Australian Bridging Boats Ordered by US Army

According to media reports, the US Army has ordered 374 "Bridging Boats" to be made by Birdon in NSW. The stubby little boats are used to push floating bridges into position and to transport equipment (including tanks) on rafts. These were adapted from a German design for the Australian Defence Force. The boats may also find some use on Australia's two Canberra class  Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships, to supplement the 12 LCM-1E amphibious mechanized landing craft already ordered. They may also supplement the Mexeflote powered rafts of HMAS Choules (L100).

Australian Built Ship Deploys Surveillance Blimp for US Navy

During the Sydney 2000 Olympics, I was briefly in charge on the bridge of an Incat high speed ship (that is not as reckless as it sounds with the ship alongside a wharf in Sydney). While in Sydney, the ship was demonstrated to the US Defense Department who subsequently leased several and later ordered a new class of similar Australian designed high speed ships from Austral. These vessels are intended for transport of equipment and personnel (the Japanese military have also used one for military transport).  But these vessels have also be tried out for other military roles, the latest of which is to deploy a Tethered Aerostat (unmanned blimp) from the stern of HSV-2 Swift. The aerostat can be positioned 3,000 feet above the vessel for surveillance.

US, Australian UK Naval Interoperability for the Next War

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Steven Paget is speaking on "The Special Relationship at Sea: Naval Gunfire Support Interoperability during the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq Wars". He mentioned problems with access to the US Secure Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet) during the second Iraq war. The problem was that the network was not compartmentalized, limiting the access which non-nationals could have. This was corrected by creating a separate network, but the UK and USA tended to miss out on some information sent over SIPRNet. It occurred to me that not only to the nations navies require compatibility with each other, but with other forces of their own and each other countries. Not all ships in warfare are operated by the navy. There are ships operated by coastguards, the army, reserves, the army and civilian contractors. In previous times these ships were not considered combatants and were assumed to be kept safely in the rear. But just as a front line is less clear in modern land warfare it will be less clear in future naval warfare. Also navies will need to cooperate with forces they do not entirely trust. In the case of Australia,  the RAAF are purchasing US aircraft with minimal customization, providing good interoperability. However, the RAN is purchasing Spanish ships with a mix of European and US weapons systems, which will make interoperability more complex. Also the two new RAN two Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock ships (LHDs) will create complex issues. These ships are purpose designed for amphibious assault in the littoral zone, transporting, supporting the Australian Army and acting as the flag ships for support vessels. 

One of hallmarks of modern naval operations – from the 1991 Gulf War to ongoing anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden – is the formation of multi-national task forces to pursue common interests. In particular, the navies of Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have a long history of operating together which continues to this day. This trend is set to continue given the reduction in fleet sizes worldwide, which may see allied nations seeking to build complimentary force elements that can produce combined capabilities.

In this public lecture, Steven Paget will explore the cooperation between the Royal Australian Navy, the United States Navy and the Royal Navy in the provision of naval gunfire support to operations ashore in the conflicts in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. These historical case studies will open a window on the broader issue of interoperability between the three navies and assess the effectiveness of their efforts to work together, and what lessons can be learned for future operations.

Steven Paget is a graduate of St Andrews University and a doctoral student in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at ANU. In 2012 he was awarded the Royal United Services Institute of Australia’s Leo Mahony Scholarship to support the research on which this lecture is based.

Australian and US Naval Gunfire Off Korea

Steven Paget, will speak on "The Special Relationship at Sea: Naval Gunfire Support Interoperability during the Korean, Vietnam and Iraq Wars", at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, Australian National University in Canberra, 6pm 17 April 2013:

One of hallmarks of modern naval operations – from the 1991 Gulf War to ongoing anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden – is the formation of multi-national task forces to pursue common interests. In particular, the navies of Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom have a long history of operating together which continues to this day. This trend is set to continue given the reduction in fleet sizes worldwide, which may see allied nations seeking to build complimentary force elements that can produce combined capabilities.

In this public lecture, Steven Paget will explore the cooperation between the Royal Australian Navy, the United States Navy and the Royal Navy in the provision of naval gunfire support to operations ashore in the conflicts in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. These historical case studies will open a window on the broader issue of interoperability between the three navies and assess the effectiveness of their efforts to work together, and what lessons can be learned for future operations.

Steven Paget is a graduate of St Andrews University and a doctoral student in the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at ANU. In 2012 he was awarded the Royal United Services Institute of Australia’s Leo Mahony Scholarship to support the research on which this lecture is based.

Ships, submarines and aircraft: Naval and aerial aspects of the Gallipoli War

Greetings from the Australian National University in Canberra, where Professor Serhat Güvenç, Kadir Has University, Istanbul is speaking on "Ships, submarines and aircraft: Naval and aerial aspects of the Gallipoli War". Professor Güvenç discussed the arms race with Dreadnought battleships before World War Two. In 1911 Dodecanese Islands were lost by the Ottoman Empire. In 1913 the Ottomans outbid Greece and Russia to purchase a British dreadnought, the Sultan Osman-i Evvel, but the ship and another was retained by the UK. The German battlecrusers SMS Goeben and Moltke escaped the British Mediterranean fleet to Ottoman territory and were  transfered to Ottoman control. Professor Güvenç argued that these circumstances effectively decided the Ottaman's would side with Germany, against the UK.

