Does Australia need an aircraft carrier?

Big-E

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #141
Aussie Digger said:
Under such circumstances a tactically significant airgroup could be carried by the vessels, with one particularly focussed on the Carrier role and operating up to 30 (if we actually HAD that many) F-35B's, plus a number of AWACS or ASW helo's, (again if we operated such)...
Wow, RAN could go from a pocket navy to a 2nd teir force with the Navantia purchase. How would it feel to be a major naval power?
 

contedicavour

New Member
Big-E said:
Wow, RAN could go from a pocket navy to a 2nd teir force with the Navantia purchase. How would it feel to be a major naval power?
It would be good to have a friendly navy of this size patrolling the Southern Pacific... but can the Australian budget sustain 2 LHD(almost CVs), 3 Aegis DDGs, 12 FFGs (4 mod OHP and 8 Anzac), and 6 SSKs, plus helos and STOVL aircrafts ?
If money were short I would buy ex-RN Sea Harriers, still good reliable birds armed with AIM-120B

cheers
 
A

Aussie Digger

Guest
contedicavour said:
It would be good to have a friendly navy of this size patrolling the Southern Pacific... but can the Australian budget sustain 2 LHD(almost CVs), 3 Aegis DDGs, 12 FFGs (4 mod OHP and 8 Anzac), and 6 SSKs, plus helos and STOVL aircrafts ?
If money were short I would buy ex-RN Sea Harriers, still good reliable birds armed with AIM-120B

cheers
We certainly seem to be able to so far. Crewing is proving more difficult than funding these purchases and upgrades.

In addition to those, we have the new Armidale Class patrol boat fleet, the new (relatively) Minehunter fleet, a new underway replenishment ship (due in September 06) and a new "fast sealift" ship, to replace either of Kanimbla/Manoora (which is not replaced by a new LHD), new NH-90's current Sea Kings.

There is also talk of a further 3x AWD's to be acquired to replace the 4 FFG-UP OHP frigates further out towards 2017-2020. This would leave use with 6x AWD's, a potent force by anyone's standards...

RAAF is most likely to purchase F-35 as it's replacement fighter aircraft. If sufficient funding is provided it may be possible to purchase some F-35B's, which would still be operated by RAAF, but operated off LHD's at times as necessary.

You are quite right. We already possess the most capable navy in the South Pacific, and arguably the most capable in the Southern Hemisphere. The upcoming acquisitions will certainly enhance that position...
 

Supe

New Member
Aussie Digger said:
There is also talk of a further 3x AWD's to be acquired to replace the 4 FFG-UP OHP frigates further out towards 2017-2020. This would leave use with 6x AWD's, a potent force by anyone's standards...
This is news to me. I wasn't aware that additional AWD's were being considered. I just hope the choice and construction of AWD's can be fast tracked. When were the Adams class DDG's retired? The gap in capability must be approaching 10 years by now.

I don't imagine Labor being keen on a further 3 x AWD's. They'd probably opt for another fitted for but not with gunboat class to replace the FFG's.
 

scraw

New Member
Big-E said:
Wow, RAN could go from a pocket navy to a 2nd teir force with the Navantia purchase. How would it feel to be a major naval power?
As AD said funding for most of that (F-35B excluded) is already planned.

The RAN will never be the USN, the population isn't there to support it and to be honest I can't see where that sort of global presence would be justified. As it is we are prickly enough to discourage threats to Australia or those friendly to us in the region while also having the capacity to contribute to operations further afield.

To me that will remain the basic stance with future aquisitions aimed at enhancing that capability. In time to come we may well see that money for another AWD (as a random example) might be better spend on improving pay or living conditions to attract more people to actually crew the fleet.
 

Cootamundra

New Member
Supe said:
This is news to me. I wasn't aware that additional AWD's were being considered. I just hope the choice and construction of AWD's can be fast tracked. When were the Adams class DDG's retired? The gap in capability must be approaching 10 years by now.

