In 1976 the ANI published A 1976 Vision of the RAN. This was reprinted on the website by the ANI at 50 on 14 March 2025. This week From the ANI Archive republishes the Young Turks II article which was produced as part of the ANI’s 30th anniversary. It was written by two Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) midshipmen Alisha Withers and Joshua Reilly. It makes for interesting reading. Among other things their comments on the changes to the recruiting model were somewhat prophetic.
Young Turks II – Where we see the Navy in the next 20 years
The Navy’s mission is ‘to fight and win in the maritime environment as an element of a joint or combined force, to assist in maintaining Australian’s sovereignty and to contribute to the security of our nation.’ This mission encompasses our duty not only to Australia, but as a member of a region, as well as recognising that we are a part of the wider ADF and must operate as such.
Roles
The Navy has responsibilities that can be categorised into three main areas: warfighting roles; essential non-warlike roles; and adaptive non-warlike roles. Warfighting roles can be broken up into conventional and unconventional warfighting. Essentially non-warlike roles are things such as peacekeeping, search and rescue, enforcement of economic sanctions or arms embargoes etc. Adaptive non-warlike roles include natural disaster relief and protection of critical infrastructure.
Geopolitical influences
It is safe to assume that the likelihood of a direct invasion on mainland Australia is very low; however, in today’s world political climate; there is an increasing threat of terrorist attacks and the use of weapons of mass destruction. Other issues that directly affect Australia are illegal fishing and people smuggling. This has increased the need for offshore surveillance and the patrol boats in their constabulary duties deny access to such offenders.
Australia’s alliance with the US has a stabilising effect in a region of great instability due to economical, political and social challenges.
Technology, research and development
The Navy is about to enter a period which is unlike anything previously experienced. With the expansion of both threats and operations, and whilst maintaining a capability that allows for traditional roles to be filled, it will require careful monitoring. Australia has planned for an increase in both size and capability of ships that will replace the current fleet. As was the case when last this brief was given, Australia will need to choose between the lesser technological risks of off-the-shelf systems with the custom built but often troublesome purpose-built systems. These new ships and systems, more complex than those we have now, will create a need for industry as well as research and development organisations to expand to meet the task ahead of offering Australia both self reliance and interoperability with allied nations.
Shipbuilding
Australia’s shipbuilding industry has already earmarked both time and resources to the development of facilities to handle future needs. The building of the largest ships to enter service with the Navy, the LHD’s, as well as AWD’s and others will place new demands on industry. As has happened in the past, these huge surges in major shipbuilding projects will be followed by a period where the Navy’s use of these facilities will decline. The Navy will need to insure that follow-on contracts provide sufficient work to maintain the companies whilst not losing capability by limiting our options. Although the facilities in Adelaide and Melbourne are undoubtedly of great importance to the Navy and future capability, these facilities are not without flaws. Both are a great distance from either fleet base creating issues for those officers and sailors posted to ships during trails and commissioning. Facilities at a ship’s home port that cater fully for refit needs would offer both increased capability and security. Facilities such as Darwin Naval Base which is able to service fully, ships home ported can easily show the benefits to both ship and crew. Regardless of location, a strong shipbuilding industry is a strategic asset that would be of great importance to Australia should large scale conflict occur.
Smart weapons
The Navy continues to bring into service more and more capable weapons systems. Over the next 20 years the increase in the size of platforms will offer the Navy more options over the weapons systems fitted to those ships. The cost of these technologies will continue to limit the Navy’s ability to conduct independent R&D into such technology. The Navy’s current and planned capabilities in regards to smart weapons speak of increasing accuracy and effectiveness. While the Navy will update weapons to offer the greatest effectiveness, it will not likely develop the kinds of smart weapons at the level used by the US or other larger maritime powers. The Navy does not have the critical mass required to support the cost of development or implementation of these weapons. Within the likely scope of future operations, the Navy possesses or plans to develop weapons capable of inflicting sufficient damage proportional to size. As technology improves and becomes cheaper, the Navy will again have to decide on the performance of smart weapons verses the cost of R&D, purchase and fitting as well as on-going costs involved. Combating these weapons will still pose an issue for the Navy. As smaller and more accurate weapons become ever more capable of inflicting crippling damage, systems to combat them will need to improve accordingly. R&D organisations within Australia will need to work closely in the future with both the Navy and allies to maintain the capability to protect high value assets from attack by smart weapons.
