• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Transfield Shipbuilding 'Joint Patrol Vessel' design proposal of 1990's

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
G'day gents
I'm looking for information, drawings, pictures of models..... of the Tranfield Shipbuilding 'Joint Patrol Vessel' design submission for the Joint Australian/Malaysian program of the 1990's. The program originally entailed the need for 27 vessels for Malaysia and 12 vessels for Australia.
Unfortunately this program didn't come to fruition, with Malaysia choosing a modified German Blohm and Voss Meko 100 design and Australia settling for an inferior and cheaper Patrol boat and using its own Meko-based ANZAC class Frigate as a Patrol vessel.

Any input will be greatly appreciated!

Regards
Pioneet
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
I was sure someone had posted this on here previously but here it is, Pg 10 is the story and details.
http://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/The-Navy-Vol_58_Part2-1996.pdf

An old boss of mine was the project manager on the OPC/IPV and then ended up as GM for DMS in the NT on the Armidales (an RAn acquaintance refers to them as "Coke Cans")
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
Thank you Volkodav!
Interesting article!
If only we'd built these types of more purposeful and sea-going vessels, instead the rechart Armidale's! (alas this was just as much politics as its intended design!) :(
Now if I can only work out how to extract the drawings from the PDF :eek:

Regards
Pioneer
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
The Armidales were actually less warship like than the preceding Fremantles that were designed as FAC (there was even a plan to order an additional batch fitted with missiles), or even the Attack Class. Structurally there shouldn't be allowed too far from safe harbour when sea state 5 is expected, dynamically they can handle it, they are actually very comfortable sea boats, but it breaks them.

The Corvettes, even if they had been completed as for but not with, i.e. no Mk 41 / ESSM, no harpoon, and a 25mm in place of the planned 57mm SAK 2, would have actually worked out cheaper for the tax payer than the decision to delay replacing the Fremantles then going for a hybrid commercial design. They would have lasted longer, been capable of longer patrols in harsher weather, been able to patrol regions that the RAN has had to assign major combatants instead and could even have been used for some international obligations instead of destroyers or frigates. Building them would also have prevented the atrophying of Australia's shipbuilding capability that was the root cause of the majority of the local issues with the AWD program (some of the other problems are a different matter and could only have been avoided by licence building a modified Flight IIA AB or something German rather than any of the actual final contenders).

Keeping shipbuilding going at Williamstown and keeping the team that delivered AFP and ANZAC programs successfully together alone would have saved more than the cost overruns on the AWD let alone the cost of the substandard ACPBs. It also likely would have provided the sort of critical mass that would have made full local construction of the LHDs possible as well as the AOR replacements. All fantasy land now but worth looking at when making future decisions as it shows that the cheaper option often isn't.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
I agree with your analogy Volkodav!! ;)

Regards
Pioneer
 

rodney

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
I have a copy of the PDF from Tenix showing the corvette details, I'll try posting it for you.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
Thank you Rodney, that would be much appreciated mate!

Regards
Pioneer
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
That would be great Rodney, I've had a long interest in this project as it was the result of a defence review that actually demanded and increase in numbers and capability of combatants based on geography, i.e. what was needed to secure Australian interests in the event of conflict or incursion by an unfriendly power into our region through controlling, keeping open, or if necessary closing chokepoints.
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,739
Reaction score
11
Now if I can only work out how to extract the drawings from the PDF :eek:
Here you go...quality's not great, but it's a start.
To extract images, or text, from a PDF, open the file in your favourite PDF reader, use the 'Snapshot' function to grab the image, then paste it into a graphics program, to re-size, enhance, etc., then ultimately save it...

cheers,
Robin.
 

Attachments

RIPPER

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Jun 10, 2007
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
I have saved some images over the years about the OPC\IPV from Transfield.
Included is a better scan of it.
I have also included some information of the Tenix designs.
These images are from The Navy League of Australia Magazine and Shipbucket.
 

Attachments

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
Thanks for that, I hadn't seen a lot of those before.

