ADF General discussion thread

[Volkodav]

The acquisition of the Giuseppe Garibaldi by Indonesia has been in the works for a while, and its impact will be significant. It dramatically increases Indonesia's ability to project power across Southeast Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region.

Indonesia approves 450m loan to acquire aircraft carrier

With the addition of this aircraft carrier, Indonesia will not only enhance its defence posture but also assert itself more strongly as a regional power. Likely, it will play a crucial role in disaster relief and humanitarian operations, making a major contribution to regional stability and cooperation.

As emerging powers like Indonesia enhance their military and strategic capabilities and take on greater leadership roles, how established powers—Australia, India, the U.S., Japan, South Korea, and China navigate a more complex regional environment, and how alliances and security partnerships evolve, will be fascinating to watch.

There are striking parallels between the geopolitical situation in the Asia-Pacific region today and Europe in the years leading up to the world wars. The rise of new powers, the shifting balance of military and economic influence, and the complex web of alliances and rivalries. Hopefully, the Asia-Pacific powers manage these growing complexities better than the Europeans did in the 20th century.

Defence Security Asia writes:

"Ultimately, the Giuseppe Garibaldi represents not merely a ship, but a catalyst for Indonesia’s emergence as a decisive actor in shaping the future security architecture of the Indo-Pacific"

If memory serves the Garibaldi design was one of the three finalists for Australia's carrier replacement program in the late 70s. It is ironic that Indonesia may well end up operating this ship.

Maybe this will lead to a rethink in Canberra and whittle away the cringe that we are too small and cannot afford such a ship.

With advancing autonomous technology, additive manufacturing as well as AUKUS, GPF and F-35 programs, the arguments against the utility, usefulness and sustainability of such a ship are rapidly disappearing.

Autonomous technology - such a ship would be ideal for operating UAVs and UCAVs in useful numbers as these tend to be much smaller than current crewed types.

Additive manufacturing - large maintenance spaces would permit the installation of state of the art cold spay and other systems allowing a complement of modern day artificers to produce spares, conduct repairs, even fabricate entire systems for specific purposes while deployed. Need a glide kit for a munition, make it, need an adaptor to fit an item to a UCAV bay, make it.

AUKUS - the subs are the primary strike asset, fleet killer and area denial weapon. The carrier(s) will not be the primary threat or target.

GPF - A long standing argument against an RAN carrier was we do t have enough escorts, GPF on top of Hunter Hobart and Hobart replacement is more escorts than we have had since WWII. Throw in a number of carriers and we have multiple balanced task forces.

F-35 - in service with the RAAF, STOVL B version available and proven. Even in small numbers this aircraft is a game changer in ISR, it would transform a task forces situational awareness. That little PLAN task group that freaked out certain people earlier this year, just imagine an RAN task force with a small carrier, six F-35B and supporting UCAVs shadowing it from a safe distance with an SSN in closer.

Finally, HMS Unicorn , very definitely not an aircraft carrier, rather a forward aviation support ship. Basically a modern day equivalent, a ship that can assemble, repair, modify aircraft (F-35, helps, UAV, UCAV, even missiles), serve as a depot, a support base, a flagship/command node. It could even supply parts and support to escorting major fleet units. A mother ship for optionally crewed combatants, a support ship for litoral amphibious deployments.

Maybe not a Garibaldi, think more a modified, multirole support ship evolved from an Izumo design. A modern day Unicorn, that can, when needed, serve as a carrier.

 

[Morgo]

Maybe this will lead to a rethink in Canberra and whittle away the cringe that we are too small and cannot afford such a ship.

We already operate two ships that are twice the size and twice the capability - Canberra and Adelaide.

The Giuseppe Garibaldi is tiny by comparison - not much larger than a fully loaded Hunter at the current rate - and getting on half a century old. The Indonesians will be doing well to reliably generate a meaningful capability from it.

 

[Stampede]

We already operate two ships that are twice the size and twice the capability - Canberra and Adelaide.

