NEWS: RAN Amphibious Fleet Neglected to Point of Inoperability

[kookaburra]

This article in the Fairfax papers [The Age/Sydney Morning Herald] today is a little like Jackaroo's HMAS Manoora thread, but news, and wider. Very concerning. It received quite a big display in Melbourne's AGE today.

_________________________________
Fatal accident fears over neglected navy fleet By Dan Oakes
February 16, 2011

AUSTRALIA'S multibillion-dollar amphibious warfare fleet has been neglected to the point where sailors could have been killed if the two largest ships had not been taken out of operation.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith admitted yesterday that the navy had ''effectively failed'' to keep the fleet seaworthy and ready for action.

Mr Smith revealed that Defence chiefs had told him if HMAS Kanimbla and HMAS Manoora had not been taken out of action, an accident equivalent to the 2005 Sea King helicopter crash in which nine Australian servicemen and women died might have occurred.

The Defence Force has been left virtually incapable of mounting an operation by sea with the decommissioning of the rusty Manoora and the indefinite docking of its sister ship, Kanimbla.

A third ship, the smaller HMAS Tobruk, is also incapacitated, and could not be used in the cyclone Yasi relief operation.

Their fate means a bridging solution is needed between now and 2015, when two huge ships called landing helicopter docks will become operational. Defence is investigating buying a ship from Britain's Royal Navy to fill the gap, and will also share a New Zealand Navy ship in the interim.

Speaking yesterday at an Australian Defence Magazine conference in Canberra, Mr Smith said following the Manoora's enforced docking that he had asked the Chief of the Defence Force, Angus Houston, and Defence Department secretary Ian Watt for answers about the state of the amphibious program.

''Their advice, which I am releasing today, was a frank appraisal and identifies systemic and cultural problems in the maintenance of our amphibious ship fleet for over a decade or more,'' he said.

''It outlines the adverse side effects of a 'can do' and 'make do' culture and a lack of sufficient adherence to verification, certification and assurance processes.

''It outlines a perception that major support ships are not subject to the same level of risk as submarines and aircraft, almost a perception that HMAS Manoora and HMAS Kanimbla are second-tier ships. It outlines insufficient resources being applied to address shortcomings.''

Air Chief Marshal Houston and Mr Watt reported that outsourcing of maintenance, lack of resources, operational pressures and crew shortages had combined to render the ships useless. ''While the current situation is unpalatable, the decision to invoke an operational pause was correct and necessary,'' they said. ''Had this not occurred, it would not be unreasonable to predict an increased risk of a Sea King sort of accident in 2005, which killed nine of our ADF people.''

The navy announced in September that Kanimbla and Manoora had been sidelined, but refused to explain why, referring only to an ''operational pause''. However, it was an open secret in the Defence community that the two ships were riddled with rust and were unlikely to take to sea again.

Mr Smith yesterday announced that an inquiry into the amphibious ships debacle would be headed by Paul Rizzo, the chairman of the Independent Defence Audit and Risk Committee and director of various Australian corporations.

The minister cautioned against blaming current Defence personnel, saying the seeds of the problems had been sown years ago. He acknowledged further reforms were needed.

[mstary1]

This story has made the sailors in the RAN very angry.

We never wanted them in the first place. They were rust buckets the RAN advised against purchasing. Yet to save a buck, the Defence Minister at the time, "Bomber" Beazley went ahead anyway. The money spend on the modifications and Rust removal was enormous. When I went aboard Kanimbla, I was shocked that these were frontline units and not future Sinkex candidates. The fact that the Navy got them this far considering the operational tempo is a credit to them.

And while we're at it, I am also angry about knocking the RAN on Maintenance issues. The sailors training has been dumbed down to the point where stokers are no more than oil lever checkers. They are not allowed to do any intensive work without contractor support. When an RAN ship broke down when I was seaman, ships staff could manage repairs themselves in most cases. Stokers were admired for their prowess in getting the job done. Now they have less qualifications, training times are very short and as I said, the RAN is now a contractors dream.
"Dibbies" don't paint now either. On Minehunters, contractors do it all. For gods sake, when the RAN reverted to black and white on hull numbers, Contractors were called in to repaint them!


The The Defence Minister should look at what the RAN is given to work with, the training provided before slinging off. Defence is a huge money spinner for Civilian contractors from everything to gate security to catering to basic maintenance. Money is so tight, even ordering in rope can take 6 months!

Inhouse joke, we call the RAN "His Majesties Thales Navy"

*Rant off*

[kookaburra]

you make two excellent points mstary1. The Fairfax County/Kanimbla Class ships WERE regarded as in disgraceful condition when they arrived here, and as an outsider who has observed some of this, the contractor disease that you speak of is bewildering.

Perhaps it's a response in part to manning problems, but you really wonder if there is anything other than a bean counter mentality behind it. Not only are contractors painting ships now, they're OPERATING ships [such as 'Seahorse Mercator' - the navigational training vessel, and others. That ship is based at HMAS Waterhen, so we have a partially-privatised Navy.

One wonders whether the concept of the navy as a fully found defence service is unravelling,and whether there now remains a philosophy behind it at all. The public hasn't been consulted about any of this, and the Defence Department is by far the most wasteful, inefficient arm of the government.

[John O'Callaghan]

Hi All! Never mind about the view of second tier ships.The Navy is in danger of becoming a second tier service. We buy second hand worn out junk and spend a fortune on trying to make do. Crews are put in a position of being unable to properly maintain and operate their ships. There is an emphasis on paygrades being streamed into 'Combat' and 'Support' ('Non Combat'?) ratings. With, I'm sure, some sailors being surprised to discover that if a ship goes into an operational zone they are all in the same ship and will be exposed to 'Combat' regardless of job.
We appear to have learned little from modern operations where 'Contractors' have been employed to carry out tasks the military should be doing. After the contractors have been proven to be unable to do the job. Or have totally stuffed it up at great expense monitarily and politically. Surprise! Surprise the serviceman or woman then has to fix what they should have been doing all along.
Cheers John O'C.