Nuclear technology
The Navy could, if not in the next 20 years, be forced to begin R&D into nuclear propulsion at some stage. The cost and access to conventional fuels will become restrictively expensive and limited access to heavy crude oil may limit Australia’s maritime capability. The ships being brought into service in the next 20 years will undoubtedly remain conventional; however, their replacements should come at a time when alternate propulsion system will be smaller, more efficient and a possible necessity. A possible alternative to nuclear propulsion in the future may come in the form of fuel cells. Research into fuel cell technology continues to make advances and could soon offer a small sustainable and economical power source. These could easily be used to produce electricity for use on ship fitted with pod propulsion systems. In the next 20 years alternative power sources from the Navy should remain an issue for future generations of ships as the R&D into these systems could take decades.
Nuclear weapons will likely remain a capability that Australia does not possess in the future. While Australia may be forced into nuclear powered propulsion of ships, nuclear weapons will remain outside Australia’s capability. The cost of developing this capability and the deterrence offered by the US makes nuclear weapons unnecessary for the ADF to invest time and money in.
Satellites
Australia should continue to develop satellite and other advance communication systems over the next 20 years. Combining satellite technology with new systems such as the RAAF’s new AEW&C aircraft will allow the Navy to increase its effectiveness. Australia’s allies, namely the US will offer the most to the Navy in access and effective use of these technologies and future Navy ships will have to be increasingly capable of integration into allied task groups in the same way that the communication abilities of the LPA’s were found to be of great use. UAV’s or high altitude/stratospheric balloons fitted with surveillance or communication equipment could provide the Navy a cost effective means to overcome the problems faced by small medium powers like ourselves. The Navy should focus on developing a robust strategic approach to accessing and using these types of equipment.
Control of technology
As has always been the situation and will continue to affect operations in the future, the Navy must find a way to balance money spent on stocked stores and the time taken to source un-stocked parts. With so many new systems coming into service within the next 20 years, and in relatively small numbers, the Navy will need to carefully manage maintenance costs and the new contracts involved. The phasing in of new systems will also be complemented with the paying off of old systems. The management of both during this period will be vitally important. Old systems must be kept operational and at sea until they are taken out of service without overstocking on parts that will soon be of no use. The new systems must be maintained and brought into fully operation standards as quickly as possible, so not to prolong any initial problems. As will be the case for almost everything the Navy is involved in, contract management with industry over maintenance of systems, both old and new, will need close scrutiny to insure the systems are available to complete operational requirements.
Existing R&D
Many organisations exist within Australia, both military and civilian that conduct important R&D. The Navy must continue to work closely with these groups to maximise their effectiveness. The Navy must set clear requirements which then allow R&D organisations to develop ways to meet future needs and overcome current problems.
Realism in R&D
Current contractual plans for the development and maintenance of future system will require extremely close management if they are to succeed. If it became evident that companies had under-bid in order to secure contracts, the effects would be on going. Not only will development and implementation run over cost, maintenance will also suffer. Operational requirements will strain equipment not only beyond levels tested in trials but for longer periods. Contracts may not factor in overseas or remote operations and with increases in range and endurance, the Navy could likely be operating at greater ranges for longer periods than in recent decades. As has been the case for many decades before, the Navy has adapted to fill requirements for which ships were not originally designed. These changes to ship operations may be outside predicted work cycles and therefore affect ships maintenance. Changes in the role of military personnel who formally maintained equipment into operators only and the ‘repair by replace’ plans for new ships may leave the Navy unable to conduct maintenance at sea. Should the operational tempo continue at current levels, logistic systems in place with civilian companies may not meet Navy’s needs.
