky to do what they want.
Why upgrade fishery ocean patrol vessels to a small frigate when the OPV does not have the bunks for much more crews? Where are the helicopter, gunners, sonar, missile, and torpedo crews going to sleep? While your frigate is off engaging in a UN Peacekeeping in the Atlantic, what is going to patrol your fisheries in the Southern Ocean? Mission creep indeed...
@@ronclark9724 who is going to patrol the Fisheries? I would hope ‘the department of agriculture and fisheries’ would put down their donuts and do that. And Australian Boulder Force would look after illegals with the AFP. The NAVY should be keeping foreign counties and war ships out, not policing Australian fishermen. They need more than air horns and BB guns to do that.
You enabled me to realize the basic Australianperspective: Patient, precise, detailed, graphic... great work ! Thank you Sir.
Yep, sounds very like our Batch2 River Class OPVs with which exactly the same questions apply. Put simply, the RAN seems to share the RN's almost pathological aversion to operating anything that looks remotely like a corvette. Most likely, in view of both navies' decades long experience with governments that have typically preferred to spend money on almost ANYTHING but defence, for much the same reasons.
Hopefully in light of more recent developments, some reassessment is now feasible.
Both the RN and RAN desire destroyers and frigates, not corvettes with so little range they can't be used for overseas deployments for whatever reason... Wet nursing to a tanker isn't an ideal place for a baby warship... Brunei is a small nation with a small EEZ so they can mount more weapons on a large patrol boat, whereas Australia is a large island continent with overseas commitments, if only to conduct UN peacekeeping and disaster relief missions around the world... Range is important...
@@ronclark9724 Good points and in Australia's case I agree with the lot. The RAN's now going to be a globally recognised though regionally preoccupied maritime power on a significant scale. with the most capable existing high end surface combat units being retained and with more large tier 1 ships projected. Iirc, at the latest, 6 x T26 specifically RAN variants, 11 x GPFs (analogous to our T31s though not necessarily a variant of it but of another newish frigate design) + now, up to 6 x LOSVs.
No need to upgrade baby Arafuras to wetnurse anything!
Have been hoping for this exact video for awhile, greatly appreciated. Definitely agree that the LRASM is a no brainer, as is the towed array modular system. What I'd really like to see though is development of a block 2 variant for the second lot of ships. Something with a little more speed, maybe a little more range, with the ability to support helicopters brought back and a mini CEAFAR AESA Radar popped in there. This would give it all the capability needed to support whatever containerised weapons systems we can come up with for it. The Danes have containerised sea sparrows and a bunch of other weapons, we could do the same and have a truly modular mini-warship without the hell the yanks are going through with the LCS.
yess..!
The RAN selected the only OPV design on offer that did NOT offer a helicopter hangar. Make of that what you will.
Or, you know, you could spend the money required for these systems and integration and buy another Hobart Class. You really, really don't need to gun up a patrol boat, especially because you still need to patrol your waters even in a war scenario. This is not like the German F125, where a frigate costs over 750 million euros and all it can do is anti-pirate missions
I think ukraine is showing that the unmanned option might be better then manned aircraft. Since the arafura's can operate unmanned helo's there would really be no need for them to have a helicopter requirement. Having a fleet of 4-8 unmanned helo's that could do submarine hunting instead of only 1 manned helo could be extremely important.
@@carisi2k11 I'm not sure that a small enough UAV exists capable of running a dipping sonar and/or ASW lightweight torpedo. Maybe someone's developing one that we can use in ten years, but the Romeo Seahawk can do both, today.
Another excellent analysis, thanks again for your detailed work.
Great video! Thought provoking as always. The only issue I have with your argument is that the modular design requires a crew well versed in a multitude of capabilities. Realistically the Arafura class will first and foremost be an offshore patrol vessel, unlike a frigate or destroyer which is a dedicated war fighting vessel. Similarly to the RAN's issue of having enough platforms as say submarines, having enough vessel in maintenance, offshore patrol and warfighting readiness would be a significant undertaking for our small navy even with a complimentof 40 crew.
That being said, a littoral ship that can link into a defensive or offensive system hosted by a Hunter or Hobart class destroyer would be an incredibly powerful asset in an amphibious assault context as well. As well as having a small landing deck which would be an alternate emergency landing platform for aircraft in trouble during such an amphibious operation.
All up though, I do agree that we need to look at what China has done in the South China sea and learn from it. A fleet of 20 to 30 multi-role OPV's with capability to be part of a wider defence network is great. But knowing the ADF, it's likely that if we had say 20 OPV's that were "multi-role", you'd end up with 12 set up as full time patrol vessels and 8 set up as combat support, with limited cross-polination between the two forces.
Carefully curated vid, good coverage. Unfortunately ADF have very little current demonstrated history of procurement. Navy in particular use their binoculars the wrong end as eyepieces.
A tinny from PNG and local using a 303 would be of more use.
Who are they procuring for anyway. Sooner or latter a belligerent boat will be off our coastline. Heavily armed. Let me guess that useless crowd in feds will send some portly poli to tell off. Ha.
Grow some balls Russell Hill or do a NZ act & stick head up arse hoping to disappear.
Of course I've got it wrong. There will be no threat to orrstrala's sovereignty in the next 50 years. Hope I'm pushing up weeds by then.
Quit cosying up to your fanboys & get strategic!
Great video again! I enjoy your contemporary analyses of our warfighting capabilities more than historical deep dives. As much as I enjoy them, too....it's past history, and hardly anyone else seems to be looking to our future. Which may not be as rosy as the last half a century has been.
But who's idea to use OPV as humanitarian assistance and iligal boats when they got Cape class boarder force for that shit.
Australia only has 3 undergunned air warfare destroyers and 8 Anzac frigates and 6 Collins class submarines in service. Our new OPV is the size off a corvette. They could heavily arm thoughs 12 for coastal defence. To make up the lack off ships we already have.