[Jackaroo]

From the ABC Radio AM program

Amphibious ships fleet

SABRA LANE: Minister, good morning. Welcome to AM.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thank you.

SABRA LANE: How angry were you when you found out that the Tobruk was unfit for service just days after you announced Manoora's decommissioning and Kanimbla's long-term unavailability.

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, I've seen references to my anger. A couple of things: firstly, it is not about me. I expressed my disappointment privately as I did publicly but the most important thing when you are dealing with these issues is how one responds, how do we respond? And what we've tried to do is to make sure firstly that we get a comprehensive new transition plan for our amphibious fleet. And I've indicated publicly that we are looking, for example, at leasing or buying a Bay Class from the United Kingdom.

We've agreed enhanced arrangements with New Zealand in terms of joint use in our region of the HMNZS Canterbury. But we need to, as I've said to Defence, all options are on the table in terms of bridging this capability gap. That is the first point.

Secondly, I was very keen to ensure that we had a very close look at how we had come to this. So I got formal advice from the Secretary of the Defence Department and the Chief of the Defence Force and I published that yesterday. And I've asked now Mr Rizzo, supported by two former Navy and Air Force personnel, to essentially do a due diligence on how we work our way through a reform program so that this never happens again.

SABRA LANE: You say you won't talk about being angry but surely you must be disappointed? And were you misinformed when the Defence Chief told you that the Tobruk was leaving dock and ready for service when in fact it wasn't and it is still out of action?

STEPHEN SMITH: I've said publicly and privately that I was disappointed. In the case of the Tobruk I detailed yesterday the changing advice that I have received and I am disappointed that what I was told, effectively, at the end of January and the beginning of February has not materialised so far as the Tobruk is concerned.

But it is also clearly the case that both with Manoora, Kanimbla and also I believe with the Tobruk, these are not issues which have emerged in the last few months or the last few years. They are of long standing - a decade and a half or more.

A very important initiative of the Chief of Navy was the establishment of the Seaworthiness Board and really, it was the report of the Seaworthiness Board in September last year which brought these issues into a real focus and there will be a lag effect.

The reform by the Chief of Navy is a good one. That, I think, will help ensure we don't see this situation again, but there will be lag effects.

SABRA LANE: What percentage of the entire fleet is able to perform to 100 per cent of its capabilities now, including the Collins Class subs?

STEPHEN SMITH: Look I think, you know, I have made this point before. It is a faulty basis and a faulty starting point to assert that every ship that Navy has needs to be in the water at the same time. They are often on training, being enhanced with additional combat systems, or they are under sensible maintenance.

SABRA LANE: Sure, people would appreciate that. But how many of them are 100 per cent capable to go out now?

STEPHEN SMITH: Two points: firstly Navy has met all of its tasked operational assignments over the last 12 months. That is very important. We do have very significant challenges on submarines, which is of long standing and well known and I don't seek to underestimate those challenges.

We have ongoing maintenance and operation issues with the Collins Class submarines and we have a significant problem with the amphibious fleet but despite those two significant issues, as I say, the Chief of Navy advises me that Navy has been able to perform all of its assigned operational tasking over the last 12 months, and that is obviously a very good thing.

SABRA LANE: But are you able to give us a figure or you can't?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, firstly in terms of the amphibious fleet, I have made that as transparent as humanly possible. Indeed, some commentators have said more transparent that any Minister before me, including publishing very frank advice I received from the Chief of the Defence Force and the Secretary.

In terms of submarines, I don't in advance indicate the precise detail or nature of operational readiness. We do that after the event. I don't do it for current purposes or in advance for all of the obvious operational reasons.

But we publish on a regular basis the operational capability and capacity of our submarines on a regular basis and I again underline and reinforce, we have significant long standing operational and maintenance challenges so far as our submarine fleet is concerned.

SABRA LANE: Will heads roll over this?

STEPHEN SMITH: I think there is a general point here that I made yesterday. I received yesterday formally from Dr Rufus Black his report on accountability. We have very significant accountability issues in Defence. There is a lack of institutional accountability; there is a lack of personal accountability and this will form a very strong feature of the reform program which I will introduce in the next few months.

SABRA LANE: Mr Smith, thanks for your time.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thank you. Thanks very much.

[kookaburra]

Some more of the coverage from The Australian: I think the radio interview transcript Jackaroo has posted below is illuminating. And I'm reminded that it was a contractor's poor flexible fuel line work that caused the HMAS Westralia fire, costing four lives.

The pieces in The Australian...

Fast ferry solution urged for navy to plug hole in amphibious fleet

By Mark Dodd

The Australian February 16,

THE federal government should move quickly to plug a hole in the navy's amphibious ship-lift capability by leasing or buying a locally-built high-speed catamaran, a respected defence think tank says.

The acquisition of a catamaran like the Tasmanian-built Jervis Bay, leased during the 1999 East Timor crisis, would be a useful addition to the Royal Australian Navy fleet, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Andrew Davies said.

Yesterday, Defence Minister Stephen Smith lashed his own department over its failure to keep its ships seaworthy and maintain a deployable heavy-lift amphibious capability.

Dr Davies, director of ASPI's operations and capability program, said experience gained during the five-year lease of the Jervis Bay was proof of the military viability of commercial high-speed catamarans.

“This seems to be a situation where considerable national capability can be acquired for a relatively small outlay,” he said.


