RAN Dreamland Thread

[vonnoobie]

My personal favourite was the opportunity to purchase the four Kidd-class destroyers upon their completion once it was clear they were never going to Iran as originally planned. They would have provided a fantastic capability to the RAN, one that could have been upgraded as necessary to lead in to the AWD project, which (as you pointed out) would have ideally been filled with Flight II Arleigh Burkes purchased straight from the United States, rather than a competition which ultimately landed us a less capable ship for more money than an AB buy would have cost...

Those four Kidds could still be flying RAN colours now and presented a fantastic upgrade potential with technologies such as CEAFAR...

It is a shame, Though some what understandable considering the drama we went through with the Newport LST's. That said we till should have at the very least sent over a group to examine them up close, At $30m a pop in 1997 then the cost of the air fares would have been a more then acceptable risk.

Only thing that really comes into play is if these would have been acquired along with the Hobart's or if the AWD project would have been scrapped entirely...

 

[t68]

Sorry but why on earth would you assign the land attack mission to the Absalon-class? I realise it's everyone's favourite flavour of the month but as far as I know it doesn't even have strike-length VLS, just enough for ESSM and a little over a dozen Harpoons.
.

Correct in there present state and the Stanfex modules the don't have strike lenght MK41, but I did find a proposal (not official) for a modified Canadian Absalon with MK41 as their next gen Destroyer. My thinking is that the modified Absalon could also hold a couple of CB90 Assualt craft for independent action away from the main body for raids or pirate hunting etc whist also supporting with the JSM or Tac-Toms

Multi-role Destroyer - Canadian Surface Combatant - Danish Absalon - Area Air Defence Destroyer - CASR Modest Proposal - Canadian American Strategic Review - Royal Canadian Navy - RCN Fleet - Destroyer Replacement - Absalon Class - Support Ship - Spe

Maybe so, but nuclear weapons are above and beyond even in here. Even though it's a dreamland thread, it doesn't hurt to look at the larger picture and think about it as well. There are ramifications and unintended consequences that need to be factored in. Hence why I say nuclear weapons are a non starter. The other questions that I asked will have an impact upon your potential CONOPS and force structure so you need to think of alternatives. For example to crew a USN CVN it would take the whole of the RANs personnel and probably then some. Remember that the USN philosophy regarding crewing is different to the RANs, so they structure their shipboard systems differently.

Now if you want to have different weapons that's not an issue. Why not a shipborne laser system? Gives you good reach. Add a rail gun as well. Just need a really good power supply - extensive generation capability - possibly a nuclear fission reactor or a fusion one. Combine that with CEA radar products and then you have a highly capable weapons system.

Ngati,*
agree on ADF being nuclear armed that ship sailed long ago,
as to two long range and endurance submarine one being nuclear powered and the other conventional don't really sea the need on that one also. But if he had suggested submarine force of 12 nuclear and 6 small conventional I could see the logic, On nuclear subs don't need to point there role but those *6 conventional would have a dual role of clearing the space out of the barn for the nuc's and also a training capabilty for the surface fleet in the littorals, 3 boats East/West

Now to the enlarged surface fleet, would love to see big catobar carriers(Ford) but for our own stragic needs they are obviously too large. Smaller Cavour or America class carrier will have a utilty in that they cover a number of roles within the fleet/ task force and our primary partner in the Pacfic the US 7th Fleet. Unless the elephant in the room feels that an expansion is needed for our resources their is no direct threat to the continent and as such would favour an operation *more of a containment would keep us at bay, therefore we need to have overwhelming superiority in our are air-sea gap as well as a capabilty to push further if need as part of our expeditionary focus.*