The Hunter class frigates that's a decade away from replacing the Anzac class frigate is also undergunned with only 32 cell VLS a displacement of 10.000 tonnes due to Australia tweaking with its design and will be too slow.
Australia only has 3 air warfare destroyers they the wrong ships for its role. RAN choose ESSM SM2 SM6 Tomahawks and LSRAM in uts VLS and new Norwegian long range anti ship missiles that is launched from missle canisters from the middle off the ship.
AWD needs 16 cell just for 64 missiles to protect the ship. They need another 16 cell just for SM2 medium range anti aircraft missile. That's 32 cell VLS used up. That leave just 16 cell for SM6 Tomahawks and LSRAM. Not enough
Australia would be better of scraping the Hunter class type 26 and build 9 f100 class with the CEFAR-2 radar aegis combat systems including the 3 we already got making total off 12 ships.
And build 6 upgraded alright Burk class destroyer for AWD with 96 cell VLS.
Heavily arm our 12 OPV build 6 nuclear powerd attack submarines, and build 12 upgraded collins conventional submarines that can launch Tomahawks.
And build one jump jet carrier maybe something like what Japan built and purchase some F35 B. And maybe some B21 stealth bombers from the US when they go into mass production Increase the defence personnel from 80 to 90 thousand. Probably cost Australia 3.5% off our GDP but will become cheaper as our economy grows
I
Good looking hull. Full of possibilities too.
Thanks for the great informative piece, as usual keep up these great contributions please. Muchly appreciated.
Discounting India in a winder anti Chinese communist conflict is something that Allies shouldn’t do
Love the fact this is just reading the brochure and still has areas wrong but got damn I’m extremely impressed with the monotone talking hitting the ADF videos on point
20:23 this quip caught me off guard. injecting a bit of dry humour in such a technically dense presentation is an artform. well done hypo
Great report, thank you. Up gunning the Arafura class is a no brainer. Even if they developed weapons that can be retro fitted when necessary.
Criminal incompetence by Australian governments aside from a lack of warfighting capability the inability to fly helicopters from the vessel is beyond the pale. Having air-sea rescue as part of the build would more than justify taxpayer's dollars being spent on what is really a lame-duck flying the Australian Navy flag. This is a bureaucratic beancounter design, having a build that lacks multi-purpose roles is to cut costs, which means the vessel will fail at the tasks it was designed for in the first place.
May be you should research WW2 PT boats and the service they provided.
@@kimsears5265 Yes and they used fishing boats and pleasure craft to retrieve soldiers from the beach at Dunkirk. What does that have to do with 2022 naval warfare?
@@zorbakaput8537 WOW
@@zorbakaput8537 Yes that’s very true.
Every boat with small modifications can do such amazing things.
It’s literally a patrol boat, instead of up gunning something that doesn’t need to be. Order another Hobart class and 2 hunter class.
Excellent review, thank you for this upload.
Another fantastic video upload. Keep em coming!
I work in RCN up in Canada and there have been similar debates regarding increasing the firepower on our new AOPVs. While I would never be against more firepower if practical I think for both the OPVs in the RAN and AOPVs in RCN service it’s not practical to equip said vessels with complex and expensive offensive weaponry.
These vessels are not combat vessels and are not intended to fill that role, they are simple constabulary patrol vessels that are cheap to build and require minimal crew with less equipment required to operate this decreasing annual operating costs. Adding long range anti ship missiles, complex point defence systems (such as ESSM and Sea Ceptor), and anti submarine warfare equipment is a ridiculous undertaking for a simple constabulary patrol vessel built to commercial standards.
Think about it, with all of those systems you now need dedicated and complex sensor systems that require systems and space (think complex ops room) on board to operate. Furthermore you now need trained crew to operate and maintain those systems, thus increasing crew complement dramatically. Also it’s not just your average boatswain operating and maintaining the weapons and equipment, it’s highly technical and trained sailors, something that takes years to train and are not in great supply. This is why I find your statement regarding the “simple” addition of anti sub warfare capability to the OPV making it proficient is anti sub warfare short sighted. You can’t just plug in a towed array and call it a day, it’s so much more complex than that as is with any of the weapon systems you mention and there’s a reason it’s only done on proper warships that have crews of 250+.
By the time all of this is done, you start to wonder why you didn’t just spend all that extra time and money (which is not unlimited) on say a couple more Hunter class frigates or an extra submarine and just built the OPV as originally intended instead of this bloated ship built to commercial patrol standards but outfitted with systems found on a corvette or frigate which are actually built with those systems in mind.
TL:DR: You miss the core purpose of these vessels, and what you claim to be easy additions to increase firepower are not as easy as you think, in my opinion. I think instead of “up gunning” these vessels, more, proper warships such as the Hunter class should be built.
Thank god someone is applying a bit of common sense to the debate, the Arafura's are simply not designed for frontline roles and should only be used in roles where more mundane general patrol duties are required, fitting 2 twin NSM's and a 57mm Mk3 would be a more practical solution if we wanted to give them a more offensive capability that could be used in littoral zones.
Finally, someone with common sense..
These kids don't know cost and budget ..
Spot on. The Arafura is going to be an incredibly capable vessel for its intended purpose. If AMSEG is able to deliver a commercially competitive hull out of the seriously impressive new Civmec yard, there are massive export opportunities into South East Asia, which is the only way to sustain the skillsets we need to develop and maintain a serious shipbuilding industry. The fabrication skills are already there, but keeping them as Oil & Gas and Mining fabrication waxes and wanes is the hard part.
Warships in Osborne, Constabulary in Henderson. The hull itself may be versatile, but each needs to be built to purpose. As an example, Arafura as a base platform is also being considered to replace our Huon Minehunters. But we can't just plonk a container on the back and call it a day.
