ISSUE 140 June 2011 A Common Platform for a New AO, AOR & Sealift Support Ship Submarine Command Course – Sanitising the near field, Looking into the deep field Beyond the Principal Warfare Officer The Indian Ocean through the Ages Gulf Deployment - Through an Artist’s Eyes 808 Squadron Support Arrangements to meet Navy MRH90 Operations Adrift in a Think Tank: Insights from the Lowy Institute JOURNAL OF THE Issue 140 3 Letters to the Editor Contents Dear Editor, As a member of the Naval Historical I enjoyed the article in Issue 138 Advisory Committee responsible for A Common Platform for a New AO, December 2010 by Midshipman overseeing the selection process for the AOR & Sealift Support Ship 4 Claire Hodge on RAN Helicopter names of future RAN ships I was very Flight Vietnam but must correct her interested to read the article written by Submarine Command Course – Note 2, where she states that SEA LCDR Paul Garai, RAN, which appears Sanitising the near field, Looking into DRAGON was the RAN’s principal in Headmark Issue 138, concerning the deep field 7 commitment during the Vietnam war, giving more meaningful names to the and the ships involved were HMA two new LHD’s. Beyond the Principal Warfare Officer 13 Ships Hobart, Vendetta and Brisbane. When viewing the article I was SEA DRAGON was the surprised to read that the RAN The Indian Ocean through the Ages 20 interdiction of supply routes and had previously named a destroyer logistic craft along the coast of North Gallipoli. This is a misleading Studies in Trait Leadership – Loved Vietnam from the DMZ to the Red comment. No RAN destroyer, or Leader: Rear Admiral Sir David Martin, River Delta (near Hanoi). On those any other commissioned RAN KCMG, AO, RAN 28 operations ships came under fire warship, has ever carried the name from shore batteries and there was Gallipoli, although three RAN ships Gulf Deployment the threat of North Vietnamese air have been named Anzac giving much - Through an Artist’s Eyes 38 and torpedo-boat attack – they were broader recognition to the deeds of the suspended on 1 November 1968, Australian and New Zealand soldiers 808 Squadron Support Arrangements during Perth’s second deployment. who fought at Gallipoli, and elsewhere, to meet Navy MRH90 Operations 42 Hobart and Perth were the only RAN during World War I. ships involved. After November 1968 The names Canberra and Adelaide Collective Amnesia in Whitehall 1981 the latter deployments of those two were selected for the two LHDs by the – 2010: The 2010 UK Strategic Review ships, plus Brisbane and Vendetta, all then-incumbent Chief of Navy in 2005 of the Royal Navy. An antipodean involved Naval Gunfire Support or following a lengthy and consultative perspective 47 other activities off the coast of South process. Both names were considered Vietnam. highly suitable and subsequently Adrift in a Think Tank: approved by the Governor General and Insights from the Lowy Institute 54 Yours sincerely, announced by the then Minister for Ian Knox AC, VADM (RAN Ret) Defence on 20 January 2006. It is most Last words... unlikely that any consideration will be from HMAS Sydney 1941 57 given to changing them now. The Global Maritime Partnership John Perryman, CSM and the Aegis Global Enterprise: Senior Naval Historical Officer Australia at the Crossroads of the Sea Power Centre - Australia “Maritime Century” 58 Book Reviews 65 Front page photograph: Hundreds of family and friends welcomed the 230 crew of HMAS Visions from the Vault 75 Melbourne home to Sydney after a six month deployment in the Middle East. (ABIS Sarah Williams, Navy Imagery Unit - East). ANI On-line Guide 76 Issue Number 140 Style Notes for Headmark 77 Printed by Everbest Printing SPONSORS: Company Australian Naval Institute Info 78 - RAYTHEON - BOOZ & COMPANY - AUSTAL ISSN 1833-6531 - THALES NAVAL GROUP - DMS MARITME - QINETIQ ANI Membership Application Form 79 Design & DTP by - AUSTRALIAN DEFENCE CREDIT UNION - ATI - LOPAC - SAAB Diane Bricknell www.diartist.com.au Journal of the Australian Naval Institute 4 A Common Platform for a New AO, AOR & Sealift Support Ship BY COMMANDER GAVIN BAKER he Royal Australian Navy has a long history of operational success Tthat is based upon the professionalism of our people and the capabilities of our equipment. This success has been, for the most part, as a result of the capacity of the RAN to deploy into distant theatres and support our forces while they are there. As we look into the future, this need to be deployable is not going to change.1 However, the costs, both in financial terms and in human resources, are going to become increasingly more difficult to support. One way to reduce rising costs might be to adopt a policy of commonality Canberra-class at wherever possible. Recent discussions of each ship’s specific role, but the an engineer to progress through an launch (Department concerning this approach have capacity and capability that the