David Johnston (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 5 July 2011:

For the period 1 January to 30 June 2011:

(1) Which naval vessels were fully operational with a full crew complement.

(2) Which naval vessels were not fully operationally ready for immediate tasking.

(3) For each naval vessel that was non-operationally ready, what was the reason for its non-operational status.

(4) What were the operational strengths on all naval vessels of the:

(a) engineering officers and sailors; and

(b) non-engineering officers and sailors.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

Navy prepares its fleet units to specified levels of readiness in accordance with guidance from Government through the CDF. Not all units are maintained at the same level of readiness.

Those fleet units held at higher readiness for short notice operational roles are appropriately manned, equipped and trained for the tasks that they might have to perform. Fleet units at lower readiness will also be crewed in a manner that is best suited to their assigned tasking which includes maintaining core skills currency and training throughput. This might mean the reduction in certain trained/skilled positions filled in order to make way for additional trainees. Fleet units invariably go to sea with all available accommodation filled.

To meet and sustain operational, exercise, preparedness and training requirements, fleet units are operated in a cycle of scheduled maintenance, training and operational availability. Planned major maintenance activity periods are a routine element of the operational cycle.

Henceforth, and in order to provide a consistent means of reporting to correctly encapsulate the manner in which ships and submarines are managed as a fleet to meet operational preparedness, Navy intends to apply the following basic definitions upon which future unclassified responses to questions relating to the general issue of operational status of naval vessels.

Within Operating Cycle

A ship, submarine or unit when conducting assigned tasks and undergoing scheduled maintenance, including external maintenance and docking refits, in accordance with the vessel's designed servicing and support plan: this is referred to in Navy as the designed Usage Upkeep Cycle (UUC). This includes alongside periods dedicated to planned activities such as crew reconstitution, and maintenance and repair work which was pre-planned for the work package to be undertaken over the period designated as routine maintenance consistent with the vessels UUC.

Outside Operating Cycle

A ship, submarine or unit undergoing maintenance that is not in accordance with the vessel's designed servicing and support plan, the Usage Upkeep Cycle (UUC). This includes those periods in time when unscheduled maintenance requirements arise either through growth in a refit work package, or through unscheduled maintenance, which requires either an extension to the existing maintenance period, or results in a new maintenance period, for a period longer than that vessel's assigned operational readiness notice. A vessel will also be classified as non-operational where any other issue arises for which the vessel is subsequently unavailable for operations within its ascribed readiness notice. Examples include circumstances where an operational pause has been invoked for safety reasons or where insufficient skilled personnel are available to crew a vessel within its UUC.

Private Briefing Opportunity

The definitions provided are considered appropriate for an unclassified forum. Providing a more detailed breakdown of this data beyond these levels of fidelity in the public domain is considered inappropriate as it would allow insight into the Royal Australian Navy's overall Fleet preparedness posture. Navy is prepared to provide the Senator with a private briefing on the more specific aspects of overall Fleet preparedness between 1 January and 30 June 2011.

Major Surface Combatants and Amphibious Ships:

(1) to (3) During the period 1 January to 30 June 2011 the operational availability status of Surface Force naval vessels is summarised in the attached table.

Excluding HMA Ships Anzac and Arunta, which were de-crewed, the operational manning strengths in the Navy's crewed Surface Force vessels during the period were as follows:

Ninety-five per cent crewed with engineering officers and ninety-six per cent crewed with engineer sailors; and

(b)   Ninety-seven per cent crewed with non-engineering officers and ninety-six per cent crewed with non-engineer sailors.

Mine Hunting and Clearance Diving Forces:

(1) to (3) During the period 01 January to 30 June 2011 the operational availability status of Mine Hunting and Clearance Diving Force are summarised in the attached table:

(4) The operational manning strengths in the Navy's Mine Hunting Force vessels (with the exception of Hawkesbury and Norman in Extended Readiness Availability) during the period were:

(a)   Manning for all MCM platforms was commensurate with tasking requirements. Mine Hunters were 98.6 per cent crewed with engineering officers (roles are performed by Chief Petty Officer Marine Technicians borne as Senior Technical Officers) and 77 per cent crewed with engineering sailors. Mine Sweeper Auxiliaries were commensurate with tasking requirements as of Feb 11 at 30 days NFS, 100 per cent crewed with engineering officers roles (performed by Petty Officer Marine Technicians borne as Senior Technical Officers) and 100 per cent crewed with engineering sailors; and

(b)   Due to an extant deficiency in qualified Mine Warfare and Clearance Diving Officers, the Mine Hunters were manned with 83% of the required skill set. Coping strategies employed were the use of Mine Warfare Officers and supplementation from Australian Naval Reserves (ANR).

Hydrographic Forces:

(1) to (3) During the period 01 January to 30 June 2011 the operational availability status of Hydrographic Forces was as listed in the attached table:

(4   ) The operational manning strengths in the Navy's Hydrographic vessels during the period were

(a)    Hydrographic units were 100 per cent crewed with Engineer Officers and 99 per cent crewed with Engineer Sailors

(b)   Hydrographic units were 100 per cent crewed with non-Engineer Officers and 100 per cent crewed with non-Engineer Sailors.

Patrol Boat Force:

(1) to (3) During the period 1 January to 30 June 2011 the operational availability status of Patrol Boat Forcevessels is summarised in the attached table.

(4)   The operational manning strengths in the Navy's Patrol Boat Force during the period were as follows:

(a)   One hundred per cent crewed with engineer officers and 100 per cent crewed with engineer sailors; and

(b)   One hundred per cent crewed with non-engineer officers and 100 per cent crewed with non-engineer sailors.

Submarines:

Details on the operational availability status of Submarine Force vessels has been provided separately (see Navy's response to Senate Questions on Notice No's. 752 to 758 – Submarine Availability and Crewing)