Operations and tactics
With the development of documents such as Australian Maritime Doctrine 1 and 2 and their availability to the majority of members, the Navy has allowed access to concepts previously not understood or known. In the future, operations undertaken by the Navy will be used to measure the accuracy of doctrine. The Navy is bringing into service new and larger ships, while continuing to upgrade existing platforms and weapons systems. The effectiveness of old and new platforms operating together and separately to complete tasks will require careful management during the transition years.
The role of the Navy is and will remain: the ability to deny an opponent the use of our maritime approaches and allow Australia the freedom to operate at sea. This is critical to the defence of Australia and to our capacity to contribute effectively to the security of our immediate neighbours. Maintaining this capability and improving it will provide important options for the contribution of the Navy to coalitions in support of our national interests. The Government expects the Navy to maintain the ability to detect and attack any major surface ships, and to impose substantial constraints on hostile submarines operations, in our extended maritime approaches. The Navy must also be capable of providing the ability to maintain Australian forces deployed offshore, to contribute to maritime security in our wider region, to protect our sea lanes and ports from the threat of sea mines and to support civil law enforcement and coastal surveillance operations. The Navy must also maintain a capable major surface fleet able to operate in a wide range of circumstances throughout our maritime approaches and beyond.
Goals the future Navy must be capable and willing to meet in order to provide are:
- our ships must be able to operate effectively with those of the US whilst being able to contribute to regional coalition operations;
- our submarines must be capable of operating effectively in high capacity operational environments in the region and pose a threat to any hostile forces in our maritime approaches;
- our patrol boats need to contribute a cost effective and sustainable force to civil coastal enforcement and surveillance operations our new ships brought into service over the next 20 years must be able to effectively replace current ships without gaps in capability appearing whilst they enter full operation service.
The future fleet structure aims to overcome the capability gaps currently experienced by the Navy. The AWD’s should fill the important role of long range air defence for the fleet. Future support vessels, with increased size and capability, will allow the Navy to carry-out operations at a greater distance for longer periods without the need for secure ports or foreign support. This will give the Government greater options with respect to international operations in which the ADF will participate.
In recent years unconventional threats to Australia have emerged, while conventional threats remain, as do the non-warlike roles that the Navy conducts. The Navy’s conventional war fighting capability will always be based around the concept ‘to fight and win at sea’. While the strategic basis for this concept is known and understood, it is possibly beyond the capacity of the Navy. The Navy should consider in the next 20 years whether we are likely to participate in a decisive blue water battle as described by Mahan. The Navy is more likely to operate in the projection of force ashore through the littoral environment as described by Corbett. The Navy should consider both of these options against Navy and ADF capabilities and rethink the mission. Within the region, the Navy is amongst the most capable and is regarded highly by allied navies. The planned force structure and associated capability should help the Navy maintain this status; if the Navy wishes to improve its status, it would need to rely on both capable platforms and capable personnel management and planning.
In conventional warfighting the Navy should, over the next 20 years, overcome capability gaps and ageing fleet units. The new capabilities set out for the LHD’s, AWD’s and other major fleet units (MFU’s) should increase current levels of effectiveness beyond that which the Navy has possessed since World War II. Conflict on the scale of World War II is unlikely to ever occur again. However should large scale conflict occur, the intensity would be so great that the duration would be much shorter. Lower level conflicts and combat support roles similar those over the last few decades are quite possible. The future fleet will increase both reach and endurance not only for the Navy but for those assets and personnel placed ashore. Greater joint operational capability with increased range and endurance could offer the Government options far beyond those the Navy and ADF can offer currently.