Related CoverageMcHale's navy The Australian, 18 hours ago
Stephen Smith coy on Navy fleet's readiness The Australian, 1 day ago
Minister's broadside at navy rust-buckets Adelaide Now, 1 day ago
Navy ships 'treated as 2nd class' Courier Mail, 1 day ago
Smith lashes Defence over navy failings The Australian, 1 day ago
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
It would take more than 12 months for the lease or purchase of a surplus Royal Navy bay class amphibious support vessel from Britain, Dr Davies warned.

He said the Jervis Bay example showed the capability could be achieved more easily through the lease of a high-speed commercial vessel.

“The RAN could acquire a capability that is not just useful for the smaller jobs that do not require the capabilities of a large vessel, but would gain considerable flexibility in terms of the speed and concurrency of deployments, including the wherewithal to augment the LHDs (new Canberra class) with what is essentially a fast ferry service.”


YESTERDAY

Minister attacks navy over maintenance of its amphibious support vessels

Mark Dodd

The Australian February 15, 2011

DEFENCE Minister Stephen Smith has condemned the navy's "make-do" culture that has left the country's amphibious support fleet unable to put to sea because of sub-standard maintenance and poor command oversight.
Addressing the problems, Mr Smith today announced the appointment of an independent team of experts to report and oversee warship seaworthiness and maintenance.

Speaking at a defence seminar in Canberra, Mr Smith said corrosion and propulsion problems facing the 40-year-old, 8,500 tonne HMAS Manoora were so extensive its $20 million repair bill could not be justified and the ship would be decommissioned.

Its sister ship HMAS Kanimbla required “substantial remediation work”, was in deep maintenance for similar problems, would not put to sea until 2012 and would be paid off soon after.

Mr Smith said the navy needed to quickly sort out its fleet maintenance challenges before the arrival of the first Spanish-designed Canberra class amphibious assault ships - at 27,000 tonnes gross displacement the largest warships ever operated by the navy.

Mr Smith said a report by defence chief Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston and Defence Department secretary Ian Watt into the reasons for the maintenance failures of the amphibious fleet made for grim reading.

“Their advice, which I'm releasing today, was a frank appraisal which identifies systemic and cultural problems in the maintenance of our amphibious ship fleet for over a decade or more,” Mr Smith said.

“It outlines the side effects of a can-do and make-do culture and a lack of sufficient adherence to verification, certification and assurance processes.

“It outlines a perception that major support ships are not subject to the same level of risk as submarines and aircraft - almost a perception that Manoora and Kanimbla are second-tier ships.”

Mr Smith said he would be as frank in public as he was in private in expressing his disappointment about the situation.

He said maintenance and sustainment must be “bread and butter” issues for Defence, the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO), for the navy and for the defence industry.

With Manoora and Kanimbla in “operational pause” Mr Smith said he was assured by the navy that the 5,800 tonne heavy landing ship HMAS Tobruk would be ready for possible support work in the wake of Cyclone Yasi and could put to sea within 48 hours notice.

But this was untrue and the warship required additional maintenance details of which he had not been advised.

[The] Navy is still currently unable to put to sea a heavy amphibious support vessel, but talks were underway with Britain for a possible purchase or lease of a surplus 16,000-tonne bay class landing ship dock to provide a bridging amphibious capability until the arrival of the first Canberra class vessel, Mr Smith said.

However federal opposition defence spokesman David Johnston said the announcement of a review to sort out the maintenance fiasco did not address the core problems in Defence.

“The fact is after the recent cyclone in Queensland we may have needed our amphibious ships up there but we find out we don't have any that are seaworthy - why isn't anybody being held accountable for this?

“I think that the defence minister himself has been ambushed by his own department, who never disclose to anybody the parlous state of their vessels and continue to obfuscate on this issue,” he said.

The new expert team will be led by prominent business figure Paul Rizzo, the chair of the defence audit and risk committee. He will be supported by Air Vice Marshal Neil Smith (retired) and Rear Admiral Brian Adams (retired), both of whom have extensive experience in marine engineering and logistics.

[mstary1]

I think the trend started when the operation of small boat in the RAN was contracted out to Defence Maritime Service. At first many people left the RAN to work for DMS so the level of co-operation and experience was first rate.
Over the years I have seen that decline to the point where DMS are looked at as another contractor tier that offer second rate support. I have sent over Zodiacs away for repair that come back with the repair not undertaken.

Just recently I had a incident where DMS let the side down. We had a major problem and asked DMS for help in which they refused to budge without the Navy paying for it in writing. Time was of the essence so my boss came up with a quick plan to fix the issue. it was strictly not out of the book but worked a treat. DMS came out and laughed at our attempt and stated they were getting their cameras out for "Funniest Home Videos". they were left disappointed when said operation worked.

The Irony was the following week DMS had their own issue when one of their towed targets sank at it's mooring and they were having major issues getting it raised and towed alongside. My boss went down with his camera and a very irate DMS chap went off, stating " Commercial in confidence". My boss quipped " Funniest Home videoes %$#@%" and walked off laughing. He did however show true navy spirit and went down and offered help and support a few minutes later.

I know Many DMS chaps and most a splendid, but it's all part of the problem of Navy not running Navy. We should manage ALL out boats. Our people need to be trained to deal with ANY engineering problem. Our security should be our problem not Chubb security.

catering should be Navy cooks, not Serco, whose food is awful. We eat much better at sea with our own troops running the messes. I understand the reason for the changes back then. Due to low numbers, we had to get more people to sea. So may support jobs were contracted out to ease the numbers shortage. I wish to see the RAN as it was. Not a mixture of uniform and civilian personnel. Back then, if we stuffed up, it was no fault but our own. Now when Contractors get it wrong, the blame is hung on the uniformed personnel.