We have seen Chinese expansion with soft power in our region what the long term ramifications *are still to be determined, AusGov/NZG are slowly see our influence in the Pacific dwindle, I would imagine once these smaller countries are depended on China they may want some quid pro Que.in regards to a defence presence,*and we have also seen then start to dominate the africain continent in Djibouti and the resurgent Russian influence in Pakistan, indo-Pacfic region is no longer the calm we have come to expect over the last couple of decades.
*
My rational for the 5x Cavour's is far in excess of current needs, but I do believe we should have the capacity for independent action of our own Anzac task force which provides the Amphiboius task force with ASW- CAP & CAS. In ASW role we could have 12x F35B plus 9x MH-60R and 2x MRH, in the strike role they would have 18x F35B 2x MH-60R & 2x MRH for 2x units East/West with the fifth in heavy maintenance.*

We know that the ability for the RAAF to maintain a presence over the task force beyond 400nm with out using up all our AAR assets and time on station is another problem using up airframe hours just for the transits.*

 

[oldsig127]

I'd just be happy with RAN actually getting what it asks Government for...

Articles already written have quoted senior persons saying RAN's request for the 'Future Frigates' will be too expensive...

This is certainly in the right place on the fantasy thread. What most people fail to understand (or don't want to account for) is that the government has a damn near infinite list of things to fund using a very far from infinite bucket of money.

In my service days it irked me badly when we were given half what we needed, but post Vietnam any more spending would have caused a change of government to one with even less commitment to Defence. Not much has changed.

Otto von Bismark knew. "Politics is the art of the possible"

Find a way to tell all those ignorant taxpayers that they should fork out more tax, or give up their favourite government service and not only will Navy get what it asks for, but you'll have a fine future herding cats.

oldsig

 

[rockitten]

My rational for the 5x Cavour's is far in excess of current needs, but I do believe we should have the capacity for independent action of our own Anzac task force which provides the Amphiboius task force with ASW- CAP & CAS. In ASW role we could have 12x F35B plus 9x MH-60R and 2x MRH, in the strike role they would have 18x F35B 2x MH-60R & 2x MRH for 2x units East/West with the fifth in heavy maintenance.*

I like it except, how about 4 AEW helicopters in your "strike mods"? That's the real force multiplier for the task force. If my memory serve me correctly, there were photo of a Indian navy frigate/destroyer's carrying a Ka-31AEW on board. Doesn't seems like a routine though (just like their trial of ballistic missiles for a corvette).

One real advantage of catobar carriers is the fixed wing AEW. Yes, there are AEW helicopters, but their radar is not as good as the one on E-2D. There was proposal for a V-22AEW, but it doesn't seems likely in the near future.

 

[t68]

I like it except, how about 4 AEW helicopters in your "strike mods"? That's the real force multiplier for the task force. If my memory serve me correctly, there were photo of a Indian navy frigate/destroyer's carrying a Ka-31AEW on board. Doesn't seems like a routine though (just like their trial of ballistic missiles for a corvette).

One real advantage of catobar carriers is the fixed wing AEW. Yes, there are AEW helicopters, but their radar is not as good as the one on E-2D. There was proposal for a V-22AEW, but it doesn't seems likely in the near future.

You are spot on with that assessment for multiple AEW assets such as the E2D and that limits us to a French PA2 which is based on the UK CVF. For possible future long range multi-spot AEW aircraft is the V22 Osprey, which gives us severel option on the StOVL carrier from Cavour right up to Queen Elizabeth CVF

I am not entirely sure on the number of V22 spots on Cavour if it's anything like Canberra then that's one. Japan has ordered a number of V22 for which I imagine Izumho would have multipe spots knowing the Japanese and I have seen pictures of 5 V22 on the flight line of Wasp class LHD for which the America is an aviation enhanced version.

The other primary driver of selecting a STOVL carrier and F35B whilst my fantasy fleet is based is that it also gives us option with using the LHD as an alternative in case of emergencies for whatever reason so that would actually gives us 9 assets to use if needed.


What would be interesting to see if the added expence of the F35B and maintence schedule would be offset using the cheaper F35C and cats, wonder if we went to UK Aircraft Carrier Alliance and said give me a fixed cost price on a STOVL carrier and a CATOBAR carrier and see the long to pro's & con's of each taking into account aircraft price and long term maintanace which is cheaper?

 

[StobieWan]

It's the dreamland thread Ngati. Reality doesn't apply here!