I don't imagine Labor being keen on a further 3 x AWD's. They'd probably opt for another fitted for but not with gunboat class to replace the FFG's.
I've heard similar but who know's what will happen. It makes plenty of sense though, I for one don't think that the RAN is all that happy with the idea of an 11-ship offensive navy which is what we will have after the AWDs come online and the Adelaides are decomm'd. I reckon 4-6AWDs plus the 8 upgraded ANZACs would do very nicely. This plus the Amphibs, the at sea replenishment ship, the new oiler, the replacement fast transport and the 14-ship patrol force gives us plenty of options. As for manning, don't forget that all the crews from the older ships will be transitioned, I think I read somewhere that with all of these changes we were not looking at a massive increase in manning levels to crew. Anyway time will tell. As for improving pay conditions, I think this does need attention as does the RANs approach to crewing ships. Sailors with families should be allowed to locate at either fllet base East or West (or out Darwin/Broome) and then they should be allowed to stay there for extended periods. This would give them stability and one hopes some simplicity for their families leaving the sailors more likely to stay in service. Crews for all ships could then be made up from the personel attached to each fleet base.
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
supe, i dont think it matters if labor would be keen to support the decision to buy 3 more AW destroyers at the moment, cause i cant see em being elected in the forseeable future!;)
 

abramsteve

New Member
We are in an excellent position to further our naval power here.

Not operating JSFs off a future Amphib/s merley closes options, however not permanently. We are not going to fight another Midway, nor are we going to launch airstrikes against a nation that has a creditable air force. We are going to support our Allies or we are going to police. When we are with our Allies we arent going to need JSFs on deck, but when we police we could use the extra firepower. If we have two such ships we can easily have one with choppers the other with a mixed JSF/Helo wing. As long as they can operate either without reducing troop/equiptment load then I dont see why we would have a problem.

2x (maybe 3) ANZACs 1x AWD and 2x Collins should be able to handle ASW, AA and any surface threats, correct me if Im wrong of cource.

Im envisoning a scenario where the Fiji government has been overthrown by the military or a simillar situation where Australian forces may be deployed...
 

RubiconNZ

The Wanderer
Trouble in the hood

abramsteve said:
.

2x (maybe 3) ANZACs 1x AWD and 2x Collins should be able to handle ASW, AA and any surface threats, correct me if Im wrong of cource.

Im envisoning a scenario where the Fiji government has been overthrown by the military or a simillar situation where Australian forces may be deployed...
Tha task group assuming they are upgraded Anzacs could take care of any threat in the south pacific with out to much worry, any other nation would have trouble supporting a threating fleet, cept the US of course, Singapore could have a go but we're mates as well, even a European Navy would have a tough time this far away from home
 

KAPITAIN

New Member
The UK managed to wage war 8,000 miles from home with a fair few problems, and as we have good relations with india im sure they wouldnt mind us using thier ports.

Mod edit: And this has WHAT to do with the thread question? Stick to the thread or create a new one if you wish. Cheers - AD.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cootamundra

New Member
KAPITAIN said:
The UK managed to wage war 8,000 miles from home with a fair few problems, and as we have good relations with india im sure they wouldnt mind us using thier ports.
Good for you! What are you going to do invade Australia cause we regained the Ashes :p:!

The British and the French could all send task forces down our way, but they couldn't sustain them for an extended period. Only the US has the capability to project power into all of the world's oceans.

For my mind with the AWDs and the SPS (hopefully) the RAN will be well placed to further its capability advantage in our immediate region. Only Japan, South Korea (possibly) and China (if in the vicinity of Taiwan and their coastline) will have the capability to match the RAN.

One thing to note, the ADF's budget is on the up, the FedGov has commited to continuing to match inflation and with the various additional programs actual budget levels are rising to 1.9% GDP. They are talking about a A$30 billion dollar budget by the start of the next decade. This is sufficient to fund the exisiting programs including upto 100 F-35s. Will that purchase include VTOL that is the question.
 

Markus40

New Member
The LHD option for the RAN is a very good one and i have expressed this in a earlier posting. Realistically i think at this stage a task force of 1 x LHD and its support surface combatants would give the RAN an edge and be a global provider of security this end of the world.

As to the LHD, the Wasp version is a very good option for Australia on the basis of being able to project manpower and airpower all at the same time. I understand that the USS Wasp is able to take 20 VTOL AV-8B s and i assume that this would be the same number for the F-35s. As a task force for any theatre operations whether on exercise or to keep Australia on top of the maritime game, having the LHD would be a major asset in the RAN arsenal.

I agree that the transition of man power from the decommissioned Adelaide class frigates will more than compensate for the running and operating of the LHD. If NZ was to keep improving its Naval forces with a third ANZAC and upgrading its OPVs with more maritime capabilities then join this with the RAN we would have a very good Naval strength down under.

An LHD for the Australian Navy is unquestionably the way to go and is the future for Australia foreign policy projections.

Aussie Digger said:
We certainly seem to be able to so far. Crewing is proving more difficult than funding these purchases and upgrades.