Bottom line is Kanimbla and Manoora should never have been purchased. Tobruk should of been replaced years ago. You get the ships you pay for!
Our Government blow billions on Pink Batts, Plasma TV's for everyone, school halls and other silliness yet won't pay for defence assets that are sorely needed in times of disaster relief.

Seeing HMAS Canberra being launched fills me with hope that we can get the assets we need. I have much faith in Steven Smith as Defence Minister as he seems capable. Let's hope for a reversal of the Navy's fortunes and we have the RAN we once had.

[kersim]

Hi all,

Well here goes for my first post and as I was an "original" crew member on these vessels I think it's a good place to start...

Isn't it funny how in 1994 the then LABOUR government were told by numerous sources that these vessels were shite - and don't buy them...!!! Yet now the CURRENT Labour government is jumping up and down saying how dare they be unseaworthy...

The one thing is clear is that "they" (they being the admiralty without balls to defend their troops, the media, and the politicians) seem to forget that over the last 10-15 years of consistent war, conflicts, peacekeeping, humanitarian missions and an Op Tempo not seen since the second world war, that the amphibious fleet is probably the most decorated and "active service" fleet since WW2. AND they all seem to forget that there is another 6 commissioned members of this highly decorated amphibious fleet that can be called upon.

The government and the powers at be, also seem to forget that they ORDERED the troops on the ground to stop spending money; including on maintenance of vessels (I have a good source at a higher rank inside the Fleet Support Unit (the old FIMA) that is responsible for the maintenance of these vessels). Now that "they" want their assets in full working order because of unforeseen events (and no doubt a bit of good PR amongst other things), surely the realisation will come to the fore that you can't run a modern military on a shoe string budget.

Bring on the new LHD and the replacement of the LCH's

Anyone got Defence Ministers Smiths email address to forward my thoughts on to

Cheers

ST

[mstary1]

Welcome Kersim.

Your dead right mate. For such an operational temp, you need modern ships capable of logging long hours at sea. Not 40 year old rust buckets bought at a flea market!

Canberra and Adelaide will we welcomed and once worked up, spend alot of time at sea. The crews of Kanimbla and Manoora have done their best as as far as I'm concerned, done us proud. What a difference when said crews march up the gangway of Canberra and view their new draft. As for the pollies, well they need to take their share of the blame with cost cutting instead of this hypocritical attitude of laying blame elsewhere.

In the 19 years I have done so far in the RAN, I have never witnessed so much
pressure to save a buck.

[spruso]

When these ships were bought a friend of mine, a civvy, was assigned, because of the new OH&S regulations, to work with a team of refitters on, I think Kanimbla, at Garden Island. Sydney. He was issued with a fire extinguisher and had to stand by the workers in case of a fire.

He mentioned to me at the time that he had never seen so much rust in a ship and very much doubted if they would ever be fully serviceable. He said they should rename the ship HMAS Lemon!

His statement seemed not too far wide of the mark.

Cheers
Bruce

[deejay]

Having followed this issue with interest and disbelief I still have difficulty accepting that a friendly nation would do this to an ally. I hope Australia learns from this and the choice offuture. suppliers thoroughly vetted. Spain seems a good place to shop and no doubt the RAN will get their monies worth with reliable and long lasting vessels.
Better still of course , design and construct at home. Oz has got it all to do this, brains and material and the country is renowned for innovation and new ideas. Perhaps there is a need for this (innovation and new ideas) in the halls of power as that seems to be the stumbling block. Be good to see the RAN back in business with the new ships.

[kookaburra]

The issues received an airing again last night with two segments on the influential ABC-TV program The 7-30 Report.

First was a review of the amphibious ships maintenance issue - not much new, but a few points. Steel in HMAS Tobruk's hull was reported to be down to 2mm thick in places, rather than the required standard of at least 10mm.

The second element was a follow-up interview with Defence Minister Stephen Smith, who leaves for the U.K. today to look at available Bay Class heavy lift ships for lease or acquisition, among other possibilities.

Below, a link to the report for however long it remains online, and may not be viewable outside Australia. Hence, transcripts also of both segments.

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/

And here are transcripts:


Australia's rust bucket armada

Broadcast: 07/03/2011

Reporter: Hayden Cooper

Was the Defence Minister misled when the Navy insisted it had one heavy transport ship fit to sail during the Queensland cyclone?

Transcript
LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: The Department of Defence has a longstanding reputation for waste, mismanagement and a lack of accountability. Tonight, 7.30 has a close look at one recent case. Why were the Navy's key transport ships missing in action over summer as Cyclone Yasi bore down on the Queensland coast?

To give some context first though, the Defence Department makes one of the biggest calls on the public purse; $27 billion this financial year. There are currently 11 Defence projects with a combined worth of $10 billion running over time and over budget. For example, there's the Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft, approved 14 years ago and still not airworthy. There are the Overlander field vehicles, constantly delayed and still at testing stage. And, the Collins Class submarines with huge maintenance issues.

Over summer, the Defence Minister's patience with his department was tested to its limits when he was repeatedly told that the only available transport ship was sea-worthy when it wasn't.

7.30 can confirm the HMAS Tobruk was so riddled with rust that in places its hull was just two millimetres thick. Here's Hayden Cooper.

HAYDEN COOPER, REPORTER: At Sydney's Garden Island naval base, three of the nation's most crucial defence assets sit idle. These are the Navy's ageing hulks, the heavy lift transport ships that put troops on the ground around the world.

So it's a pretty important vessel for not only the Navy, but the entire Defence Force?

NAVAL OFFICER: Yeah, massive - for Australia.

HAYDEN COOPER: But if these ships are the very backbone of the force, how is it that all three were out of action at the same time, just as Cyclone Yasi was threatening North Queensland?