Only obsolete ships were used for the UK's Gallipoli Campaign as the Ottamans were seen as not having a significant military force. The available Ottaman ships were required to counter the Russian threat. Instead Gallipoli was defended with shore mounted obsolete naval guns and sea mines. Guns and mines were carefully positioned in anticipation of the likely lines of approach for UK ships. The UK forces used Greek  (notionally neutral) islands. Professor Güvenç argued that the Minelayer Nusrat while a small ship was very significant to the Gallipoli War. One aircraft available to the Turks, was also significant in providing advice on the status of the mines. Australian submarine AE-2 penetrated to the Sea of Marinaras, which was a morale boost for UK forces, but not militarily significant. German submarine U-21 was more effective in forcing K ships from the Gallipoli area. UK submarine E-11 in the Marmara Sea severely disrupted Turkish shipping (and attacked a train with gunfire).

Professor Güvenç argued the Turks won the Gallipoli War because they had better military leadership, but also were well prepared. The Ottoman Empire in effect won their war with Russia, but ultimately lost with the allied victory in WWI. From another perspective the modern Turkish state arose partly from Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's rise to prominence in the Gallipoli War.

Professor Güvenç's analysis of the Gallipoli is significant not only historically but for the world today. One lesson is that major warships are at a disadvantage in the littoral zone close to shore. Ships are vulnerable to relatively unsophisticated sea mines, land based aircraft and gunfire. Large ships are also vulnerable on approach to shore from submarine attack. There are significant issues for Australia, which has ordered two Canberra Class Landing Helicopter Dock ships (LHDs). These ships are purpose designed for amphibious assault in the littoral zone as flagship of an Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG). But the LHDs are very vulnerable and must be protected by mine-clearing, anti-submarine and anti-aircraft defenses. This will require a significant investment by Australia, not only in ships, but in specialized highly trained personnel. Australia is building Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyers and upgrading Anzac-class frigates, to provide air defense, but does not have sufficient mine or submarine countermeasures.

The Gallipoli Peninsula stands as one of the earliest theatres of joint military operations in the modern era. At Gallipoli, both the Allies and the Ottomans employed their naval, land and air power assets in pursuit of a decisive victory. The campaign, which opened with a naval assault to force a quick capitulation of the Ottoman Empire, turned into a massive land campaign as a result of the allied amphibious landing. However, the naval assault failed, and degenerated into a war of attrition waged increasingly by submarines and aircraft to the end of World War I.

This presentation has three objectives. The first is to provide an overall assessment of the factors that contributed to the Ottoman decision to go to war. The second is to discuss the reasons how and why the submarine and aircraft, as new and largely untested weapons, gradually succeeded the battleship, as principal means of warfare upon which both sides continued to rely until the end of the conflict. The third objective is to discuss the legacy of the Gallipoli Wars in shaping the contours of the subsequent Turkish War of Liberation and the Republic of Turkey.

Dr Serhat Güvenç is an Associate Professor of International Relations at Kadir Has University, Istanbul.  He has a BA in International Relations and an MA in European Studies from Marmara University, Istanbul and a PhD in Political Science and International Relations from Bosphorus University. He has worked at Koç University, Istanbul Bilgi University and the University of Chicago as a Visiting Assistant Professor of History in 2006.
Dr Güvenç’s research interests include Turkish defence policy and modern Turkish military/naval history. He is the author of Ottomans’ Quest for Dreadnoughts on the eve of the First World War, Istanbul: Is Kultur Yayinlari, 2009, and Turkey in the Mediterranean during the Interwar Era: The Paradox of Middle Power Diplomacy and Minor Power Naval Policy, Indiana: Indiana University Turkish Studies, 2010 (co-authored with Dilek Barlas). He has published in the Middle Eastern Studies, International Journal of Naval History, Uluslararasi Iliskiler (Turkish Journal of International Relations), Exotierika Themata (in Greek) and the Journal of Strategic Studies. He guest-edited a special issue of Uluslararasi Iliskiler on the 60 Years of Turkey’s NATO Membership.

Offshore Combatant Vessel

Australian Defence project SEA 1180, proposes to replace patrol, mine and survey ships with one design of "Offshore Combatant Vessel" (OCV). Containerized equipment would be placed on the ships temporarily to suit the mission. The obvious design for this would be the Austal Multi Role Vessel (MRV 80). This is a trimaran, which looks like a patrol boat at the front and a car ferry at the back. The proposed MRV 80 is about 50% longer and heavier than the current Armidale class patrol boa,. Due to the trimaran design the MRV 80 is twice as wide as the patrol boats, providing room for a helicopter flight deck and hangar, as well as 500m2 of covered space to accommodate cargo, vehicles, or containerized equipment.

The MRV 80 resembles the US  Independence class littoral combat vessel from the same designers. But the MRV 80 is smaller and leaves out the high tech weaponry and complex systems of the LCS.  The LCS has a stern door for launching boats and sensors at sea, with a side ramp for loading equipment in port. In contrast the MRV 80 has boats stored in open areas on each side and a stern ramp for loading equipment. The stern ramp is based on a proven design used on car ferries and might be used to launch sensors at sea and transfer cargo while underway, as well as in port.

Australian Army Planning for Marine Operations

The Australian Army is restructuring to have three "manoeuvre brigades" which can operate with the Navy for amphibious operations under "Plan Beersheba" (with details in Army News). This will require the Army to relearn old skills. With the delivery of two Canberra class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships and Hobart class air warfare destroyers, Australia will have the nucleus for amphibious operations. However, Australia will not have fixed wing aircraft to operate a US style carrier strike group.

Offshore Support Vessel For Australian Navy

The Minister for Defence, Stephen Smith announced the purchase of the 6,500 tonne Offshore Support Vessel (OSV) MSV Skandi Bergen for $130m. Alongside the HMAS Choules , recently purchased second hand from the Royal Navy, this helps fills the gap in amphibious military transport until the first of two new Canberra class Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD) ships arrive from Spain. Australia got a good deal with both Skandi Bergen and Choules, due to the downturn in the global economy.