In addition to those, we have the new Armidale Class patrol boat fleet, the new (relatively) Minehunter fleet, a new underway replenishment ship (due in September 06) and a new "fast sealift" ship, to replace either of Kanimbla/Manoora (which is not replaced by a new LHD), new NH-90's current Sea Kings.

There is also talk of a further 3x AWD's to be acquired to replace the 4 FFG-UP OHP frigates further out towards 2017-2020. This would leave use with 6x AWD's, a potent force by anyone's standards...

RAAF is most likely to purchase F-35 as it's replacement fighter aircraft. If sufficient funding is provided it may be possible to purchase some F-35B's, which would still be operated by RAAF, but operated off LHD's at times as necessary.

You are quite right. We already possess the most capable navy in the South Pacific, and arguably the most capable in the Southern Hemisphere. The upcoming acquisitions will certainly enhance that position...
 

Markus40

New Member
Good on yer mate, i agree, however i might add that the French and British forces combined to undertake such an operation would be a formidable force in deed and would hold out for a long time i would suggest. Some of the French Islands like New Caledonia could be good jump points for launching air and sea operations if they wanted too.


Cootamundra said:
Good for you! What are you going to do invade Australia cause we regained the Ashes :p:!

The British and the French could all send task forces down our way, but they couldn't sustain them for an extended period. Only the US has the capability to project power into all of the world's oceans.

For my mind with the AWDs and the SPS (hopefully) the RAN will be well placed to further its capability advantage in our immediate region. Only Japan, South Korea (possibly) and China (if in the vicinity of Taiwan and their coastline) will have the capability to match the RAN.

One thing to note, the ADF's budget is on the up, the FedGov has commited to continuing to match inflation and with the various additional programs actual budget levels are rising to 1.9% GDP. They are talking about a A$30 billion dollar budget by the start of the next decade. This is sufficient to fund the exisiting programs including upto 100 F-35s. Will that purchase include VTOL that is the question.
 

KAPITAIN

New Member
"The British and the French could all send task forces down our way, but they couldn't sustain them for an extended period. Only the US has the capability to project power into all of the world's oceans. "

I dissagree here consider that britian has a auxilary fleet comprising of over 30 vessels and one of the largest merchant fleets in the world not to mention allies such as india close by, id not hessitate to say that we could hold out we did in the falklands and we had 24 harriers against what was the count about 200 argentine fighters.

the good thing about having a large merchant fleet is that you can commandier them, my ship dart 8 her sister dart 9 and 10 were all commandered for use in iraq in 2003, all three ships carried tanks jeeps helicopters and soildiers, with the amount of ferries we have we could land most if not all our army onto your beeches.

I know it sounds far fetched but if you look into it theres a tad of logic, we used a thonsend thoresen ferry in 1982 to help land troops, in 2003 the MOD used my ship dart 8 to carry and land troops.

combine that with our royal fleet auxilary and the royal navy then yes id say we could support a major deployment that far away, you only have so many planes and ships and men so it might take a while but i believe we could if we tried.

But why would we want to your a good friend and an ally.
 

Big-E

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #155
KAPITAIN said:
"The British and the French could all send task forces down our way, but they couldn't sustain them for an extended period. Only the US has the capability to project power into all of the world's oceans. "

I dissagree here consider that britian has a auxilary fleet comprising of over 30 vessels and one of the largest merchant fleets in the world not to mention allies such as india close by, id not hessitate to say that we could hold out we did in the falklands and we had 24 harriers against what was the count about 200 argentine fighters.

the good thing about having a large merchant fleet is that you can commandier them, my ship dart 8 her sister dart 9 and 10 were all commandered for use in iraq in 2003, all three ships carried tanks jeeps helicopters and soildiers, with the amount of ferries we have we could land most if not all our army onto your beeches.

I know it sounds far fetched but if you look into it theres a tad of logic, we used a thonsend thoresen ferry in 1982 to help land troops, in 2003 the MOD used my ship dart 8 to carry and land troops.

combine that with our royal fleet auxilary and the royal navy then yes id say we could support a major deployment that far away, you only have so many planes and ships and men so it might take a while but i believe we could if we tried.