JAMES BROWN, LOWY INSTITUTE: We've been caught short. We've got a large capability gap in our Navy, we've got a large capability gap in our Defence Force. And it leaves us with the question of how did this happen and how are we going to fix it?

DAVID JOHNSTON, OPPOSITION DEFENCE SPOKESMAN: The whole future plan for Navy appears to me to be institutionalised chaos.

HAYDEN COOPER: As the cyclone brewed off the coast, the Government started preparing and Defence support was vital. On three occasions, the Minister was told HMAS Tobruk was ready to respond, but it never was.

JAMES BROWN: It's very difficult to say whether lies were told, whether incorrect advice was given, but at the very least there's a communications problem there.

DAVID JOHNSTON: I have some sympathy for the minister. He has been misled.

HAYDEN COOPER: After six months in charge, Stephen Smith has set out to take a hard line with the Defence chiefs and bureaucrats, and even his opponent blames the department, not him.

DAVID JOHNSTON: He's exasperated and I share his exasperation.

HAYDEN COOPER: A warning of all this trouble for Australia's amphibious fleet has been on the radar since September when HMAS Kanimbla and Manoora were docked for routine checks. The results were not good. Serious work was needed to repair gear boxes and rust - so serious that rumours started to spread.

SENATOR (Senate committee, last month): These two ships are extensively corroded. People tell me they could punch their fists through bulkheads.

ANGUS HOUSTON, DEFENCE FORCE CHIEF: Well, people have told you that, but they haven't told me, Senator.

HAYDEN COOPER: It wasn't the only alarming piece of news. It soon emerged that HMAS Kanimbla had come perilously close to disaster when it lost power in Sydney Harbour. With more than 200 sailors and a $90 million helicopter on board, the Kanimbla was just 20 metres away from foundering on the rocks.

Opposition spokesman David Johnston has uncovered details of the incident.

DAVID JOHNSTON: The emergency was so serious that the skipper of the vessel, the commanding officer of the vessel, called civilian tugboats to come and assist them. Now for Navy to have to ring up and call in an emergency civilian assistance, call for civilian assistance, I think underlines how perilous the situation was.

HAYDEN COOPER: Both ships were taken out of service - the Kanimbla for 18 months, the Manoora for good. 7.30 has been given the first access to the Navy workhorses, though the areas of significant damage were kept off limits.

NAVY SAILOR: It's not good to see a ship go out this way. We, yeah, we're all happy with what we have done and we've achieved being on here.

HAYDEN COOPER: The move leaves the Navy with just one active heavy transport ship.

But 7.30 can now reveal the extent of the sorry state of the nation's last option. While Tobruk was never called on to respond to the cyclone, the ABC has confirmed that it was in no fit state to sail. In some places its hull was so corroded, it was just two millimetres thick when it should've been at least 10. The best advice was it would need two and a half months in dry dock, but under pressure from its Minister when it couldn't supply another ship, Defence demanded it be ready in 24 hours, so a steel plate was welded to the hull in an emergency patch-up job. Defence and the crew on board now assure the minister that the Tobruk is back in the water, ready for action.

TIM NOBLE, PETTY OFFICER, HMAS TOBRUK: 48 hours for us means we're like a tightly-coiled spring ready to pounce at any given moment.

HAYDEN COOPER: Anything happens and you're gone.

TIM NOBLE: Correct. We're ready to go.

HAYDEN COOPER: James Brown is a former Army officer and now a Defence analyst with the Lowy Institute. To him, the news of Tobruk's state of disrepair is no surprise.

JAMES BROWN: Well Navy amphibious ships are particularly prone to rust and corrosion because they have seawater inside as well as outside. And these are old ships. There's been concerns in Navy about the ability of Tobruk to keep going, to keep operating and to carry us through for a number of years.

HAYDEN COOPER: So who then is responsible for the state of the fleet and the incorrect advice to the minister? That advice about the readiness of the Tobruk came from the chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Russ Crane.

DAVID JOHNSTON: I want some accountability. I think the Minister wants some accountability. He's got to go and get it.

HAYDEN COOPER: How?

DAVID JOHNSTON: Well I think he's got to analyse when someone says something to him, if it's not true, then the person that says it, you know, has to bear some responsibility.

HAYDEN COOPER: So are you saying the chief of Navy should be sacked?

DAVID JOHNSTON: Well, if the chief of Navy's giving advice on such an important issue as to amphibious ship lift in the face of a serious cyclone in North Queensland and that information is not true, I think it speaks for itself.

LEIGH SALES: Hayden Cooper with that report. And we did approach both the chief of Navy and the head of Defence Force to be interviewed for tonight's report, but both declined.


second transcript. Defence Minister interview:

Defence Minister Stephen Smith responds to Navy debacle.

Transcript
LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: Let's cross now to our political editor, Chris Uhlmann in Canberra.

Chris, has Defence administration been accountable?

CHRIS UHLMANN, POLITICAL EDITOR: Well, Leigh, I'm sure that there are many people inside the Department of Defence who would say that they are accountable, but I think there's a broader question: what does accountability mean in the Department of Defence?

And to discuss that I'm joined by the Defence Minister Stephen Smith. Welcome to 7.30.

STEPHEN SMITH, DEFENCE MINISTER: Pleasure, Chris.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Why did the chief of Navy tell you the Tobruk was ready to sail when it wasn't?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well I think that's, with respect, a pejorative analysis of the advice that I received on the Tobruk. The disappointing features of the advice, and I've made my disappointment clear both publicly and privately, was the advice that saw Tobruk's condition deteriorate quite rapidly. I asked for the state of the Tobruk. I was told that it was within 48 hours operational readiness. And then when it went into dry dock to put itself into a full state of preparedness for the potential Cyclone Yasi, the device deteriorated from that point in time, and it's only been recently when I've been advised that as from 27th February, it's ready for - on 48 hours' notice.