Skandi Bergen is sister ship to the Australian Customs Service's ACV Ocean Protector and will be transferred to Customs when the new purpose built amphibious transport ships are delivered in about three years time. The offshore support vessels are built for supporting oil rigs in harsh polar waters, and so will be useful for patrolling Australia's southern ocean, but are not designed for amphibious warfare. They have a helicopter pad, but this mounted high above the bridge and cannot be used for moving heavy cargo or vehicles, just personnel. But the ships have a useful cargo deck and crane for transshipping supplies.

Media reports indicate that the Minister for Defence rejected the option of purchasing an Australian made military transport, from Incat Tasmania or Austral WA, on advice from the Navy that these were not suitable for extended periods at sea. This is a curious decision as the purpose of a transport ship is not to spend extended periods at sea, but to get cargo from one point on shore to another as quickly as possible. This is a contentious issue in the US military, with the Army acquiring its own ships as a result. The US Army and Navy have both used high speed ships from Australian suppliers, including the Fortitude class Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) from Austral.

Stern Landing Vessels for Australian Military

Sea Transport Corporation has proposed a militarized version of their Stern Landing Vessel (SLV) for use as a heavy landing craft for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN). The SLV design has been used for civilian passenger ferries. The vessel has a conventional "V" shaped bow at one end and a ramp at the other. This way the ship can travel efficiently in heavy seas and need only back into the beach to unload.

The 65m vessel depicted would have a payload of 400 tons for the ADF Landing Craft Heavy Replacement (Phase 5 t JP 2048 Phase 3 of Amphibious Watercraft Replacement). The 2000Kw propulsion would give a speed of 15 knots and range of 2600 n miles with 83T fuel. This is about twice the capacity and speed of the current Balikpapan class LCH (Landing Craft, Heavy), over a similar range.

The SLV design has an open vehicle deck, typical of military landing craft. However, landing craft of the RAN tend to be used for general duties and rarely for beach landings. It might therefore make sense to build them with a covered vehicle deck. There would be space for a passenger deck behind the bridge (as with the JHSV) and a medium sized helipad above the rear vehicle deck. This would restrict the view from the bridge when beach landing, but video cameras could be used, along with large format high resolution flat screen displays to provide virtual windows on the bridge (also providing some protection for the crew).

The covered vehicle deck would be able to hold ISO shipping container sized equipment modules, as used on littoral combat ships. This would make for a versatile general purpose ship.

Austral Trimaran option for Australian Navy

According to Defence Technology International, one solution to the Australian military's lack of transport ships is a 102 meter trimaran sitting unused in Western Australia ("Good Deal", Bradley Perrett, DTI, April 2011). The ship was built by Austral, with a hull design similar to that of the US Navy's Freedom-class Littoral combat ships (which are made by Austral in the USA). The ship could be quickly modified to carry out a similar logistical function to the Fortitude class Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) which Austral is also making for the US military.

The ship could also use interchangeable mission modules, as envisaged for the Fortitude class ships. The modules are shipping container sized and can be loaded on the ship for different tasks. There have been problems with the mission module concept, both in production delays and inflexibility. A simpler approach could be taken by the Australian military, with existing truck, container and trailer mounted equipment, simply driven onto the ship and used when needed. Some of this could be equipment used already by the Army, Navy and Air Force on land. Other equipment could be commercial off the shelf. Containerised equipment designed for mining companies and shipping container sized data centres would be particularly suitable.

Best of EDUCAUSE Australasia 2011

The conference CCA-EDUCAUSE Australasia 2011, is in Sydney 3 to 6 April 2011. I am presenting a poster on "International Graduate Level Sustainable ICT Course". Just had a note from the organisers to say there is a spare ticket to the Tall Ships cruse 3 April on The Svanen. Normally I miss the social events at conferences, but this time I thought I would try some. There are people who I have been on mailing lists discussing issues with for years and never met. It will be interesting to see some of them (I hope).Apart from the tall ships, there is a Welcome Reception 3 April, the Posters Reception, 4 April 5:00pm (which I have to attend as I have a poster) and Sundowner, 6 April 4:15pm at the end. I thought I would give the conference dinner a miss, after a day with the delegates, all I want to do is escape. ;-)The conference program is not as complex as WCC2010 but even so, there are five parallel sessions. Here are my choices:

Program

Sunday 3 April 2011: Meetings, Tall Ships Cruise, and Conference Welcome

13:15 - 14:45	Meeting space available	Meeting space available	Tall Ships Cruise and Lunch: Departs 13:15 from Campbell’s Cove, The Rocks (Adjacent to Hyatt Hotel). Concludes 15:45 at Darling Harbour.
15:00 - 15:45	CAUDIT Procurement Update and Discussion (All welcome)	Meeting space available
16:00 - 16:45	CAUDIT Orientation Session (All welcome)	Meeting space available
17:00 - 17:45	Meeting space available	Joint meeting of the conference Organising, Program, and Conference Experience Committees
18:00 - 19:30	Conference Welcome Reception