The Giuseppe Garibaldi is tiny by comparison - not much larger than a fully loaded Hunter at the current rate - and getting on half a century old. The Indonesians will be doing well to reliably generate a meaningful capability from it.

Good luck to them
It’s a good fit for many a Navy but as you mentioned it’s very old.
A good training platform and in service capability they currently don’t have today.
But it’s not a LHD with the logistics flexibility such a design provides and as an aviation asset it certainly has qualities for its limited sized but Indonesia does not have the naval aviation assets Italy does.
That said a good choice.
As for the RAN please continue to maximise the aviation potential of the Canberra Class.
Their great ships.

Cheers S

 

[Volkodav]

We already operate two ships that are twice the size and twice the capability - Canberra and Adelaide.

The Giuseppe Garibaldi is tiny by comparison - not much larger than a fully loaded Hunter at the current rate - and getting on half a century old. The Indonesians will be doing well to reliably generate a meaningful capability from it.

Adelaide and Canberra are not carriers.

That cringe I referred to is the fact that carriers, like SSNs used to be, are something the RAN can never operate because of "insert conflated reason".

Because the LHDs are a purple asset, optimised for amphibious operations, they are not perceived as a ASW helicopter carrier, let alone a STOVL carrier or drone mothership.

There are also only two of them, giving them extra roles will probably not happen.

As you pointed out GG is not much bigger than a Hunter, which is exactly what I was thinking. A small, carrier that we could afford four or five of, even six, could be a very versatile addition to the fleet.

A modern forward aviation support ship, drone mother ship, ASW help carrier and STOVL carrier, thant can easily also carry army helps for vertical envelopment.

 

[Morgo]

Adelaide and Canberra are not carriers.

That cringe I referred to is the fact that carriers, like SSNs used to be, are something the RAN can never operate because of "insert conflated reason".

Because the LHDs are a purple asset, optimised for amphibious operations, they are not perceived as a ASW helicopter carrier, let alone a STOVL carrier or drone mothership.

There are also only two of them, giving them extra roles will probably not happen.

As you pointed out GG is not much bigger than a Hunter, which is exactly what I was thinking. A small, carrier that we could afford four or five of, even six, could be a very versatile addition to the fleet.

A modern forward aviation support ship, drone mother ship, ASW help carrier and STOVL carrier, thant can easily also carry army helps for vertical envelopment.

Hmmm. You may be on to something.

To be honest though I’d rather we bought another 2 - 3 Canberras. They are providing amazing bang for the buck.

 

[Volkodav]

Hmmm. You may be on to something.

To be honest though I’d rather we bought another 2 - 3 Canberras. They are providing amazing bang for the buck.

Smaller and slower, and not capable of operating F-35B but something like this-
NRP D. João II - Wikipedia

The other thought, the support side, i.e. additive manufacturing and artificers, these could even serve as tenders for SSNs and and MFUs.

 

[spoz]

I’ve got the design stashed away somewhere - the Training and Helicopter Support Ship (THSS). We almost got it approved in the early 90s.

 

[OldTex]

Perhaps a modern incarnation of the Invincible class, but not trying to be an fleet aircraft carrier. Comes back to something like an LPH. Almost a cross between HMAS Sydney III (A214/L134) and HMAS Stalwart II (D215).

 

[Stampede]

Adelaide and Canberra are not carriers.

That cringe I referred to is the fact that carriers, like SSNs used to be, are something the RAN can never operate because of "insert conflated reason".

Because the LHDs are a purple asset, optimised for amphibious operations, they are not perceived as a ASW helicopter carrier, let alone a STOVL carrier or drone mothership.

There are also only two of them, giving them extra roles will probably not happen.

As you pointed out GG is not much bigger than a Hunter, which is exactly what I was thinking. A small, carrier that we could afford four or five of, even six, could be a very versatile addition to the fleet.