@@xellosblackforest1685 To be fair, the creator is referencing an ASPI document written by another old codger like us. hypohysetericalhistory does make some fantastic content, the historical stuff in particular is superb.
@@brinchaser1313 true. Problem is, too many readers are requesting on adding extra items like torpedo tubes, AA missiles etc..
Sooner or later when stuff are added in, commenters will request for ICBMs, laser guns & plane decks too ..
I was just talking about this very topic earlier today. Excited for your take on the topic.
Proud to have you as a fellow Aussie mate 👍
found you on tik tok and can’t get enough of your content. i found this video fascinating, well-produced, and a suitable replacement for scrolling through tik tok.
This video is criminally underviewed! Such a good analysis.
Another well thought out and well presented video and even more relevant given events in Ukraine that show aggressive nations will always, at some point act aggressively.
Loved the video, been looking forward to seeing something like this.
Thank you for this very interesting video.
It may be a pipe dream but perhaps they should look at C-Dome. It's incredibly small yet capable. You could easily fit 10-20 missiles along with bringing back the 40mm on the front area. Once there's some Anti-ship missiles on deck you have yourself an incredibly capable minor war vessel or patrol corvette.
but why? Why spend the money procuring and deploying an anti-missile system onto a patrol boat. These things are made for patrol, they don't need a big gun, C-Dome or god forbid LRASMs!
@@gamm8939 did you even watch the vedio were talking about how they could be used in a morden major war not to send off the Somali fishermen. The boat should have the capability to be armed with some of these weapons. Should they stay on during peace time only during fleet exercises. If we ignore such capabilities they become target practise for the enermy even if we put them on covoy escort only. For that they would need the towed array at least.
After reading a story on Pakistani Frigates acquired from China these OPV'S could possibly hold their own as the Frigates have problems with weapon systems that won't fire and engines that break down. China's Navy would obviously suffer Tofu building just like everything they build. It's so bad I think China's Navy is a paper tiger.
@@gamm8939 Thailand : too late now
@@gamm8939 Spot on...
Great upload, some great points made here
Great content! Building bigger bases in East Timor and PNG would be a start !
excellent as always
Very nice ship. Great video too
Very Interesting and thought provoking
Very well thought out proposal. I just wish the same process had been pursued prior to the building of the USN's LCS boats.
Loving your content!
a heck of an upgrade from the old Armidales !
Thank you, very though provoking! I imagine that there has been thoughts of mounting canister launched LRASM onto merchant vessels, Offshore Supply. Stern Trawlers and small Container or RO/Ro vessels. The ultimate would be subsea deployed systems in neutral waters that hide until required.
Worked in the past . Australia even had signal stations isolated on small island rocks in WWII and were a great set of eyes in early surveillance of the Japanese
That's *exactly* the stuff you'd do if you wanted to really really win.
Sounds like essentially a modern version of the Q ship, and I could definitely see it being used for an infiltration assault by navies that don’t have the numbers to take on a larger force such as the USN.
@@Rusty_Gold85 Indigenous coast watchers signalled the attack on Darwin.
@@bossdog1480 Father McGrath of the Sacred Heart mission on Bathurst Island.
Your assessment is spot on. The HLD are woefully under gunned and its insane to not accommodate the possibility of fixed wing jets. For a start, take those 4 x 25mm cannons off and replace them with 4 x Phalanx CIWS. Now the vessels can defend themselves. As for the OPV's, yes, put the the 40mm cannon back (or better add a Phalanx CIWS ) and refuelling for a attack/sub hunting helicopter plus plus plus. As for deterring an offensive battle group .... we deploy a couple of nuclear powered attack subs with a compliment of cruise missiles & torpedos. Yes, 20 x Arafura class OPV all up gunned and up optioned would be logical.
Love your stuff.
It’s not just passive ASW which triangulation is important, passive EW also relies on this. That’s just another role these vessels could perform very well for a limited cost in tandem with higher end ships.
1st class thanks for sharing
great job mate!
The only thing about pair them up with larger ships, is the endurance issue, smaller ships won’t be able to stay at sea as long, so some of the tonnage will need to used to extend range and endurance before you after extra systems and weapons
36:15 - BAE Williamstown yard was shut down at the end of the LHD build. Not impossible to get it back up and running but you'd need a multi-decade package of work to make it worthwhile.
after the job they did on the LHD blocks....they can stay shut
Because the fitted for but not with policy worked out so well with the early ANZACS...Right?
A medium calibre weapon and SeaRAM should be the minimum load out for this class vessel's.
I reckon they should keep our 8 Anzac ships evean after they build 9 hunter class. Change the main gun to a rapid fire 76mm with p3 shells add a 21 sea ram system at the back off the ship. Put another 8 cell VLS next to the other one. Making it 16 cell. Have 32 ESSM. And 8 SM2. Change the harpoons over for new Norwegian long range anti ship missiles that has 900km range or add US new 2x4 cell external mounted MK41 VLS in the middle off the ship and have 8 LSRAM anti ship missile or whatever fit's best.
Use them for heavily armed coastal ships.
Agreed. This ship is rather anemic for a naval OPV. Would do fine as a Coast Guard OPV though. But the lack of a heptr is seriously limiting.
RAN seems to have forgotten or chose to ignore the CCP's menace in its supposed sphere of influence.
The RAN should divest the entire fleet of Arafuras and Capes to the ABF and focus on warfighting. Constabulary and fisheries protection aren't Navy duties, and if there really is a need for Navy patrol elements, acquire five or six general purpose patrol frigates, which are still capable of making a useful contribution to naval warfare.
While all of your deployable navy is off to the Atlantic to engage in a UN Peacekeeping mission what is going to keep the Chinese from depleting the Southern Ocean's fisheries? Mission creep indeed... During the Second World War America had pre-First World War battleships being used for other roles than being a battleship...