Monday 4 April 2011: Conference Day 1

8:30 - 9:00	Registration and coffee					The Lounge
9:00 - 10:50	Opening plenary Session chair: Peter James, Conference Chair
9:00 - 9:10	Welcome: Ross Milbourne, Vice-Chancellor, University of Technology, Sydney
9:10 - 10:00	Special Guest Speaker
10:00 - 10:50	Keynote: Changing the Game Brad Wheeler, CIO Indiana University
10:50 - 11:15	Morning tea
11:15 - 12:50	Strategy and IT Session chair: Peter Nissen, CAUDIT	Challenging the role of the library Session chair: Jemima McDonald, UTS	Course and learning management tools Session chair: Ric Canale, La Trobe University	Lightning rounds Convener: Heath Marks, AAF	Sponsors Session chair: Chris Foley, Murdoch University	The Lounge
11:15 - 11:35	Get past technology and define what you do Peter Hicks, Curtin University	Playful Engagement as Serious Strategy Suzana Sukovic, University of Sydney, and Ashley England, UTS	Integrated Course Data Management – a Strategic Approach Richard Lamb, University of South Australia	Lightning round: Innovative federation uses: Telescopes, labs, and clouds Convener: Heath Marks, AAF	TechnologyOne: QUT Case Study: Implementing a Real Time Event Driven Solution for Student Management SystemsWayne Oswin, QUT	Meet Peter James, Conference Chair and Brad Wheeler, Keynote speaker
11:40 - 12:00	It is better to travel hopefully than it is to arrive: A journey in IT strategy at the University of Adelaide David Munro, University of Adelaide	No More Us and Them: Mobile Support for Clients and Staff at UTS LibrarySophie McDonald and Rajan Davio, UTS	CourseBuilder: elearning enabler Ashwini Datt, University of Auckland		Emerson Network Power Smart Solutions: Delivering Efficiency Without Compromise™ for Higher Learning Institutions Eoin Coghlan, CCNA
12:05 - 12:25	The IT Strategic Planning Journey at the University of Newcastle Frank Herb and Carey Steller, University of Newcastle	The organisation has changed: Joining libraries, eLearning, IT and facilities management to meet new challenges Sue McKnight, University of Canterbury	Personalising the ePortfolio Experience Shane Sutherland, Pebble Learning	Lightning round: The Future of Identity Federations – where will they add value? Convener: Heath Marks, AAF	Adobe
12:30 - 12:50	A New IT Framework to Enable Effective Change Terry Nikkel, University of New Brunswick	A new role for QUT Library Natalie Ryan, QUT	Green IT Departments, Green Libraries – Moving Forward Malcolm Wolski, Griffith University		Blackboard:Driving User Adoption and Institutional Success through a Strategic and Flexible approach to Professional Development Sarah Morgan and Kimberly Hillyard, Blackboard	Meet Gordon Suddaby, ACODE President and Chris Cahill, Program Committee Chair
12:50 - 14:00	Lunch
12:50 - 14:00	CAUDIT Leadership Institute Alumni Reunion
14:00 - 14:45	Strategy and IT Session chair: Lynnae Rankine, UWS	Models for supporting learning and research Session chair: Alison Slocombe, Southern Cross University	Enterprise systems Session chair: Jenny Leonard, University of Sydney	Lightning rounds Convener: Alan Sieper, ANU	Sponsors Convener: Ian Poole, Integ	The Lounge
14:00 - 14:20	The Five Critical Success Factors That Define Success in Achieving Business Technology and Process Change Mark D Nicholls, Information Professionals	A hybrid approach – The best of both worlds: A narrative account of Griffith University’s re-structuring of academic blended learning support and student literacy support Kevin Ashford-Rowe, Griffith University	Pimp My Research Management System Stuart Lewis, University of Auckland	Lightning round: Managing Relationships with External Learning Management System Providers Convener: Allan Sieper, ANU	Integ:Changing the Game: A Panel DiscussionHost: Ian Poole, CEO Integ GroupSpeakers: Peter James, UTS, Mark Buckley, Alcatel-Lucent, and Felicity Threadgate, postgraduate student
14:25 - 14:45	Higher Education Essentials for Strategic BI Darren Dadley, UTS	A new (multiplayer) model of academic library support for research Alissa Sputore and Robin Gardner, University of Melbourne	Revolutionary Approach on how to improve Business Continuity Management at a University Alexandre Medarov and Linden Vazey, University of Auckland			Meet Richard Northam, CAUDIT General Manager
14:45 - 15:05	Coffee break
15:05 - 16:30	Afternoon plenary Session chair: Paul Sherlock, CAUDIT President
15:05 - 15:10	Announcements
15:10 - 15:40	Featured talk: Changing the Game: Building the Sustainable Library Maxine Brodie, Macquarie University
15:40 - 16:10	Gold sponsor featured talk: Intelligent Virtual Infrastructure – Building and Managing Your Cloud Michael Warrilow, Manager of Products and Solutions for VMware Asia Pacific and Japan
16:10 - 17:00	Keynote: Visions of the higher education horizon: possible futures Bryan Alexander, Director of Research NITLE
17:00 - 18:15	Posters reception					Meet Featured speakers Bryan Alexander and Maxine Brody (17:00 - 17:20)