In the next two decades the operational tempo experienced by the Navy could increase. Once Australia withdraws troops from Iraq after it becomes fully independent, the Navy could remain behind in some capacity as it has since 1990. North Korea continues to raise concerns with her nuclear program. If the US were to consider North Korea a threat under the ‘War on Terror’ it could mean a return to the Korean Peninsular. Australia may well commit forces there in support of UN or coalition forces.
China continues to increase in military strength and Taiwan continues to be the thorn in her side. It seems only a matter of time before China reclaims Taiwan by force. The US has made it clear that they will react with force if China were to do this, which could bring Australia to the point of having to choose between the US alliance and Chinese trade. A difficult question and like much of this, purely speculative and open to many interpretations.
Closer to home, PNG could require attention from the Navy as part of the Government’s assistance package. The level of involvement in PNG will depend on the Navy being either directly involved or in a support role to other agencies such as the Australian Federal Police. Australia will offer aid to PNG where and when needed and the Navy will continue to provide assistance as directed.
The increase in prevalence of non-conventional operations has brought with it new requirements which could affect the Navy. In the event the Navy operates under the threat of non-conventional attack, the relative utility of some weapons systems could be questioned. The Navy may be forced to attack smaller targets that are currently indistinguishable by smart weapons. Increased human interface to insure the correct acquisition of targets would place new strains on the crew. The introduction of surveillance systems such as AWAC and MILSAT will increase effectiveness in these situations.
The Navy will continue, in the next 20 years, to be called on to participate in essential noncombat roles. The ongoing border protection and fisheries roles carried out by the Fremantle class patrol boats and eventually the Armidale class patrol boats (ACPBs) will remain one the most important non-combat tasks undertaken by the Navy. The further development of facilities and the joint operational nature of this task will, under planned objectives, increase efficiency. The events of the last year in Indonesia highlighted possibly the most important non-combat role the Navy could serve in the next 20 years. Disaster relief is a task not trained for, but which the Navy is undoubtedly suited. Future ships such as the LHD’s will have an enhanced ability to deal with such events due to their range, endurance, lift and support capability. The Navy could begin to place larger ships into these roles during periods were their specific capability is not needed. Larger vessels such as the FFH, FFG or AWD could be involved in operations in the Southern Ocean where smaller vessels cannot safely operate but where the Navy’s expertise is critical.
Peacekeeping and support to these operations will continue to be important. Anywhere Australia could increase the stability of another nation could only have positive flow-on effects, and both major and minor acquisition programs will provide capabilities that will enable these operations to continue. Increases in the speed, size and range of RHIB’s and improvements in personal protective gear will improve the operational efficiency of roles such as those being carried out in the Gulf. Coalition interoperability should remain a focus over the next 20 years. With new vessels coming into service, the Navy will be able to fill a larger role in coalition forces. The Navy should work together with coalition partners during the design phase and when developing procedures for the operation of these new platforms.
Actual capability: current and planned
Currently the Navy is crossing а capability gap. Current ships, although very capable in their own right do not meet the full spectrum of the Navy’s operational needs. The three AWD’s should close some capability gaps. These ships will, as is currently the case, require support in order to operate outside of Australia’s direct sphere of control. HMA Ships Success and Westralia are both limited in peacetime activities by international treaties. The replacement double hulled vessels will fill the same purpose but without the limitations set on current vessels. Upgrades to existing ships will insure their effectiveness over the coming 20 years and may extend their operational lives further. The new ACPBs have the potential to increase the number of patrol boat days at sea while decreasing individual strain on sailors.
Project Air 9000 promises the replacement of ageing airframes like the Sea King helicopter; however, suitability of aircraft for use in the maritime environment must be considered. Land based aircraft could prove useful in supplementing naval aircraft for large operations but the Navy must be capable of providing airframes for continued use at sea.
Personnel
It is important to realise and remember that the people are central to the Navy’s ability to fight and win at sea. Without the right people with the right skills, no amount of technology will secure operational success for the Navy.