Interesting isn't it that the full blown corvette wasn't far short of an ANZAC / MEKO 200 ANZ patrol frigate in capability. It would have been intriguing to see an ASMD type upgrade (CAEFAR, VAMPIR, upgraded SAAB combat system) on the platform, had it proceeded.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
Thank you robunos for you tip on PDF and for actually posting exert drawings!!
Regards
Pioneer
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
That you Ripper for your fine contributions, like
Colloidal, I too had not seen these brochures/drawings before!

Regards
Pioneer
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
Volkodav said:
Thanks for that, I hadn't seen a lot of those before.

Interesting isn't it that the full blown corvette wasn't far short of an ANZAC / MEKO 200 ANZ patrol frigate in capability. It would have been intriguing to see an ASMD type upgrade (CAEFAR, VAMPIR, upgraded SAAB combat system) on the platform, had it proceeded.
Yes, you make an interesting point Volkodav!
I very much think much money and capability was lost on the politics of the ANZAC class frigates as half-hearted acquisitions. For although capable designs in practice, they were negated their true capabilities and used as glorified patrol frigates as such (until both the RAN and government's realised the Oliver Hazard Perry's would need complementing/replacement) - this is underlined by they're years of adequate weapons fit, including combat capable helicopters.
I'm still of the opinion that the RAN could have/should have had corvette sized OPV no greater than 70-75m design. Pity, and costly exercise which still hasn't been resolved.

Regards
Pioneer
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
Pioneer said:
Volkodav said:
Thanks for that, I hadn't seen a lot of those before.

Interesting isn't it that the full blown corvette wasn't far short of an ANZAC / MEKO 200 ANZ patrol frigate in capability. It would have been intriguing to see an ASMD type upgrade (CAEFAR, VAMPIR, upgraded SAAB combat system) on the platform, had it proceeded.
Yes, you make an interesting point Volkodav!
I very much think much money and capability was lost on the politics of the ANZAC class frigates as half-hearted acquisitions. For although capable designs in practice, they were negated their true capabilities and used as glorified patrol frigates as such (until both the RAN and government's realised the Oliver Hazard Perry's would need complementing/replacement) - this is underlined by they're years of adequate weapons fit, including combat capable helicopters.
I'm still of the opinion that the RAN could have/should have had corvette sized OPV no greater than 70-75m design. Pity, and costly exercise which still hasn't been resolved.

Regards
Pioneer
When initially planned the ANZACs were meant to be to be part of an increase in numbers and a switch in priority from primary ASW to a more anti surface slant, i.e. the Penguin requirement for the planned shipboard helicopter for the ANZACs and corvettes.

Escort numbers, though consistently planned to be around twenty, with or without carrier(s), were rarely ever more than a dozen post war. With the retirement of Melbourne they were planned to increase to 17, nine tier 1 (DDGs and FFGs), eight tier 2 (patrol frigates) and about a dozen tier 3 (corvettes). With nine (later reduced to eight then four and finally three) guided missile destroyers and frigates that as a minimum would have been replaced by FFGs with an equivalent to NTU standard and hence, at the time, second only to AEGIS in capability, twenty ships (eight PFs and 12 corvettes) with ESSM, Harpoon and helicopters armed with Penguin would have been more than adequate.

The problem wasn't so much that bigger, better, ships should have been acquired than the ANZACs, or even that a smaller number of more specialised (ASW) ships acquired as a one for one replacement for the River class, but rather that the more capable replacements for the DDGs and FFGs didn't eventuate, forcing the ANZACs to fill roles they were never intended too. They were more than adequate for what they were intended for and, as has been shown, could be upgraded extensively, the problem was the timely replacement of the DDGs and the US built FFGs was cancelled, while the FFGUP, that was intended to cover the gap between the retirement of the DDGs and the arrival of their eventual replacements, went way over budget and schedule and was cut back to only four ships. This meant the workload and roles meant to be covered by fourteen major and twelve minor combatants instead was left to the eight ANZACs plus Adelaide and Canberra with the Fremantles being useless and the Armidales worse than useless, they were dangerous.

What made things worse was when the government cancelled the corvettes and deferred the DDG/FFG replacement it was on the assumption that the required capability would be filled by six upgraded FFGs and eight ANZAC WIPs (ANZACs upgraded with AEGIS SYS-1F and SM-2). They thought they could get away with not having to order any new combatants until the 2010s, the impossibility of ANZAC WIP plus the wakeup call of Timor resulted in the belated kick off of the AWD program at the time the government was starting to realise that the FFGUP was in trouble too, throw in the problems with the Super Sea Sprite and MU-90 and the RAN was in serious trouble.