I would be utterly fascinated to see a video on the history of the Armidale Class patrol boat.
Probably not the Navy's most popular boat.
Was interesting to see - at least according to the wiki - the 2009 defence white paper called for 20 corvettes.
Funnily enough, Labor announced that looking in to up gunning the Arafuras would be one of the things they look into Navy wise if they get govt.
Yet again Labor proving to be better on defence, economy, border security and foreign relations... what was the Liberal party good at again? clearing irreplaceable rainforrests and driving Koalas extinct?
Hey mate I have been following your content for a while now from our wee island (NZer) and let me tell you, the amount of frustration you must feel pales in comparison to watching my govt flounder around with out "defence force".
Could you do a broad overview type video on the NZ DF.
I am a Political science major from Otago Uni and several other Grad's wanted to write some sort of "white paper" type article suggesting how NZ could revamp our entire defense force while still capping our budget under 3% of GDP. It was AMAZING just how much value there is out there if you accept that some things are just not practical. We never finished the paper but even in the draft stages we had 8 missile corvettes slightly smaller than your Arafura class as our main anti-invasion deterrent and had about 30 stinger, javelin and 50cal stocked "hidden ammo dumps" dotted around the country and about 80 tiny 10m by 10m sites dotted around our coastal forests just big enough for an NH90 to drop a containerized anti-ship missile on moments notice. We had most of our Lav's sold and about 60 of them re-equipped with ATGM and Anti-Air Role. As I recall we were just finalizing a theoretical deal that would allow us to buy 2 dozen Grippens by leveraging the coal resources in the east coast over a 10 year period.
Dreams aye.
When New Zealand gets around to replacing the Anzac Frigates in their Navy I think the best option would be the Type 31 Frigate because it is much cheaper than a Type 26 and you may get three ships for the same money.
@@lindsaybaker9480 Only issue with that is that the brits are already basically saying the Type 31 (as they currently plan to fit it out for themselves) is not fit for high intensity conflict zones. So I dunno does that mean NZ finally accepts we cannot meaningfully contribute to proper multilateral naval operations such as helping the Aussies maintain freedom of navigation and helping Brits escort their carriers or what?
Well done. I've been thinking about this for years. As a force multiplier our patrol boats should be used as missile platforms. Most large fleet units will be taken out in the first few months. If an adversary gets close to Australia, smaller missile platforms makes sense and quicker to build.
That is why we have F-35's and F18's. Secondly you are all assuming the US won't be there for us which is silly because we already have a US presence here and will continue to do so.
The reason they are only armed with the second-hand 25mm instead of the planned 40mm is the contract for the 40mm fell through.
The best bet would be for the RAN to acquire the 40mm bofors that that RN are putting in as secondary armament in the Type 31 FFG. The only possible handicap is they are a bit heavier (about 400kg) but given the variable payload planned for this class that shouldn't be an issue.
The 40mm bofors was chosen instead of phalanx or goalkeeper in the Type 31 as a CIWS weapon with the added bonus of it's ASuW capability.
It would give us the calibre of weapon that was planned for this ship, interoperability with one of our closest allies, and who knows, maybe even consider the same weapon for future surface combatants.
This is some big patrol boat. I was at Waterhen when we had the Attack class boats. But Iam impressed
It should be mentioned that an OPV and a minor war vessel like an ACPB are very different types of vessel. The OPV is specifically designed for open water, long range patrols, whereas the ACPB is actually a shallow water patrol and fast attack craft (fast in its manoeuvrability, rather than it's top speed). As such, the OPV is definitely, in a broad sense, of the corvette type of warship. However, the ACPB (and if they get a main gun, the new enhanced CCPB) are designed for shallow water operations around reefs and islands...a role the OPV cannot perform. This segment completely ignores the fact that all the fleets in the region hold a shallow draught, highly manoeuvrable inshore combat capability. These are used for special operations support, reef and channel patrols (especially in the many waterways of SE Asia too shallow for major vessels to enter or manoeuvre, indeed even the bays and reefs around Australia's own coast, such as the Torres Strait, the Barrier Reef, Ashmore Reef, etc, where larger vessels cannot operate, except in dredged sea lanes), as well as provide a gun boat (and for many regional navies, a missile, mine and torpedo) capability for inshore coastal defence. In fact, the modern RAN patrol fleet isn't descended from the WWII corvettes which perform the tasks described in this video; no, they descend from the HDML's (Harbour Defence Motor Launches), and Vosper and Fairmile MGB's (Motor Gun Boats) which performed the equal roles in WWII - and a role that was still being performed as recently as the late 2010's with counter-piracy, counter-insurgency operations in the Mindanao - Tawi-Tawi Island Chain (where only a few ports and straights are deep enough for corvettes and frigates to enter). A corvette is not a patrol boat, it is a very different type and class of vessel. The OPV is not a complete replacement of the patrol boat, but a change in operational focus (it will be interesting to see if the Army assumes the inshore Littoral Combat Zone, or if the Navy retains the eCCPB's as inshore combat and patrol boats).
These OPV'S only have a draft of 3 Meters. That's shallow draft .
Yeah, this thing is the size of a corvette or a small frigate, so it could at least use 4 harpoons (or equivalent) and an 8 cell VLS.
Also I'd love to see you do a video on the battle of Binh Ba, since that is the battle honour of my infantry unit and I think you would do it great justice.
I bet you appreciated the armour support at that battle, Andrew
@@alexlanning712 I wasn't at the battle, I'm much more recent. My battles were in Iraq and Afghanistan, but we have to remember the past so that the stories never die.
@@andrewsmall6834 Yes, for sure, I'm a Baby Boomer, born and bred, and I was brought up to respect and appreciate, the memory and sacrifices made by people such as yourself
Vid on the Battle of Binh Ba would be great! Seconded!