But why would we want to your a good friend and an ally.
Your comparison of Fuerza Aérea Argentina to RAAF is laughable. Your Harriers wouldn't last five seconds against the RAAF Hornets. If the RN was going to have a chance in hell they would HAVE TO find bases for RAF within striking distance of your LZ. UKs EFs must be included in this fight to have any prayer of gaining air-superiority. This really is the key to any invasion force. If RAF can get these assets in place I might be inclined to agree with you as things currently stand. If your going to defeat the ADF you have to throw everything you've got, those M1A1s will rip you to pieces if you don't take them out early.
 

oldsoak

New Member
Big-E said:
Your comparison of Fuerza Aérea Argentina to RAAF is laughable. Your Harriers wouldn't last five seconds against the RAAF Hornets.
I wouldnt compare the FAA to the RAAF either , but in 1982 they were a very real threat to regaining the Falklands. We didnt diss them at all.
The likelyhood of UK battling Aus is unlikely outside a cricket pitch or rugby scrum - and we generally drag it out to full time - so the comment about SHar not lasting five minutes against RAAF hornets begs the question which varieties of SHar and Hornet are we talking about ?
 

KAPITAIN

New Member
The hornet is now what 25 years old plus, the aussies dont have the super hornets, id say it will be a tie.

the only real disadvantage the harriers have is speed but we took on aircraft even faster than hornets in the falklands, etandards and mirages are capible of mach 2+ from whats seen all over a hornet just about reaches mach 1.8.

in terms of a close in dog fight the hornet is inferior the harrier can out turn it easy.

The hornet carrys more weapons AIM-9's which both planes can carry hello same mission same result just the skill of the pilot.

so id say definatly got a chance against hornets here.
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
KAPITAIN said:
The hornet is now what 25 years old plus, the aussies dont have the super hornets, id say it will be a tie.

the only real disadvantage the harriers have is speed but we took on aircraft even faster than hornets in the falklands, etandards and mirages are capible of mach 2+ from whats seen all over a hornet just about reaches mach 1.8.

in terms of a close in dog fight the hornet is inferior the harrier can out turn it easy.

The hornet carrys more weapons AIM-9's which both planes can carry hello same mission same result just the skill of the pilot.

so id say definatly got a chance against hornets here.
I would say that your info on the Aussie Hornet is now out of date, it has/is being extensively updated and I believe that a Boeing exec described the Aussie Hornet as the most advanced legacy Hornet flying.

Added to that the ASRAAM and AMRAAM (I believe they are both in service) coupled with the fact that the Harrier is now limited to short range AAMs and I believe that the FAA/RAF would be at a disadvantage.

Happy to be corrected if I have it wrong.
 

oldsoak

New Member
Whiskyjack said:
I would say that your info on the Aussie Hornet is now out of date, it has/is being extensively updated and I believe that a Boeing exec described the Aussie Hornet as the most advanced legacy Hornet flying.

Added to that the ASRAAM and AMRAAM (I believe they are both in service) coupled with the fact that the Harrier is now limited to short range AAMs and I believe that the FAA/RAF would be at a disadvantage.

Happy to be corrected if I have it wrong.
Current Aussie F18's are easily on par with the last model Shar FA2 - I'd say they are a lot better.
The FA2 ( not to be confused with the Falklands era FRS1 ) carried AMRAAMs ( the first UK aircraft so armed ) and had a very good radar so would have been very nasty at BVR - better than the early version of the RAAF F18. Obviously, the games moved on since then and the current RAAF F18 with its latest upgrades to radar etc is rather different beast.
The F18 actually turns better than the Shar and has ASRAAM vs FRS2 AIM9L/M so in theory has a better engagement envelope than Shar. Add JTIDs and Wedgetail, the RAAF looks like it can sort out most threats for a fair while yet.
 

Whiskyjack

Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analys
Verified Defense Pro
oldsoak said:
Current Aussie F18's are easily on par with the last model Shar FA2 - I'd say they are a lot better.
The FA2 ( not to be confused with the Falklands era FRS1 ) carried AMRAAMs ( the first UK aircraft so armed ) and had a very good radar so would have been very nasty at BVR - better than the early version of the RAAF F18. Obviously, the games moved on since then and the current RAAF F18 with its latest upgrades to radar etc is rather different beast.
The F18 actually turns better than the Shar and has ASRAAM vs FRS2 AIM9L/M so in theory has a better engagement envelope than Shar. Add JTIDs and Wedgetail, the RAAF looks like it can sort out most threats for a fair while yet.
Except that the Aussie F18 is in service and the FRS2 isn't!
No point comparing models when one has been retired, its the GR9(?) now. Also Wedgetail is a wee way behind schedule as well. I'm always a bit leery about comparing platforms that arn't in service for one reason or another! ;)

At the end of the day these assets will be operating together not against each other.

Although I am sure that the Aussie F18s will be exercising against the FRS2 in Indian colours in the future from all accounts!
 
Top