The ANZACs were trying to do everything while most of the FFGs were tied up in the troubled FFGUP, the AWDs were years away and the Perths long retired, whoops. Add in the troubles with the Armidales that have led to their early replacement, the damage done to the AWD program by letting Australian shipbuilding whither, as well as the chaos caused by letting obsolescence of the fleet come to a head in the 2010s I just can't help but wonder if would have been cheaper to have built the corvettes after the ANZACs as planned and maybe three or four Flight IIA Burkes in the 2000s without FFGUP, then spend the 2010s replacing the amphibs and tankers before moving to an ANZAC replacement in the 2020s.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
1,667
Reaction score
35
Once again, very interesting Volkodav!
It differently sounds like we were trying to have two bites of the cherry, which has come back and bitten the RAN/ADF.
It probably also begs the question whether we should have bought the Kidd class as a replacement for the Charles F. Adams class?
I think the modern RAN 'over ambition/expectation'.
Would I be right in thinking that this Transfield PV could have lead to them becoming somewhat little pocket battleships of sorts, when one considers the increasing size/displacement/armament from the original 'Joint Patrol Vessele' conception - for as Ripper contribution shows, the design ends up at 85m in length.

Regards
Pioneer
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
116
Reaction score
1
At the time the Kidds were on offer second hand ships had a bad rep because of the experience with Kanimbla and Manoora (even though that was Australia's fault for not moving quickly enough to secure the original pair that had been surveyed and selected), but the government also stated at the time that buying the Kidds would impact plans for the FFGUP as two FFGs would have to be retired early and not be upgraded for crewing reasons if the ships were acquired. This is ironic as two FFGs were retired early due to problems with the upgrade program anyway and the Kidds, as is from the USN, were far more capable than the upgraded FFGs without any further upgrade or modernisation having recently received the comprehensive USN New Threat Upgrade. There was also a concern that buying them would result in a delay in any new construction for the RAN causing a decline in shipbuilding capability.

So as I understand it the Kidds were refused because, although recently upgraded and being the most capable non AEGIS destroyers in service, it would see three DDGs and two FFGs replaced by only four (admittedly much more capable) ships, it would take work away from Australias shipyards, and the government (who were seriously considering buying the RNs Upholder Class subs at the time and were in very bad materiel condition) didn't want to buy second hand because they were afraid they would be in poor condition. So instead we saw three DDGs and six FFGs effectively replaced by only three AWDs almost twenty years (probably the expected life span of the Kidds) later and the ANZACs and remaining four FFGs, neither as capable as a Kidd, run into the ground and surface combatant number decreased and the local shipbuilding industry had to be rebuilt, yet again, after being starved of work.

Basically in hindsight, the reasons for not buying the Kidds have been shown to have been wrong. The same applies for the reasoning behind not building three Flight IIA Burkes in time to replace the Perth Class DDGs and not pursuing a stretched ANZAC to replace first four FFGs. Actually on the stretched ANZAC, plans for that ranged from a basic ship using some recycled and some new systems in what was literally a lengthened ANZAC hull (looking at what has been achieved with the ANZAC ASMD, imagine what could have been done with a larger hull using an up-scaled CEAFAR system), through an enhanced multi-role F123 (with SM-2) derivative, to a new design that was an ANZAC in name alone. It also ranged from eight ships replacing both the DDGs and FFGs to just the FFGs or only the first four FFGs with Burkes, either locally built or procured from the US replacing the DDGs.

The governments of the 90s and 2000s had a multitude of options and twenty years to revitalise the RAN, they also had continuous growth from the early 90s that continues today, as well as half a trillion dollars in unbudgeted extra tax revenues from the mining construction boom and somehow managed to stuff up every program, almost kill the local industry, leave the RAN short of ships and relying on overage vessels, that were falling apart because of under investment in maintenance, and the fact the industry and RAN engineering capability had been gutted as a cost saving. Even without any extra funding the amount of money that was spent with virtually nothing to show for it would likely have been sufficient to do all the things that should have been done with change left over.
 
Top