Let's be honest, this ship is designed to be a patrol boat, it would be better to limit to 8 patrol boats and build a Corvette/light Frigate class which can accommodate VLS, ASM, ASW and ASEA capabilities. You need something which can at minimum supplement the fleet and not burden it
I've sailed he Arafura Sea (Prawn trawler, not military), had 2 brothers in the RAN, seen the Taiwanese illegal fishing boats hauled up in Weipa, so this hits home...well done good sir.
Flexibility of military platforms is key to a small nation tasked with defending a massive land/sea area.
Similar to your video on the potential F-35B deployment on our amphibiouls class ships, the Australian Defence policies seem short sighted.
Now...where are our nuclear-powered subs...?
Subs? ... any day now. Any. Day. Now.
probably really CCP chinese coast guards dressed up as fishing Trawlers
@@Rusty_Gold85 Who spoke Taiwanese and were involved in fishing sharks, for their fins only, tossing the sharks back after to slowly starve to death...I think that's worse.
Amazing!!!
Now this is amazing work, would love to know if you have any ideas in relation to the Samuel Beckett class in the Irish Naval Service.
Excellent presentation. I totally agree with your hypothesis and assessment. If the OPV is supposed to be a modular platform, then it would be extremely cost effective to the ADF and Defense Bureaucracy to assimilate these capabilities in a timely manner, in order to meet future or developing events. Also I totally agree with Ulas Yildirim, ASPI, 22 March 2022 article (Defence needs to change its approach to equip the ADF better and faster). Australia needs to review and absorb the massive lessons on the battlefield of the Ukraine-Russia war. A conventional force can disrupt the classical doctrinal roles of branches of the opposing military in unique and COTS warfare and weapons systems.
That drone can cover Australia in 24hrs! 7.7 million kilometres. Impressive.
Unfortunately the current configuration of the Arafura class belongs in a bygone era as the threat and the threat level has changed. A nation to our north deploys armed fishing vessels, sometimes into triple figures. In the video, I was hopeful of a discussion on the following: What bow sonar would be appropriate for the two twin light weight torpedo tubes (midships), the 57 mm gun being move forward to accommodate the 60 to 80 C-Dome missiles - tasked to the CEAFAR's Radars, moving the RIBS to midships and restoring the helicopter flight deck and fuel system. Discussion on the mark 57 vertical launch system to line the fight deck, say 12 VLS per side with the Sea lancer system and an engine upgrade to at least 6 to 7 Mw would round out the upgrade. Like to hear your thoughts.
Question: with the upcoming replacement of the US B-1Bs with the B-21s, do you think Australia could have a use for a few of them, 8-12, as essentially modern Backfires? I imagine they could get them used at a fairly steep discount, and as far as I know, the airframes still have plenty of life left in them. They could provide an impressive area denial capability that the Super Hornet, with its much more limited range and payload, simply couldn’t. In addition, a long range stand-off strike against a carrier group seams just like the kind of medium threat environment the Bonehands are useful for.
Us won’t sell them to anyone. That’s why they are the only ones operating them. Same with the B1, A10 etc
If I had my way we would get B-21 & SSNX. I don't think it's as unlikely as most. The fact is, the US need allies buying this stuff. IMO the Yanks can't afford to continue to insist the rest of their allies use their 2nd tier gear or nothing. It's not going to be a pretty century, nor is it getting any cheaper to maintain a deterrence. However they have see where their, don't share with anyone policy leads. Far too few F-22's, higher unit prices for the US military, too much support on the US for its SOTA.
Great video! Especially like the videos about Australia's modern military abilities.
Video suggestion. I heard both ASPI and some people in SA saying we should build more naval vessels. I think ASPI said 3 more Hobart class destroyers before the Hunter Class Frigates, and the people from SA said another 6 conventional (Collins?) submarines.
I'd be great to get your perspective on that.
We would do much better in the short term to buy some subs off of the South Koreans. They would be reasonably priced and nearly/similarly as capable as Japanese ones.
Aspi said that because a lot of their arms sponsers have a leg in the hobart. We need anti submarine warfare because that's the biggest threat.
@@bossdog1480 From what I heard, conventional submarines, particularly the smaller ones, don't fulfill what the ADF need. My guess of what they need are capabilities that work with the US navy. The ADF want's a regionally superior submarine as well.
This video gave me an armchair thought that a RAN fleet-wide upgrade to anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare could be a way to go instead of additional surface vessels or submarines. More VLS on the Hobart destroyers, better ASW and anti-shipping on the Arafura, etc; make what we already have much better. I could be wrong but I think a fleet-wide upgrade would be done at those shipyards. The people in SA wanted more work on the shipyards, and this could be a way of doing that.
What are your thoughts on this idea?
@@dan7564 I agree. I think a previous video of hypohistoricalhystory, he mentioned about ASPI's very high cost estimate regarding improving the Canberra LHDs to use F-35b's. I heard a few other little bits as well, but maybe that's just their members having a different perspective; I'm not sure.
There are other options for improving anti-submarine warfare without submarines, such as wake-detecting satellites, improved hydrophone systems, improved sonar on surface vessels, and UAVs. Not saying you already didn't know these, I'm just listing some out so others can see.
@@nerdbane9376 I know nukes are the way to go, but in the meantime we need 3 conventional subs asap. South Korea is an ally so the gear may be compatible. The Collins class is just way too old to keep updating.
I fully agree that updating our surface ships is a good idea.
Subhunting and ASM is perfect. If your going to aquire and modify such a fantastic agile ship, it should have the capability. Completely agree
Awesome content! It looks similar to my concept for an Aussie built global combatant ship design that I made in Kerbal Space Program haha
Id love to see the Rheinmetall Oerlikon Millennium Gun on these for anti surface and anti air ability for its main gun.
This is a damn patrol boat. I dont know what you guys have fever dreams about an anti-air patrol boat.