A modern forward aviation support ship, drone mother ship, ASW help carrier and STOVL carrier, thant can easily also carry army helps for vertical envelopment.

Manned fixed wing over land and sea is evolving.
With resources continuing to development aircraft for the future it certainly appears to have a place in the decades ahead.
We are very much in the F 35 club going forward as are many others.
As Volk mentioned.
There could be a place for a
“RAN task force with a small carrier, six F-35B and supporting UCAVs shadowing it from a safe distance with an SSN in closer.”

I have followed with interest what small Carriers with attached small air wings bring to the fleet

Many decades of proven capability.

Navy’s today seek this and spend time and capital to acquire this force multiplier.

UCAV will compliment this capability going forward.

RAN / ADF well we know better.

I sometimes wish we could bolt shut the accommodation cabins surplus to the ships core crew and aviation compliment and shut off the heavy landing deck and just see what the Canberras can do in an aviation centric role.

Start with the full range of ADF helicopters plus our unmanned assets.

Then evolve it!

I get the LHDs are purple assets
I also get we are getting an Amanda of landing craft
I also get what the Juan Carlos Class and ships of similar size can do in other Navy’s either in reality or aspiration.
The LHDs have great aviation potential.

Just so long as we don’t call Adelaide and Canberra carriers we should do justice to these ships and the options they give to government.

They are too capable to just be utilised as a Vung Tau Ferry!!

Like a Swiss pocket knife let’s use all its tools.



Cheers S

 

[Bluey 006]

A modern forward aviation support ship, drone mother ship, ASW help carrier and STOVL carrier, that can easily also carry army helps for vertical envelopment.

Forward is the key word here.

This is a missing piece of RAN ORBAT, one that is probably more needed as unmanned underwater systems proliferate.

Helicopters are the primary asset aboard a warship to prosecute submarines, the more we have available the better.

We already operate two ships that are twice the size and twice the capability - Canberra and Adelaide.

The Canberra-class LHDs are excellent at what they’re designed for, but do we really want them operating in waters where hostile submarines are active?

If said Aviation ship or UxV cruiser is conducting ASW or operating to support deployed assets (naval or land) with UxVs it is likely operating within or close to or within A2AD zones. Not a very safe place for your primary amphibious deployment assets. They just become large liabilities that need to be protected.

Furthermore, in a distributed maritime operations environment, where you might have several groups of deployed forces 1000s of kms apart, two ships won’t be enough for amphibious ops and aviation ops, and the SSNs can’t be everywhere (the Ghost sharks will help, but their capability is yet to be proven).

Said ships may even operate in support of the LHDs /LPD/LC-H using their ASW helicopters and UxVs (or weapons) providing a “sensor and shooter” screen forward of the high-value assets, or to clear a littoral zones ahead of a landing, or as Volk says provide additional lift etc

From 2024 #9496

What would it be preferable, is a dedicated UXV Through Deck Cruiser to support and protect the LHDs and other high-value ships. An aviation-capable ship that can deploy and control the full suite of unmanned systems (UAV/UCAS, USV, UUV) and large numbers of anti-submarine helicopters. Possibly a trimaran design, with its own VLS and self-defence systems.

A few different concepts have been thrown around for a Drone Carrier or, the Hanwha interpretation

Although Turkey did it with the Juan Carlos class, Portugal has done it with MPV all be it with a different mission set, and China is also getting in on it with the Mysterious Drone carrier

 

[Volkodav]

I’ve got the design stashed away somewhere - the Training and Helicopter Support Ship (THSS). We almost got it approved in the early 90s.

Didn't that get canned and we bought Kanimbla and Manoora instead? Admiral Hudson's push after the first Fiji coup and we had no way to evacuate Australian citizens?

I would love to see it.

I always thought to original Bremer Vulcan design for Thailand was very interesting, the one they ordered before switching to Navantia.

 

[Volkodav]

Similar in concept, but different. Imagine if Australia had ordered a couple in the late 30s to support the RAAF or one to replace Albatross.