Tuesday 5 April 2011: Conference Day 2

8:00 - 8:35	Registration and coffee					The Lounge
8:35 - 10:30	Morning plenary Session chair: Chris Cahill, Program Committee Chair
8:35 - 9:10	Cisco Platinum sponsor featured talk: Video Inspiring Innovation in Teaching & Learning Lance Ford, University of Maine, US and Kristine G Held, Madison Area Technology Colledge, US
9:10 - 9:35	Featured talk: The Future of the IT Department – will it survive the cloud? Nick Tate, RDSI
9:35 - 10:25	Keynote: The Gifts Change Brings Shirley Alexander, DVC (Teaching, Learning and Equity), University of Technology Sydney
10:25 - 10:30	Announcements
10:30 - 11:00	Morning tea
11:00 - 12:35	Portfolio, program and project management Session chair: Tracy Huntleigh-Smith, University of Otago	Research data management and eResearch Session chair: Howard Amos, University of Otago	How new ways of learning are changing universities Session chair: Janne Malfroy, UWS	CIO stream Session chair: Richard Northam, CAUDIT	Sponsors Session chair: Steve Johnston, CAUDIT	The Lounge
11:00 - 11:20	CAUDIT domestic study tour 2010: a new community of practice in portfolio, program and project management Paul Cullen, Charles Sturt University	*A Framework for University Research Data Management Malcolm Wolski and Joanna Richardson, Griffith University	Technology Design for Formal and Informal learning Spaces in the Facebook age Jason Wheatley and Nick Gilbert, University of Sydney	A half-day session aimed at CIOs and IT Directors	echo360:Video media in education after the NBNDavid Cummings, Victoria University
11:25 - 11:45	IT P3M and Delivery@Griffith Sudath Wijeratne and Ian Smith, Griffith University	Setting a focus – creating a research database one-stop-shop through cross divisional collaboration Patricia Scott, Deakin University	Growth of E-Learning in Small Remote Aboriginal Communities: Implications for University Teacher Education Programs Dennis Sharpe, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada		Desire2Learn:Enhancing student engagement through online and mobile technologiesIan Smissen, Desire2Learn
11:50 - 12:10	Portfolio Management: Art or Science? Diane Bussey, University of Auckland	eResearch Administration: The game will change Simon Porter, University of Melbourne	*Informal learning on the Internet and its importance to curriculum Deirdre Wilmott, Ballarat University		Blackboard Technologies: Getting More from What You’ve Got! Chris Eske and Ben Carmichael, Blackboard
12:15 - 12:35	Benefit Management – An Oxymoron? Diane Bussey, University of Auckland	E-research university partnerships revisited Linda O’Brien, Griffith University	Whose game are we playing? Learning, digital technology and crises of identity Herbert Thomas, University of Canterbury		IBM:Mark VeitchSales DirectorTivoli Endpoint Manager
12:35 - 14:00	Lunch
12:35 - 13:15	Incoming and Outgoing Conference Committee Meeting
14:00 - 14:45	Shared services and attracting talented IT staff Session chair: Peter Gale, UTS	Strategy and scholarly information Session chair: Andrew Wells, UNSW	How new ways of learning are changing universities Session chair: Sarah Lambert, University of Wollongong	Transforming spaces and Staff development for eLearning Session chair: Alison Neal, UNSW	Sponsors Session chair: Paul Campbell, ACU	The Lounge
14:00 - 14:20	A Journey Shared Mat Myers and Geoffrey Brown, University of Sydney	Eyes on the horizon, tackling the weeds: making organisational strategy into reality Donna McRostie and Margaret Ruwoldt, University of Melbourne	Regulatory Frameworks for Distance Education in the Asia/Pacific Region Stephen Marshall, Victoria University of Wellington	Design for the New Millennium: Transforming Learning and Service Spaces Wendy Abbott and Grace Saw, Bond University	Netspot:Reflections on La Trobe’s Moodle implementationRic Canale, La Trobe University and James Strong, Netspot	Meet Nick Tate, Featured speaker and Paul Sherlock, CAUDIT President
14:25 - 14:45	Attracting, developing and retaining talented IT professionals Sophie Kysil and Peter Nissen, CAUDIT	The Only Constant is Change – Innovation in Scholarly Communication Philip Kent and Donna McRostie, University of Melbourne	*Online Student Conferences as Assessment Instruments: A Case Study of Knowledge Acquisition Michael Nycyk, Curtin University	*Staff Development For E-Learning: New Playing Field, New Rules Ian Olney and Lynnae Rankine, University of Western Sydney	Enterasys:Gaining Network Visibility and Control on the Education CampusJulian Critchlow, Enterasys	Meet Peter James, Conference Chair and Chris Cahill, Program Committee Chair
14:45 - 15:05	Coffee break
15:05 - 16:35	Afternoon plenary Session chair: Gordon Suddaby, ACODE President
15:05 - 15:10	Announcements
15:10 - 15:40	Featured talk: How we are taking the UTS library into the future Mal Booth, University of Technology, Sydney
15:40 - 16:30	Keynote: Next Generation Learning Diana Oblinger, President and CEO, EDUCAUSE
16:40 - 17:00						Meet Featured speakers Diana Oblinger and Mal Booth
18:30 - 22:00	Conference dinner