CHRIS UHLMANN: But is that acceptable to you?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, what is not acceptable is that we have a very clear gap in our heavy lift amphibious capability. And that's why, in response to this issue, I've required three things of Navy and the Defence Force. Firstly, I have imposed a independent review by Paul Risso so that we can make some reforms to ensure this never happens again. This is the second time we've seen this over a period of a quarter of a century. Secondly, to require an urgent plan to make up that capability gap, and that's why you've seen from the beginning of this year me talk in terms of a United Kingdom Bay Class as a possibility and also closer co-operation with New Zealand.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Sure.

STEPHEN SMITH: But thirdly ...

CHRIS UHLMANN: Go on, sorry.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thirdly, in doing this, I want to make sure that I don't leave effectively the same legacy for my successors as has been left with respect to the Kanimbla, the Manoora and the Tobruk. We're dealing here with a problem that has essentially been for 30 to 40 years.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Minister, all of that is understood. All of that is understood. Yeah, it's an historic issue. But the question is: is it acceptable that you should be told a ship is ready when it isn't? And are there are any consequences for that?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, in the end, as the Minister for Defence, I am the one who is accountable to the public and that's why I've taken the action that I have referred to. So far as Defence itself is concerned, there's no doubt that senior officials, whether it's the chief of the Defence Force himself, the chief of Navy, the secretary or the chief executive officer of the Defence materiel office, all also have to accept responsibility. No-one ...

CHRIS UHLMANN: And what does that mean? What are the consequences of that those actions?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, what that means is we need to urgently make sure that we put a reform program into place so that this type of incident doesn't occur again, but secondly, we urgently put in place what we need to cover the capability gap until the arrival of the so-called landing helicopter docks in the middle of this decade.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Alright. We'll come to that in a moment. Is the Tobruk available today?

STEPHEN SMITH: The advice I have as at today is that the Tobruk continues to be available on 48 hours' notice and readiness for sea and that's been the case since 25th February.

CHRIS UHLMANN: And the advice is from the same people that told you last time, so you have confidence in that advice?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well, I have confidence in that advice until such time as I get different advice, and I've made the point both internally and publicly that one of the very serious issues of concern so far as the Tobruk was concerned was the deteriorating advice in a rapidly short space of time.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Alright. Now, this ship - the replacement for these ships don't come online for four years. What are you going to do in between now and then because this ship will not be on 48 hours for the next four years?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well that's true and that's why I've been saying since the beginning of this year that we have to look at alternative options. I'm leaving Australia early tomorrow for the United Kingdom. I'll be having further discussions with the UK Defence Secretary about the possibility of Australia leasing or purchasing a Bay Class amphibious lift which is available from the United Kingdom. But we also have all other options on the table, including, as we have in the past, the historic past, the use potentially of commercial options available in Australia, whether they're catamarans or trimarans, so we are exploring every option, because as you correctly point out and as I have appreciated for some time, we cannot proceed with confidence that the Tobruk will always be available.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Finally and very briefly, Minister, how can we have confidence in the Navy, which will get an enormous amount of money over the next few years to build up its capability, if it can't manage the kit that it's got now?

STEPHEN SMITH: Well we need to ensure that we continue with the reform program this government has put in place. Forever and a day we've had capability difficulties in Defence procurement and acquisition capabilities and we've put in place reform programs over the last three or four years to improve that, but there's a lot more work to be done. The single most important thing we can do and bring to Defence is to substantially improve the personal and institutional accountability that goes with the making of decisions, and together with the Defence Materiel Minister Jason Clare I'll be bringing forward such a program over the next few months.

CHRIS UHLMANN: Alright. Stephen Smith, we'll have to leave it there. Thankyou.

STEPHEN SMITH: Thanks, Chris. Thanks very much.

[brian james]

Another one of 'Bomber Beazley's' brilliant purchases...Along with the Collins Class Submarine debacle.......As I said many months ago those responsible for the Marine Survey of these vessels prior to purchase from the USA (our supposed allies) have never surfaced to face the music!!!If those culpable had been in civilian employ they would have been sacked!!!The buck however is supposed to be carried by the Minister responsible!!But as usual he is 'rewarded' with a diplomatic post in the Washington 'Trough'!!!These vessels on arrival in Aust had to have millions spent on them.... Just to bring them to an Operational level!!!!The Yanks must have been laughing behind our backs at our total ineptitude!!.....Over the years Sailors no longer even paint ships ...Maintenance and such is all left to less than satisfactory standards from the lowest civilian bidder,..which has become 'cash cow' industry......I no longer serve thank God but I have mates that still do..and the one constant theme is.... All is left to the 'bean counters' to organize in a budgetry climate based on 'first in best dressed'.....Not good enough by far having the Public Service running the ship!!!!!

[Paddy54]

Purchasing a replacement vessel overseas leads to the full purchase price being removed from the Australian economy. Plus the ongoing requiment for spares - more hard earned dollars being exported.

Building a replacement in Australia leads to most of the outlay circulating in our community. Back in the 1970's it was taken as Gospel that for every dollar expended in capital works a further seven dollars were generated throughout the supply chain.

Enhancingf local employment; increasing our ship design skills and better utalisation of shipyards. All leading to eventual additional tax revenue.

By all means lease a replacement for a few years but either design & build the thing locally or purchase an overseas design, refit the airconditioning for tropical use; standardise on RAN fittings and then build it here.

No matter how 'cheap' it appears the loss of recirculating money makes it more expensive.

Why increase another countries GDP at the expense of our own?