Identity
Currently the Navy does not hold a prominent position in society; however, we hope to see a change in this in the coming years. The most effective way to do this would be to improve media relations. Whilst the media loves to print a story on sailors misbehaving, they rarely show the public the positive aspects of what we are doing. The problem is, it takes years to build a good reputation with the public and only seconds on prime time television to forge a bad one. With the media’s help, we, the Navy and the wider ADF, will be able to establish our public identity and show ourselves for what we are; dedicated individuals striving to serve our country and uphold the values of honour, honesty, courage, integrity and loyalty.
Recruiting
It is a well known fact that the demographics of Australia are changing. We have a rapidly aging population and this will have an impact on the Navy’s ability to recruit personnel. Recent television ads have increased public awareness about seaman officers in the Navy, showing it to be an exciting career prospect, but this is where it stops. These have been very beneficial for recruiting seaman offices, but the need is greater than this. We see the need for continued development of these ads in order to show the public that there are options; they can study for a degree or learn a trade; they can work with their hands, on the bridge of a ship, in an engine space or in an office. Today more than ever we are competing with the private sector and realistically, if we want to increase numbers, we need to target school leavers with information on all aspects of the Navy, not just on being a seaman officer. An increase in public interaction, such as in schools, shopping centres, anywhere young people who are faced with making career decisions are, will have a positive influence on recruiting.
The ADF’s recent change to outsourced recruiting has had a negative impact on the recruiting process. The contact potential members have with military personnel has been severely limited. How can a teenager be expected to make a decision about joining an organisation when all they see are people of another organisation? Whilst recruiting videos are great to watch, without face to face contact with real life officers, senior and junior sailors, a full appreciation of the situation cannot be gained. We see considerable benefits in reintroducing military personnel to the recruiting process.
Retention
Whilst a flow of people through the Navy is healthy, there is a greater need to retain skilled and experienced personnel. With the average age of the Australian workforce increasing and changing attitudes to families, ie women going back to work after having children, close attention needs to be paid to the conditions in which Navy personnel work. Higher morale, greater motivation and flexible employment options will all result in higher retention.
There are many factors to be considered when posting someone, and these include opportunities for spouses to gain employment, educational facilities for children and special needs requirements need to be fulfilled, as with the issue of back-to-back postings in order to gain some stability, especially for the children involved. Trying to obtain the most stable life as possible, especially for those members with families to consider, should continue to be looked at by the Navy. Improving these conditions will surely encourage personnel to stay with the Navy longer, rather that taking their skills and expertise to the private sector.
As more women today are choosing to return to work after having children, it is important that the Navy look at ways to encourage these women to stay. Limits, such as the age limit for sea command, need to be looked at, to take into consideration those women who take time out to have children. Childcare also needs to be more accessible, especially for those with several children, as the cost of putting them in day care full time is becoming increasingly expensive.
With a higher operational tempo at the moment, people are spending much more time at sea, away from the families and friends. People in this situation should be focused on and given more benefits to show appreciation for their hard work. Whilst it is recognised that it is often not possible to take leave, perhaps an option to ‘cash out’ their excess leave would be more viable.
Education
Education is a critical investment for the future of the Navy. People today want to spend more time studying and the Navy needs to provide options to make this possible. Such options should include the Australian Defence Force Academy, civil schooling and distance education. We believe personnel should be able to undertake continuing study in their primary qualification, as well as in functional qualifications such as human resource/project management. Sailors should also be offered a greater range of technical training courses to continue their professional development.
Having education more accessible and more flexible will also prove to be a great recruitment and retention tool.
Training
With the impending introduction of new fleet units, both major and minor, the Navy should continue to focus on training. It has become evident in the past that in order to increase the time on the job, training courses have been shortened. This has resulted in a great loss of knowledge at all levels. We see a need for the Navy to re-examine and redevelop training continuums so as to ensure that our crews are highly capable and have a great wealth of practical knowledge to see them perform well above the acceptable standard. One way to do this is the use of On Board Training Systems (OBTS). This system will allow for warfare training to be conducted at sea and ensure the highest standard possible throughout the fleet.