Wednesday 6 April 2011: Conference Day 3

8:15 - 8:45	Registration and coffee					The Lounge
8:45 - 10:30	Morning plenary Session chair: Cathrine Harboe-Ree, CAUL President
8:45 - 9:10	Gold sponsor featured talk: Microsoft Office 365 in Education Reed Wotiz, Director of Live Services, Microsoft Asia Pacific
9:10 - 9:35	Featured talk: Going international: The New Zealand Virtual World Grid Scott Diener, University of Auckland
9:35 - 10:25	Keynote: Alice Through the Looking Glass McKenzie Wark, Associate Dean Eugene Lang College, the New School for the Liberal Arts
10:25 - 10:30	Announcements
10:30 - 11:00	Morning tea
11:00 - 12:35	Emerging technologies: Challenging the role of IT Session chair: Kerrie Newcombe, UTS	Libraries supporting learning Session chair: Jennifer Peasley, Macquarie University	Student success and retention Session chair: Maree Gosper, Macquarie University	Point/counterpoint Session chair: Patricia McMillan, CAUDIT	Sponsors	The Lounge
11:00 - 11:20	*Infecting professional staff with the emerging technology ‘virus’: how the leadership game has changedLisa Cluett, Judy Skene and Mark Pegrum, University of Western Australia	Won Bronze, now aiming for Gold – Implementing a sustainable model for using information to learn at The University of AucklandLi Wang and Hester Mountfield, University of Auckland	Enabling Student SuccessGrace Lynch and Kara Robinson, Open Universities Australia	Point/counterpoint: Cognitive Surplus or The Shallows: Is the Internet making us stupid? Patricia McMillan, CAUDIT and Geoffrey Brown, University of Sydney		Meet Featured speakers McKenzie Wark and Scott Diener
11:25 - 11:45	Driving emerging technology evaluation with the STREET process Matthias Liffers, Murdoch University	Playing the game: adapting the LMS to engage the Library liaison team in sustainable activities in order to promote the embedding of seamless learning support Judy Fisher and Simon Hart, University of Otago	Bringing learning to regional communities: designing the game Barbara Cram, University of Canberra			Meet Richard Northam, CAUDIT General Manager and Cathrine Harboe-Ree, CAUL President
11:50 - 12:10	Improving Moodle’s Assessment Facilities – a UniSA Perspective Richard Lamb and Wayne Pedder, University of South Australia	Monash University Library & E-Learning: Shaping the Future Lisa Smith and Steven Yates, Monash University	Changing The Game: The SMARTHINKING Experience Kevin Ashford-Rowe and Debi Howarth, Griffith University	Point/counterpoint: Is there a library in the future? Barbara Goldsmith and Sean Riley, UTS; Convener: Jemima McDonald, UTS		Caudit P3MCOP Introduction and Open Discussion Hosted by Paul Cullen, Charles Sturt University
12:15 - 12:35	Using mobile devices to access data and systems – The experience at the University of Queensland’s School of Medicine Hans Dauncy, University of Queensland	Enhancing the Student Experience for Transitioning Students Lynda Cooper, University of Wollongong	Students choosing the players but the game stays the same: Accessing student academic support via an online Smarthinking service Philip Paasuke, Open Universities Australia			Meet Paul Sherlock, CAUDIT President and Richard Katz, Featured speaker
12:35 - 14:00	Lunch
12:35 - 14:00	Joint CAUDIT, CAUL and ACODE Executive Committee Meeting
14:00 - 14:45	Virtualization and Clouds Session chair: Geoffrey Brown, University of Sydney	E-books and scholarly resource discovery Session chair: Peter Green, Curtin University	Designing spaces and organisations Session chair: Tracy Huntleigh-Smith, University of Otago	New skills for the new game Session chair: Heath Marks, AAF	Sponsors	The Lounge
14:00 - 14:20	Virtualization: The need to know what is going onTim Chaffe, University of Auckland	E-books – how can we show they’re worth it? Ksenija Mincic-Obradovic, University of Auckland	The Opening of a new Campus in Manukau City – A contemporary approach to learning, teaching and the student experience. Richard Molitor, AUT University	Do technical skills matter anymore in a university IT Department? Peter Nikoletatos, Curtin University
14:25 - 14:45	My boss used to tell me I had my head in the clouds, now my strategy is in the cloud Richard Northam, CAUDIT	Discovering scholarly resources: the student experience Julia Gross and Lutie Sheridan, Edith Cowan University	Integrated design – the nexus between curriculum and space at La Trobe University Library Geoff Payne and Fiona Salisbury, La Trobe University	Distance learning and affectivity: the tutor’s role in keeping students’ enthusiasm in the virtual environment Alexandre Graeml, Positivo University, Brazil		Meet Cathrine Harboe-Ree, CAUL President and Gordon Suddaby, ACODE President
14:45 - 15:05	Coffee break
15:05 - 16:15	Closing plenary Session chair: Peter James, Conference Chair
15:05 - 15:55	Close note: Monsters, eduPunks, devils, and things that go bump in the night: Reflections of an educational optimist on a sector gone Gothic Richard N Katz
15:55 - 16:10	Closing matters — End of conference
16:10 - 17:15	Sundowner social

Amphibious Ship for Earthquake Relief

The Royal New Zealand Navy reported that multi-role vessel (MRV) HMNZS Canterbury was alongside in Lyttelton when an earthquake struck on 22 February 2011. The ship was able to immediately begin relief operations.

Unfortunately Media reports indicate that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) has no comparable ships available to assist, with all in for repair.

This would be an ideal use for Australian designed high speed multi hull vessels. The US Maritime Administration (MARAD) used the Australian designed high speed catamaran “Huakai” to deliver aid to Haiti. The US military are acquiring up to ten similar Fortitude class Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) designed by West Australian based company Austal. Unfortunately the Australian Government has no plans to acquire any of these ships for the Australian Defence Force.

Australian Military Sealift and Amphibious Options

Yesterday I wrote "Options for Amphibious Operations by Australian Defence Force", in response to media reports that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) will have limited capabilities for amphibious operations for the foreseeable future. Today I noticed that the Australian Strategic Policy Institute released "Back to the future: Australia’s interim sealift and amphibious capability" (16 February 2011) by Andrew Davies, which comes to much the same conclusions. The Australian military will need to consider interim vessels for transporting the Army , most likely based on commercial vehicle ferries. This is not quite as some cartoonists have portrayed it, with troops on a Sydney passenger ferry. There is now considerable experience in how to adapt vessels for military use, with options for heliports and weapons. The RAAF has used adapted civilian airliners as military aircraft for decades and the practice is now becoming common for navies.