Here is a list of SOME weird/non-neccesary ideas in this comment section.
MANTIS, C-Dome, LRASM, a AESA Radar and ESSM. This boat is for patrolling, not for war. Spend the money on development, integration, and procurement and buy a few F35s or something.
You know how hard it would be to fit only one of these things onto this little ship? This is supposed to be cheap, with a minimum amount of crew, not a corvette
In light of recent relevations about Australia looking for a corvette. A 90 metre arafura could be built for those last 8-10 arafura's.
This is a great video and I agree with your proposal for up-gunning the Arafura Class OPV in order to use it as a supplementary vessel in a high intensity naval conflict, but I don't think there is justification for up-gunning all the OPV's now, since the likelihood of a high intensity conflict in our region is extremely low. I imagine it would be very difficult for DoD to justify the cost of acquiring extra capabilities for the Arafura that go beyond what is actually intended for it, as determined by our current strategic environment and defence posture. However, given DoD's own acknowledgement of the rapidly changing strategic environment, I would say that prudence demands we have a plan in place to upgrade the Arafura's if we decide the extra warfighting capability becomes necessary. Perhaps we should create a prototype upgraded Arafura as a proof of concept now so that we can prepare an upgrade plan that we could apply to the rest of the vessels if we need to in the future.
I really enjoy this content. You're the only youtuber I know that gives meaningful in depth information about the ADF's capabilities.
I agree, prototype immediately.
Another potential use for small warships like the Arafuras (although this would have to be a dedicated design and not a multi-role platform) would be to build a primarily gun armed ship that could be used to support amphibious operations with naval fire support. Ships that small can be built with a fairly heavy weight of guns compared to what a modern frigate or destroyer carries (the WW2 era Sims class destroyers carried about 5 times the throw weight of a Hobart class destroyer in guns at a displacement slightly smaller than an Arafura class OPV) and they'd still be quite cheap to build and operate while being able to replace the role of frigates and destroyers in providing close in support for an amphibious assault (which is dangerous and best not left to the ships also providing the bulk of your air defence and anti-submarine capability).
It's a very specialised role, but it wouldn't be an overly expensive capability to acquire as far as naval capabilities goes and can provide massive boost in firepower available to amphibious assaults even if we're going going to be replicating the effect of bringing an Iwoa class' 16 inch guns to bear like what the USN tried and failed to do with the Zumwalt class.
A great target.
At this point in geopolitics, the order should be upgraded to the OPV-90 and arm it the teeth. Same should go for all surface combatants and add one the other 8 VLS cells to the ANZAC class... we need anything and everything we can get now. A doubling of everything at least. History shows every 100 years around this period is an age of strife, current events vindicate this pattern.
A minimum of 5% of GDP must be allocated for the doubling of ADF strength and new force multipliers.
I ain't religious, but may God have mercy on us all.
I think they should reduce the order for these to cover the replacement of the mine warfare and hydro ships. Then build Type 31s instead, much better ship, better value.
These are not frigates to replace the anzac class. They are to replace the armidale class patrol vessels.
@@carisi2k11 Good point. But I was more commenting on that they are thinking of up gunning them. I really do think they are a waste, twice the crew, same range and endurance and slower than a Cape class. 6 times the expense to. I just don’t see what these bring to the table for the price, they are close to a Mogami in price.
Video says it all - its a capable vessel for the taskings that the ADF is asking of it. It is not equipped, unsurprisingly, for missions that are not part of its mission set.
a good mix of LRASM and NSM :)
Feels like the UK could do with a few of these, so capable!
Love the disdain in your tone when uttering "frenchman"
I concur.
Love these videos. Just out of curiosity are you taking notes on the Russian/Ukraine war for a future video? Guess there will be a lot that comes out later.
For those who keep commenting these are under armed have to remember it's a module ship and can easily be fitted with upgraded weapons and systems that's how they're designed.
The cost to refit such vessels after build is far greater then to included these aspects when being produced in dry dock. When the justification for such upgrades is present before production, it is questionable to why we would do it the hard way later on.
I hope there's a dilation room module to accommodate the brave and powerful transgender contingent.
@@lewisrosenfels536 I agree it is more expensive to upgrade them later instead of putting it in the original design, but these were designed as multi purpose ship and according to my mate in the Navy they have ready made modules which get bolted on and hooked up for various missions. Apparently they can be fitted within 24hrs
@@matthewburgess1406 Thats good news in terms of mission modulus, I can imagine it would be for UAV and helicopter re-fueling. Anything combat like VLS, Anti-ship missile canisters and CIWS will take dry docking most likely. Which I think are the main things to be included from build.
fascinating video. would love to hear your analysis of the Royal Navy's river class opvs now they've been deployed to the south pacific; a credible contribution to allies in the region beffitting the British tilt to the region? Also, i think the tendency of european navies to be somewhat lightly armed would be a great video; it seems to me that copying the USN's force structure of carrier strike and subs for offensive, other platforms as carrier escourts might not be wise giving the lower numbers europeans have and Russia's tendency to arm their ships to the teeth to give them superiority in 1v1 encounters
They lack serious capability and with no specialist eqp. are in fact pretty useless. The crane takingupdeck space could be used as a trebuchets I suppose
If my understanding is correct, Australia does not have a "Coast Guard" as the USA has so it uses it's navy for that role as well as defense. It looks like the Auafura is to function more as a coast guard cutter. It would seem it is fitted for that job. The helicopter refuling ability while nice, adds much to the maintaince and risk of fire if you are not going to use it. While the 25mm gun may look small compared to a 40, 57 or 75mm gun it would be very good at stopping, if it came to that, small freighters, fishing ships and the Chinese militia ships it is more likely have to enguage. The ability of "making your point' with a smaller weapon is much easier than with a big gun that could easily, and accidentally, blow your target out of the water.