[brian james]

Totally agree Paddy...The loss of manufacturing expertise to overseas interests is a 'scandal' in its own right....But we never seem to learn from past experiences when purchasing overseas out of date rust buckets, with millions having to be spent on 'acclimatising' these vessels and more millions on the complicated modern 'communcation suites' required to operate at the level needed in todays environs....Whenever the Poms or Yanks have a few 'handmedowns' it seems the Aust Defence Dept coupled with a Govmt (usually of a Labor leaning)are falling over themselves to rush in and grab a 'bargain'...Just look no further than our friends over 'the ditch'..The Kiwis looked around..found a suitable vessel (Canterbury) to meet their requirements and only because they didn't have the building expertise at home had it built on budget and on time!!!! It is not rocket science gentlemen!!!Why we cannot perform the simplest of Forward Naval Requirement Planning is a bit of a worry to say the least.......

[Bundall]

You will find it very interesting to ascertain how infrequently Manoora and Kanimbla have been drydocked during their service in the RAN.
It seems that the beancounters are in the ascendency.

[kookaburra]

The Rizzo Report into the RAN amphibiuous fleet maintenance issue was released yesterday, calling for an rebuilding of the Navy's engineering poilicy and capacity, and overhaul of a make-do culture.

Some reports:
ABC LATELINE PROGRAM:

ALI MOORE, PRESENTER: A damning report into the repair and management of the Australian Navy's support ships has found longstanding problems and has called for urgent reforms.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith commissioned the report after the Navy was unable to help in the aftermath of Queensland's Cyclone Yasi in February.

John Stewart reports.

JOHN STEWART, REPORTER: When Cyclone Yasi stuck Queensland in February, none of Australia's main amphibious landing vessels were operational.

HMAS Manoora, Kanimbla and Tobruk were all out of action. It was an embarrassing episode for the Australian Navy. Even New Zealand offered to send a ship to Australia.

By the end of the saga, the Defence Minister was not impressed.

STEPHEN SMITH, DEFENCE MINISTER (Feb. 15): The maintenance and sustainment of our amphibious capability has, regrettably, effectively failed. I will be as frank in public as I have been in private in expressing my disappointment at this.

JOHN STEWART: The Defence Minister ordered a review of Navy management practices and today an independent report was released highlighting systemic failures in ship repairs and maintenance.

STEPHEN SMITH: The report is a damning report of what has occurred in the past, but importantly it provides us a very clear pathway for the future and a very clear pathway for reform.

JOHN STEWART: The report also identified poor communication between the Defence materiel organisation, which buys Defence assets like ships, and the Navy.

Other problems include what the report describes as "organisational complexity" and "blurred accountabilities"

PAUL RIZZO, REPORT AUTHOR: The report deals with complex and technical issues, but our conclusions are clear that there has been longstanding, wholesale institutional failures in dealing with them.

JOHN STEWART: Navy chief Vice Admiral Ray Griggs admitted that the Navy's ability to move troops is currently limited by the lack of heavy-lifting amphibious vessels.

RAY GRIGGS, NAVY CHIEF: Can we put thousands of troops ashore? No. But at the moment we have coverage for the humanitarian assistance and disaster relief which are clearly the most pressing of those operational contingencies.

JOHN STEWART: Among the report's 24 recommendations are more resources for maintaining the Navy's amphibious vessels and a major boost to Navy engineering.

STEPHEN SMITH: It's clear from Mr Rizzo's report that Navy's engineering capacity has, in recent times, not been up to the mark.

JOHN STEWART: But Defence experts say that boosting the Navy's engineering capacity may be difficult.

ANDREW DAVIES, AUST. STRATEGIC POLICY INSTITUTE: That's going to be a real challenge at the moment because the mining industry needs all the engineers they can get. Engineers, project managers, skilled labourers. So there's going to be a real contest between Defence and Navy and the mining industry for those people.

JOHN STEWART: HMAS Manoora was decommissioned earlier this year. The future of HMAS Kanimbla is uncertain. Today's report recommends using it only for training purposes.

STEPHEN SMITH: I expect we'll be in a position to make that judgement in the not-too-distant future. But the decommissioning of the Kanimbla is a live option, as I've indicated previously, as has Minister Clare.

JOHN STEWART: The Navy plans to replace some of its older ships with the new Canberra class. It's hoped the younger ships will have fewer maintenance issues. But Defence experts point out the newer ships are also more high-tech and have problems of their own.

John Stewart, Lateline.


THE AUSTRALIAN

A 'make-do' culture has let the navy down

Mark Dodd From: The Australian July 19, 2011 1

INSTITUTIONAL failures and a "make-do"culture have led to a collapse in the Royal Australian Navy's once-vaunted engineering capability, an independent inquiry has found.
All 24 recommendations contained in the long-awaited report on naval repair and maintenance by highly experienced defence management expert Paul Rizzo were yesterday unconditionally accepted by the federal government.

As a first remedial step, Commodore Michael Uzzell will be promoted to the rank of rear-admiral to oversee the rebuilding of the RAN's engineering division, Defence Minister Stephen Smith said.

In February, a furious Mr Smith ordered an inquiry into navy maintenance after being told none of the three big amphibious warships, HMAS Kanimbla, Manoora and Tobruk, were available to help with disaster relief following devastation wrought by Cyclone Yasi.

The Rizzo report highlights a number of critical issues for the navy and its delegate arm, the Defence Materiel Organisation, including poor risk-management practices and a failure to plan for regular and continuous maintenance.

"One of the key recommendations of the Rizzo report is that navy engineering needs to be rebuilt and reorganised, led by a two-star navy admiral to give the necessary weight to this critical function," he said.

"Commodore Michael Uzzell will be promoted to this position and will lead the rebuilding of the navy engineering function."