The obvious option option, not raised in the media yesterday, would be the use of Austrlaian built high speed multi hull vessels. The USA is acquiring up to ten Fortitude class Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) designed by West Australian based company Austal. These ships lack the ability to operate heavy landing craft to deliver tanks to a beach. However, they can operate helicopters and could be adapted to operate smaller landing craft. Ships of this type from Austral and Tasmanian builder Incat are available second hand. Use of such ships would have the political benefit of supporting Australian ship builders, who would be able to quickly carry out any needed modifications for militarisation on the ships they designed and built. This work could be done in months, rather than the years needed for a new build.

While there has much been said about automation of US warships to reduce crews required, this work as gone ahead much faster and much more effectively with civilian ferries. During the Sydney Olympics I had a tour of an Incat ferry and talked to the CEO Robert Clifford. It was a little unnerving when he left me on the bridge alone for a few minutes. The ship was tied up at the wharf, but even so there were an array of computer display panels monitoring the ships functions in front of me (as a former HQADF staff member I guess I could be trusted with this). The ship went to sea a few days later for a demonstration for US military, who were so impressed they ordered several (the Austrlaian military were less impressed, preferring to buy rusty US made ships).

Andrew Davies full report is available as a 423 kbyte PDF download.

For any meaningfully-sized operation overseas, the bulk of ADF personnel and materiel would necessarily be moved by sea. Airlift remains the fastest way to move small numbers of troops or small volumes of equipment, but only movement by sea allows for large quantities to be moved efficiently. The government should soon be faced with some choices about the interim provision of sealift and/or amphibious capability for the RAN. This paper examines the options.

From: Back to the future: Australia’s interim sealift and amphibious capability, Andrew Davies, Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 16 February 2011

Options for Amphibious Operations by Australian Defence Force

Media reports indicate that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) will have limited capabilities for amphibious operations for the foreseeable future. The Landing Platform Amphibious ship HMAS Manoora (L 52) will be retired during 2011. Sister ship HMAS Kanimbla (L 51) requires repair until mid 2012, but may be retired early. Landing Ship Heavy (LSH) HMAS Tobruk (L 50) is in for longer repairs than anticipated.

Kanimbla was to be replaced in 2014, by the Canberra class amphibious warfare ship HMAS Canberra. But Canberra may not be delivered on schedule. Also the Canberra class ships are much larger and so less able to do some of the tasks undertaken by the smaller ships.

One option under consideration by the Australian government is to acquire the UK's landing ship dock RFA Largs Bay (L3006), which is being retired due to UK defence budget cuts. Largs Bay is larger (and more capable) than Kanimbla and would complement the Canberra class ships.

Another option being considered is sharing New Zealand's HMNZS Canterbury multi-role vessel (MRV). Canterbury is smaller than Kaninbla and less capable of providing for heavy amphibious operations, but is more suited to low intensity operations (and much cheaper to operate). The closest comparable Australian ship is the southern ocean patrol vessel ACV Ocean Protector.

One option not raised in the media so far would be the use of Austrlaian built high speed multi hull vessels.

The USA is acquiring up to ten Fortitude class Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV) designed by West Australian based company Austal. The RAN has previously operated a similar (but smaller) ship HMAS Jervis Bay (AKR 45) to support operations in East Timor. These ships lack the ability to operate heavy landing craft to deliver tanks to a beach. However, they can operate helicopters and could be adapted to operate smaller landing craft. They also can deliver tanks and heavy equipment to a port with no shore infrastructure required. This was demonstrated when the US Maritime Administration (MARAD) used the Australian designed high speed catamaran “Huakai” to deliver aid to Haiti. Use of such ships would allow a level of commonality in operations with the USA and would also have th political benefit of supporting Australian ship builders.

Boeing P-8I for Indian Navy

Boeing produced a video animation of the Boeing P-8I Poseidon Multimission Maritime Aircraft (MMA) depicting it in use by the Indian Navy to detect and destroy submarine and surface ships. The P8 is a modified 737 passenger aircraft for anti-submarine warfare, shipping interdiction and electronic intelligence (ELINT). India has agreed to buy 8 P-8I aircraft. Operators of the successful Lockheed P-3 Orion anti-submarine warfare (ASW) aircraft (which was also based on an airliner) are also considering the P-8, including Australia. The Indian Navy Information Warfare squadron currently fly locally made Do-228 aircraft using the same Israeli radar as Australia's P-3 Maritime Patrol Aircraft. So there is some potential for cooperation between India and Australia with the new aircraft.

Military Data Network Dependability

"Navy Network Dependability: Models, Metrics, and Tools" is another in the excellent series of technical report from RAND corporation on aspects of military operations. In this report the reliability of the telecommunications networks used by the US Navy is investigated.

The emphasis here is on how reliable the network shared between Navy ships and aircraft in a strike group looks to the military user. A methodology for assessing this is outlined and then applied. As with previous RAND reports the report provides a clearly written but technically rigorous analysis. However, it is limited by the brief given.

In this case the limitation of the analysis is shown by three examples of networking in a carrier battle group. These show the IP Network, Secure Voice Equipment String and the Tactical Data Link Equipment String. These are three different networks all of which have to be supported on ships and aircraft. The logical way to make this more reliable would be to use one network which could prioritise communications and route it over all avialable links. Having separate networks devoted to two different sorts of data and voice makes little sense and is a legacy of the development of such systems.