Auatralia has a several nation buffer to China to it's north, that does help it's situation. The US has several companies testing container based weapon systems, including cruise missile launchers. So that front is quite fluid.
Long term, 30 to 50 years, the world situation may be much different than now and China as we know it now might not exist.
PS; "Sea Patrol" was a nice TV show, though it could have been better.
This video is a perfect example of the dangers of mission creep.
And definitely agree we could do alot better with the armament the Arafura has. We need to plan to have them upgunned quickly and at least fit for even if not with until needed. Plus I definitely think it should be fitted with towed array, torpedo tubes and NSM!
Ahead of time preferably so there's no bottleneck of retro fitting at a much more critical date.
The navy has aging Hobarts that do need another 4 or 6 Hobarts / F110s to overlap the Type 26. With the inclusion of the Arafura capability upgrades this would certainly lift the Navys position. The then Anzac class could hold the line with the incoming Arafura class to extract depth of sensor capability.
Nice size for a RC model boat.
I genuinely hadn't thought about the Southern ocean EEZ's ? in my head it was always about the northern approaches
1 correction in the video,
13:00- Shandong doesn't carry 32 J-15s.
The fictional number was created on the basis of hangar being enlarged & improved flight deck. While the latter is true, the former is fictional. Kuznetsov to Shandong, the hangar size is the same.
The max number of J-15 it can store is 26 (vs 24 on Liaoning), even 28 J-15 is considered a strech.
& 12 helicopters.
Do you have a link dude?
@@hypohystericalhistory8133 as for media articles? I have no links
But I can explain it to you,
Kuznetsov & Liaoning can carry upto 24 J-15 & 12 helis (36 aircrafts total, not 50 as reported by mainstream media all the time).
The number 32 for shandong circulated after it was said that the aircraft hangar for Shandong is enlarged, removing the weapons storage & the missile battery near the bow + the improvement on the flight deck (smaller island & flight deck where SAM cells were located in Kuznetsov/Liaoning).
The smaller island on Shandong allows to pack 1 more J-15 on the flight deck (between the forward aircraft lift & island). There are further improvements that allow it to pack 2 J-15s more on the flight deck when compared to Kuznetsov/Liaoning.
The flight deck in place where kinzhal were stored allows the J-15s to be parked at a better distance from the landing strip compared to Kuznetsov/Liaoning.
As for the hangar being the same size as Kuznetsov/Liaoning, there are pictures available for its' hangar bay. twitter.com/HenriKenhmann/status/1221099687815479298?t=TKaPexNYnGXvXkxKzblxNw&s=19
The hangar is around 153×26m, if the media reports of hangar bay being stretched to where the P700s where located is to be believed then the hangar would be longer than even Nimitz...which is not the case as proven by the pictures of shandong' hangar.
From 24 to 32 (flight deck + hangar),
Packing 8 more J-15s (compared to Liaoning) on flight deck is not possible. Same number in the hangar as the size is same. So it's 26-28 at best. The number is agreed with analysts such as RickJoe_PLA (Twitter account) & Henri (the one who's tweet I shared above).
+ I myself have experimented with a digital Ouija board created for Shandong & have found similar results. I can share the pictures if you have a discord/Twitter account.
I guess I have explained well?
As usual a great video and well thought out...for my 2c, I reckon maybe way too much for what these ships where intended for. For the roll you're talking about I would think drone ships may be a better option.
Ah, the mythical drone ships and drone subs that nobody has...
I had a good laugh at the way you spat out “tha-les” - I confess I am guilty of wanting to correct you every time you say it wrongly in other videos - at least I left it at wanting! Go for “thay-lees” to piss off everyone.
Also I love your videos, and I have no idea how YT didn’t pick up on my Perun addiction and recommend you earlier.
For the cost of adding 4x LRASMs to the Arafura class, could we not increase our purchase of F-35s to add those additional missiles to the strike package? They would be far quicker to reload and repeat.
I do love the idea of a 57mm and the towed array for increasing our ASW capacity.
Either way, I love your content. Thanks so much!
It would need torpedo tubes added if we add a towed array which I would also advocate to counter Chinese submarines!
Looks like something New Zealand would buy
I think the LRASM on the Arafura class is a pipe dream. You acknowledged that the ship is too small for the missile and then just moved on. This missile is just too big for this ship.
A better alternative is the Naval Strike Missile (NSM) which is more in line with the size and weight of the Exocet currently deployed on the same hull. The range and payload is less but its still a stealthy long range anti ship missile and can contribute to a saturation attack. More so because the Arafura could have more of them (4-8). The addition of a SeaRAM would give it a good balance of offence and defense.
Still a great video though, and you make some good points. Especially re the anti submarine role.
I said that we do not know whether LRASM can be used on the Arafura or not. You just made a bald assertion with no evidence or argument whatsoever that it is too large. NSM is only 1 foot shorter than LRASM. The only potential issue is the weight, but without a detailed understanding of the design we simply don’t know whether 8tons is a problem or not. There is PLENTY of reserve buoyancy for that much additional weight, the only issue is stability and currently we just don’t know if that’s a problem or not. You are claiming (or pretending) to know one way or the other. Do you have any evidence at all to support that claim???
As for the NSM, it’s certainly a very capable weapon, but the main problem here is it’s lack of range. Long range weapons systems are fundamental to the A2/AD concept. If your engagement envelope is to small then you are simply exposing yourself to overwhelming enemy fire, especially when engaging a carrier strike group equivalent. If you have to close in to 100 nautical miles then you might as well not even bother trying, not unless you have enough mass in terms of your defensive systems to fight off a carrier air group and YJ-18 volleys, which the Arafura certainly doesn’t.
@@hypohystericalhistory8133 I didn't think it was that bold of an assertion considering the obvious size and space discrepancy when compared to the exocet. It just seems really unlikely to me that they will attempt to launch a 2000kg missile from an OPV. But I'm happy to be proven wrong.