The report stipulates this requirement will depend on an innovative recruitment campaign by DMO and navy to attract engineering talent.

To increase the navy's deficient amphibious lift capability, the Defence Minister said the federal government had chartered a long-range support ship, Aurora Australis, in addition to the $100 million purchase of a decommissioned British amphibious warship, Largs Bay, scheduled to arrive at the end of the year.

In an emergency, New Zealand has agreed to loan its modern amphibious lift ship HMNZS Canterbury.

These collective measures would ensure the navy would

not be found wanting during this cyclone season, Mr Smith said in Sydney.

The Rizzo report also found that problems involving the maintenance of the amphibious fleet had built up over decades.

"I would like it to be noted that the systemic breakdown described in this plan evolved over a long period," Mr Rizzo said.

"It is the result of institutional failures rather than a contemporary failure by individuals."

Other key recommendations include a closer working relationship between Defence and its procurement arm, the DMO.

The new Chief of Navy, Vice-Admiral Ray Griggs, should review the structure of Fleet Command to better ensure operational preparedness of warships and crew.

An implementation committee led by Mr Rizzo would be established to ensure all 24 recommendations are enforced at the earliest opportunity.

"I believe they are a practical set of recommendations that will help us improve ship repair and management practices and avoid what has happened in the past," Admiral Griggs said.

______________
Related CoverageRust bucket navy beached Adelaide Now, 15 hours ago
Navy's capability under fire The Australian, 1 day ago
Defence plan to demote DMO The Australian, 7 Jul 2011
Defence supply chief quits The Australian, 7 Jul 2011
Smith moves to create Defence corporation The Australian, 27 Jun 2011
.End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
Mr Smith said DMO would undertake a parallel restructuring of its Amphibious and Afloat Support Systems Program Office.



..More related coverage
It's been anything but plain sailing

Courier Mail, 13 May 2011
Navy forced to hire civilian ship

Adelaide Now, 11 May 2011
'Cancerous' morale risks our navy fleet

The Australian, 18 Feb 2011
Navy scuppered by 'can do, make do' culture

The Australian, 18 Feb 2011Minister's broadside at navy rust-buckets

Courier Mail, 13 May 2011
Navy ships 'treated as 2nd class'

HERALD SUN Melbourne yesterday :


Report damns navy on repairs to key ships Ian McPhedran

From: Herald Sun July 19, 2011


THE navy and the defence purchasing agency have allowed the nation's key emergency response ships to fall into a state of complete disrepair, an external review has found.

The report by engineer Paul Rizzo identified failings that resulted in the HMAS amphibious ships Kanimbla and Manoora and the heavy lift ship HMAS Tobruk to become unfit for sea without informing the Government.

Manoora has since been retired and the fate of Kanimbla is uncertain after the Government's decision to buy a second-hand Royal Navy ship, Largs Bay, to fill the amphibious role.

The Rizzo Review makes 24 recommendations, and the Government has ordered the navy and Defence Materiel Organisation to implement all immediately.

Review key findings were:

CONTINUING systemic failures.

LACK of accountability across Defence.

POOR risk management.

FAILURE to manage assets.

INEFFECTIVE navy engineering and DMO maritime branch.

AN "us and them" culture between navy and DMO.

A DANGEROUS "can do make do" culture in navy engineering.

That culture was found to be a key factor in internal navy failings that led to the crash of a naval Sea King helicopter in Indonesia that killed nine people.

Mr Rizzo found navy engineering policy was out of date and ineffective, and raised serious concerns about whether the navy and DMO had the capability to deliver two new large amphibious ships and three new air warfare destroyers.

"Navy and DMO should confirm whether they will have sufficient resources and skills to operate and maintain the new LHDs and AWDs," the report says.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said the review found accountability was lacking across Defence, particularly in decision-making and performance management.

"These issues have compromised the availability of navy assets and potentially the sustainability of navy ships in the longer term," Mr Smith said.

He said Commodore Michael Uzzell would be promoted to Rear-Admiral to run navy engineering.

The DMO would also hire 20 new senior project managers to work on navy ship maintenance.

Mr Rizzo will be appointed to chair an implementation committee to ensure that his recommendations are being properly introduced.


Related CoverageA 'make-do' culture let the navy down
The Australian, 15 hours ago
Navy's capability under fire

The Australian, 27 Jun 2011
More defects in crippled HMAS Tobruk
The Australian, 15 Jun 2011
Navy forced to charter civilian ship

[ludsie]

Are we able to get our hands on some pictures of the corrosion. It sounds pretty serious I cant believe our young men and women arre put at risk like this

[brian james]

Another one of Bomber Beazley's 'bargain buys'...along with the Collins Sub debacle.....His reward.... Was to be 'Shipped off' to Washington ....With his nose firmly entrenched in 'the Diplomatic Trough' We must be the laughing stock of the World Naval Community..so once again it's left to the hapless Aust Taxpayer to pick up the bill once more for Labor Politicians organisational ineptitude.....Now they are back in power it wont be long till another series of blunders arrive....

[RANFAN]

Originally Posted by brian james

Another one of Bomber Beazley's 'bargain buys'...along with the Collins Sub debacle.....His reward.... Was to be 'Shipped off' to Washington ....With his nose firmly entrenched in 'the Diplomatic Trough' We must be the laughing stock of the World Naval Community..so once again it's left to the hapless Aust Taxpayer to pick up the bill once more for Labor Politicians organisational ineptitude.....Now they are back in power it wont be long till another series of blunders arrive....

I must be dreaming, thought the laughing stock have been in power from 2007.
But then again the bob brown and the greens are running the country thru the back door of the lodge in Canberra, my's well give him the key to it and Kirribilli house so they get a good look at the new years fireworks display in Sydney ohh the green house gases that go that night!!!