Navy Network Dependability

Models, Metrics, and Tools

By: Isaac R. Porche, III, Katherine Comanor, Bradley Wilson, Matthew J. Schneider, Juan Montelibano, Jeff Rothenberg

The Navy is increasingly dependent on networks and associated net-centric operations to conduct military missions, so a vital goal is to establish and maintain dependable networks for ship and multiship (e.g., strike group) networks. In this volume, the authors develop a framework for measuring network dependability that is focused on users' perceptions of whether individual network services are available, as opposed to hardware-focused measurements of whether individual pieces of equipment are functioning. The authors used this framework to modify a tool for modeling network availability that was originally developed by Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command; the modified tool allows the user to perform sensitivity analysis that captures the degree to which individual network components affect overall mission operational availability. The authors walk the reader through some exemplar analyses, then conclude with recommendations on how the Navy might facilitate future network dependability assessments, provide more meaningful results to network engineers, and, ultimately, enhance the dependability of networks across the fleet.

Pages: 126

ISBN/EAN: 9780833049940

Joint High Speed Vessel for US Marines

According to a news report, General James Conway, Commandant of the U.S. Marine Corps, is looking at using the Joint High Speed Vessel (JHSV) as a Marine troop carrier. He is concerned that new US Navy transport ships lack a well deck to launch their equipment at sea. But it occurs to me that the Marines simply drive their Amphibious Assault Vehicles (AAV) off the ramp of the well deck, they don't flood the deck unless unloading a landing craft. The JHSV is designed with a rear ramp to unload Abrams main battle tanks. The ramp could be lowered into the water and the Marines drive their AAVs off the end. This would also have the advantage that the AAVs could be launched when the ship is underway. It may be possible to recover the AAV's replacement the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV) at speed on water.

Australian High Speed Ship to Transport Haiti Aid

The US government is deploying the Australian designed 113 metre high speed catamaran “Huakai” to assist with Haiti relief. Completed last year as a vehicle ferry for Hawaii, the ship can carry up to 800 tonnes at 40 knots. It has a shallow draft of 3.7 m, water jets and 20 metre ramp, allowing it to dock and unload without assictance. It is likely the ship will shuttle between Haiti, Guantanamo Bay and Miami.

A similar operation was carried out by the high speed catamaran HMAS Jervis Bay, operating between Darwin and East Timor from 1999 to 2001. Like Huakai, this was a surplus commercial ferry taken up for government use. The US military were impressed with this and leased a number of Australian designed catermarans.

The US Department of Defence has contracted Austal (who built the Huakai), to build up to ten similar "Joint High Speed Vessels" (JHSV) for military transport. The first named “Fortitude” (JHSV 1) is being constructed in the USA. Tjhis will be followed by Vigilant (JHSV 2) and Spearhead (JHSV 3).

Report on Jessica Watson's yacht collision

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has released a preliminary report on the collision between Jessica Watson's yacht Ella’s Pink Lady and the bulk carrier Silver Yang off Point Lookout, Queensland on 9 September 2009. While media reports have questioned the wisdom of a teenager solo sailing, what comes through in the dry technical language of the report is of a skipper acting calmly under pressure.

After the collision the report says the skipper, seeing the mast was about to collapse retreated to the cabin, assessed the yacht was still seaworthy, radioed the Silver Yang that assistance was not required, reported the incident and returned to port.

Ella’s Pink Lady was equipped with an Automatic Identification System to detect other ships electronically, a radar, a radar enhancer (to make the yacht show up better on radar). Navigation equipment included fixed and hand-held magnetic compasses, four GPS units, an integrated electronic chart-plotter/radar display and a laptop computer with a back-up electronic charting system. Also there were two VHF radios, a high frequency (HF) radio, an Inmarsat-M satellite email/telephone and an Iridium satellite telephone.

At 0151½ on 9 September 2009, in a position about 15 miles east of Point Lookout on North Stradbroke Island, Queensland, the Australian registered, single-handed yacht Ella's Pink Lady collided with the Hong Kong registered bulk carrier Silver Yang.

At the time of the collision, Silver Yang was en-route to China and travelling at a speed of about 9 knots on a northerly heading. Ella's Pink Lady was under sail on a voyage from Mooloolaba, Queensland, to Sydney, New South Wales. The yacht was making good a course of 144°(T) and a speed of about 7 knots.

Ella's Pink Lady was dismasted as a result of the collision, but the skipper was able to cut the headsail free, retrieve the damaged rigging on board and motor the damaged yacht to Southport, Queensland.

The ATSB investigation is continuing.

From: Abstract, Collision between Silver Yang and Ella’s Pink Lady off Point Lookout, Queensland, 9 September 2009, ATSB, 268-MO-2009-008, 20 October 2009

Common electronic system for multi-hull Australian warships

In Naval Systems (Proceedings of the US Naval Institute, June 2009) Edward J. Walsh describes the electronic core mission system to be used on the Australian designed USN Navy littoral combat ship Coronado (LCS-4). The Coronado will be the second trimaran LCS for the UN Navy, following the USS Independence (LCS-2), which began sea trials recently. He reports at a simplified version of the same electronic system will be used for the Joint High Speed Vessels (JHSV). The JHSVs are designed by the same Australian company, Austral, as the LCS-2 and LCS-4.

Austal are using a similar trimaran hull for the lower cost Multi-Role Vessel and so the same core mission system would be an option for these vessels. If the MRV was purchased by Australia, that would provide some commonality with UNS systems, as well as between different classes of Australian ships.

The Austral design for the LCS is competing with the Freedom class mono hull design by Lockheed Martin. The Israel Navy has abandoned plans to acquire Freedom class ships and is now reported to be looking at the more conventional German Kedah class ships, as used by Malaysia.