I'm certainly not making any claims of inside knowledge of the issue considering a lot of details would be classified and I do not work in the defense industry. But I do have long conversations with a family member who worked on the anzac class frigates and one thing that I found enlightening was how the space required to integrate weapon platforms is a major issue. There is a good reason why the USN mainly fields destroyers not frigates.
Then again the Russians cram much bigger missiles into smaller spaces so who knows what is possible.
One interesting thing about the NSM is it has vastly different ranges for different flight profiles. At a hi-hi-low profile its range is not that dissimilar to the advertised range of the LRASM at 300 nmi. Of course that leaves it open to early detection but maybe its stealth aspects will mitigate that somewhat...?
Certainly the LRASM is a better missile for the job you are proposing. But its massive and expensive. There is a reason why we are funding development of the NSM and will probably procure it in the future. It has a role on smaller platforms and I would have thought an OPV would be an obvious use case.
Again, if I'm wrong it will be a pleasant surprise. Either missile would be a massive improvement on what they have now regardless.
If it made fiscal/military sense to weaponize this class then a light weight but capable gun system like "Millennium dual role" and 4-6 LTASM on/integrated into the forecastle as a surface action variant. Then you mention the ASW option. This actually makes more sense to me than the surface action concept for a vessel of this size/speed/construction. Modular systems have come very long way since the mess known as LCM. Thanx for the video. Slava Ukrainni 🇺🇦
The lack of coverage over the north-east coast in the direction of the Solomons becomes a very real issue now.
I think we should be building the OPV 90 instead of the 80. This will give more more room for upgrades. But over all I think the 20 knot speed hinders these vessels. The Royal Nave is building the Type 31 frigate to compliment the type 26's, their hunter class. These cost A$450 each and would in my opinion be a better war fighting platform.
That's the thing though, this is distinctly NOT a warfighting platform. it's a patrol vessel designed to be just scary enough to get fishermen trawling our waters to fuck off without a fight, and I'm quite happy with that.
The Hunter class and subs incoming will provide all the firepower Aus needs to provide itself. Our role is not to win the war but to augment and support our allies as well as provide humanitarian aid and security to our pacific neighbours.
Great video! I have followed on tiktok for a long time! If you want some constructive criticism, look at getting a high quality microphone, or if you already do, move an inch or two back from the mic, would make a more crisp audio :)
For the high-end fight scenario, Australia needs something that can deliver a considerable number of anti-ship missiles without having to deploy the entire RAAF against that target. I agree with you, we do have the capacity to locate and support a operation to destroy a PLAN CBG. It is our ability to get enough missiles to the target that is in doubt. Remember in any war, RAAF assets are going to be in high demand, being able to assemble the entire force of Super hornets for a single mission unlikely. The USAF concept of deploying the palletized LRASM from the C-17 makes a lot of sense for Australia. The advantage of modern long-range ASCM's is that they do not require an expensive penetrating platform to deploy them. If we wanted to, we could buy some old B-52's and put them through the current USAF upgrade program which includes replacing the 1950's era jet engines, which would give you a long-range asset that could deploy twenty LRASMs from Amberley for a low cost without having to wait ten years for it.
What about the low-end fight? If you look at the dispute between the Philippines and China, you see China deploying large numbers of lightly armed, often under the flag the Chinese coast guard and not the PLAN. It is reasonable that our allies to our north, Indonesia and Maylasia could find them themselves under similar pressure. The ability to deploy several armed patrol boats would be desirable for such a grey zone conflict. The Arafura class would be ideal for such a confrontation. LRASM would be overkill, but there are a wide variety of small cost effective off the shelf weapons you could arm the Arafura class that would be ideal. The Arafura is also cheap enough, with a small crew requirement, that the RAN could seriously consider building 20-30. We could build a substantial number quickly by building them in two shipyards, since construction of the Hunter class is to commence.
Instead of B52's we would b better off buying the B1's that are being retired currently and mounting them as anti ship missile trucks armed with LRASM
@@montys420- meh there's only a few of B1s and they're expensive as fuck to operate
@@jonny-b4954 and B52's aren't?? Lol🤦♂️
@@montys420- Well, I mean you have a point to an extent. But no, not compared to B-1. B-52 is well known to have absurdly low maintenance and operational costs. It's one of the few reasons we've kept them around. Plus, there's a few less B1's than B-52 aircraft in inventory: 45 B-1b's (air force retired 17 in 2021) and like 76 B-52's around, only like a dozen of the B-1bs are supposedly mission capable at any given point. They're much more advanced and have specialized parts. It's also much more limited in it's payload. Though some B-1's have undergone a refit (maybe it was just proposed) to increase bomb bay by 30% to carry hypersonic and larger ordinances.
@@jonny-b4954 my reasoning is Australia wouldn't need many and could buy the extra airframes to cannibalise or could invest in re structuring there bodies snd wings for strength and put new engines on them so there cheaper in the long run in maintenance, otherwise Australia needs to hope the US will allow us to buy B21's?? I doubt congress will allow its export so the next best thing would b a stealth bomber drone in the shape of a B21 just for the payload advantages over the loyal wingman drones!
The Arafura boats are Patrol Boats, built to patrol our littoral waters, NOT to sail over to the SCS and take on the PLAN. We have Air and Naval assets to do that sort of work, as well as protect us from any potential PLAN approach.
I agree. I was under the understanding that The whole reason for building the arafuras was for them to do the low end patrolling missions thereby freeing up the Hobart's and Anzacs for warfighting missions
The Arafura’s specs seem more appropriate for a coast guard vessel rather than a navy one.
Are these the boats taking over the Armadale class patrol boats?
this is very well thought out and presented and you only kinda touched on things at the beginning the ADF is in a political pickle constantly caught between national defence from 1 government to national indifference to total disarmament from potential governments