Another issue is accreditation and certification. Whilst sailors receive certification for their courses, the Navy should look closely at the certification of the officer branches. If the Navy were to focus on this issue, we believe they would see great benefit in the way of retention and job satisfaction.
Another issue the Navy will be faced with in the next 20 years is the increase in joint operations. In today’s political climate and our ‘unique strategic environment’, joint operations will be seen much more often than single Service operations. As such, we see the need for the Navy to continue to adapt their training programs to take this into account.
Conclusion
During the next 20 years and beyond, technology will continue to evolve. Smarter more capable systems will come into service throughout the world. R&D into these technologies must continue if the Navy hopes to maintain any advantages currently enjoyed. The Navy has a responsibility to the ADF, the Government and the Australian public to stay abreast of these future technologies. Through careful and close work with R&D organisations, the Navy must make an effort to insure we have access to the most appropriate technologies. Although there will be many options available and on offer, the Navy must choose the system that is most suited to the task it will serve, not the system with the greatest number of features.
Operationally, the Navy should close current capability gaps. With these issues dealt with, the Navy can take advantage of the capability offered by new fleet units. MFU’s will be capable of extended operational deployments and increased versatility. Greater range, endurance, lift and support capability will allow the Navy to take part in larger deployments with greater force for longer these new periods. During the next 20 years systems will be brought online and into operational service. Over this period, the Navy should expect to maintain current operational requirements. Operations in the Gulf or abroad in the same or similar capacity should be expected. Operations in support of our neighbours and within our region should continue to occupy the Navy. Protection of Australian waters by ACPBs and MFU’s should continue in much the same way as it has over the past 20 years. Only in a worst case event should the Navy expect high intensity conflict. Although the likely operations the Navy will participate in may not vary greatly, a shuffle of which are the most important to Australia could. A change of Government or in public support for an operation could easily turn the Navy towards projection abroad or to purely regional issues.
The major issues we see the Navy facing over the next 20 years with respect to personnel are those of recruiting and retention. By the very nature of our job, recruiting will always be a struggle, and our ageing population and competition with the private sector are not going to make it any easier. The Navy has already begun to combat this with more media time but we see the need for a continued emphasis on this to continue high levels of recruitment. For retention, whilst it is easy to say we need to improve the working and living conditions for personnel in the Navy, we recognise that this is not so easily accomplished. We need to find a balance between the quality of life of Navy personnel and the operational requirements of our job. Everyone has different priorities in their life, whether it be having a family, continuing their education, freedom and independence or the simple pleasure of watching the sun set over the ocean; but whatever their priorities, if the Navy wants to retain their knowledge and experience, it will have to continue to adapt and move with the times.
About the Authors
Commander Ali Withers is a Surface Warfare Officer (Air). She graduated from the ADFA with a bachelor degree in mathematics and oceanography. She is a graduate of the Australian Command and Staff Course with a Masters of Military and Defence Studies and holds a Graduate Diploma in Psychology. Ali has had three commands – the patrol boat HMAS Maitland (2014-16), the RAN Recruit School (2022-23) and the destroyer HMAS Hobart (2024-25). She is the Deputy Director Navy Strategy and Futures in Navy Headquarters.
Lieutenant Commander Joshua Reilly has a bachelor’s degree in history and chemistry. He also specialised as a Surface Warfare Officer (Air) and was the Direction Officer in HMAS Sydney in 2013. Later that year Joshua completed an air warfare officer (AWO) course with the Royal Navy as served as an AWO in the Type 45 destroyer HMS Dragon. On return to Australia in 2015 he joined the frigate HMAS Perth as her operations officer with the ship undertaking Operation Manitou. Joshua retired from full time naval service and joined Raytheon Australia. He is part of Raytheon’s Mobile Training Threat Emitter System (MTTES) team.