basic entire technical career and never go to of Defence) focussed on the proposed Offshore hull provides will meet the RAN’s sea in any other Combatant Vessels.2 requirements for all five ships. ship. It is suggested that a similar The approach to commonality could RAN ecent R History problems with be adopted for the RAN’s fleet of this are obvious: amphibious and logistic support ships. Across the span of the RAN’s history the sailor Specifically, it is suggested that the we have been required to deploy ships in question adoption of a hull form; engineering far from our shores. To do this we have develops configuration; and command, control needed ships specifically designed to professionally & communications (C3) system for support those deployments. Without without the HMAS SUCCESS the new AO, AOR and Sealift Support exception, these essential ships have benefit of experiencing different undergoing final painting in 2007 Ship common to those of the Canberra been more different than they have systems and different ways of (Courtesy RAN) Class LPD would offer substantial been alike. One only has to look at life; problem solving approaches advantages over a fleet comprising the current disparate group of ships become entrenched; and personnel three or four completely different ship providing the critical, often high- management skills focus on “the way types. profile, support to operations both it has always been done here.” On the It is not suggested that we at sea and ashore to recognise the corporate side of the question, the should acquire five LPDs, but rather challenges to training and crewing that sailor can only be effectively employed that all five ships, that are likely to they represent. in one platform without substantial comprise the RAN’s amphibious The most obvious example of additional training and experience; and afloat support fleet, be designed these challenges is provided by drastically limiting posting options. and built upon a common hull and HMAS Success where, as a result of engineering layout. This is not to say her completely unique engineering T he Opportunity that all five hulls would (or should) be plant and the commensurately unique identical. Superstructure and internal training and experience required to Recently, the decision was taken to configuration are bound to change to operate that plant, it is possible (and acquire the two ships of the Canberra meet the operational requirements more efficient for the organisation) for Class. These are state-of-the-art ships Journal of the Australian Naval Institute Issue 140 5 with modern propulsion plants and C3 operations specialists; four discrete ship-sets of equipment suites that offer great potential to be • postings and career fitted in five different platforms. For upgraded as required to meet changing progression; example, there is very little in common fleet requirements, while retaining an • maintenance and support; and between the training of an engineering essential fleet-wide commonality. The • whole-ship DC training. watch keeper for HMAS Success when size and layout of these ships, taken in compared to HMAS Sirius. concert with the fundamental flexibility An excellent example of using this Additionally, while simulators are offered by their modern systems, design philosophy to great advantage recognised as a cost effective method provides the RAN with an opportunity is provided by the US Navy through of providing training, the RAN would to adopt, over the course of the normal the decision to build Ticonderoga need four separate ship simulators just platform acquisition cycle, a common Class cruisers on the basic hull and to train the personnel posted to the hull, engineering configuration and C3 engineering layout of the Spruance five ships under discussion. Juxtapose suite across the entire amphibious and Class destroyer. this with the situation we have the afloat support fleet. If this opportunity opportunity to realise where all five were to be sacrificed on the alter of Training of marine engineers, electrical ships’ companies could be trained on short-term reductions, the enduring engineers and operations specialists one set of simulators. Suddenly, there detriment to the whole Navy would are real financial benefits to be had. affect us for an entire generation as we The fundamentals of any trade can be, Similarly, training provided continued to struggle with the financial and are, taught as part of the normal onboard to the vast majority of sailors and personnel costs of supporting an training and education of sailors at in the marine engineering, electrical unnecessarily diverse fleet. shore establishments across Australia. engineering and operations branches However, the specifics of operating and would be equally applicable to any one Advantages maintaining the systems peculiar to a of the other four common platforms in particular ship must be done either in the fleet.