It'll have to because this Defencetalk - not Stratpage. So, yeah, whatever's proposed would have to fit inside a current budget, avoid no brainers like nuclear armed or nuclear powered combatants (surface or sub surface) If it doesn't then this thread gets termed an unhappy experiment in freedom of expression and canned.

 

[t68]

It'll have to because this Defencetalk - not Stratpage. So, yeah, whatever's proposed would have to fit inside a current budget, avoid no brainers like nuclear armed or nuclear powered combatants (surface or sub surface) If it doesn't then this thread gets termed an unhappy experiment in freedom of expression and canned.

That should have been stipulated at the start, but who's current budget previous goverment with 1.5% of GDP or hoped budget of 2% GDP. PM Howard had us hovering around 2% and gave supplements which puts us over 2% at times, how long is a piece of string?

This is a placeholder for RAN "fantasy" or generally unrealistic items - it will be relatively lightly moderated as a result as long as contributions remain respectful and are at least formatted and readable.

So, if you want to discuss flat tops for the RAN, nuclear subs, or any amount of uncosted and unworkable proposals for the RAN, please do so here. The intention is to free up the RAN thread for discussions of a more grounded nature. Knock yourself out.

Unfortunatly you opened pandora box

 

[t68]

As we are only looking at one posable aspect of the strategic triad of the ADF, decisive planing for the future is a complex *task and selecting capabilities out till 2030-2040, because it will take up to 20 years to bring many these capabilities chosen. Strategic guidance should take into account the**required *survivability to absorb predicted threat levels in futrure Area of Operation, and a sufficient*overmatch in combat power to overcome predicted threat.

We cannot assume *in the future that United States bases in Guam, Japan and elsewhere will enjoy high levels of security in future crises, and with the rate of PLAN A2AD expansion*that RAN and allied naval surface vessels can operate with high security in all parts of the Western Pacific, that*assumption is for United States and allied air forces as well, it's for these reason this dreamland thread is or should be aimed at a more self-reliant Australian defence strategy.
*

 

[vonnoobie]

should be aimed at a more self-reliant Australian defence strategy.
*

Couldn't agree more, First priority should be self reliant, second should be interoperability. In regard's to be self reliant, one aspect that need's to be looked at long term is oil storage, We have at the best of times a week's supply in Australia, General recommendations say that nations should have a couple of months minimum.

If our logistics grinds to a halt (lack of fuel) then eventual flow on effect's would endanger operations by the ADF (In worst case scenario).

 

[t68]

Couldn't agree more, First priority should be self reliant, second should be interoperability. In regard's to be self reliant, one aspect that need's to be looked at long term is oil storage, We have at the best of times a week's supply in Australia, General recommendations say that nations should have a couple of months minimum.

If our logistics grinds to a halt (lack of fuel) then eventual flow on effect's would endanger operations by the ADF (In worst case scenario).

You don't have to worry about that, at the rate we are closing oil refinery's all they have to do is interdict our fuel shipments and Australia will grind to a halt inside of a week.

http://www.shell.com.au/content/dam...nloads/clyde/shell-clyde-factsheetsept-12.pdf

http://www.caltex.com.au/CommunityAndEnvironment/KurnellSiteConversion/Pages/Home.aspx

Mobil Adelaide Refinery

From memory only ones left are Mobil Altona which is on borrowed time, Shell Corio which has been sold to Viva. Caltex Lytton is still operating at the moment, not sure what's happening with Kwinana refinery, but as far as I am awere that the import only terminal fuel is coming in from Sth Korea and Singapore mainly

 

[vonnoobie]

You don't have to worry about that, at the rate we are closing oil refinery's all they have to do is interdict our fuel shipments and Australia will grind to a halt inside of a week.

http://www.shell.com.au/content/dam...nloads/clyde/shell-clyde-factsheetsept-12.pdf

http://www.caltex.com.au/CommunityAndEnvironment/KurnellSiteConversion/Pages/Home.aspx

Mobil Adelaide Refinery

From memory only ones left are Mobil Altona which is on borrowed time, Shell Corio which has been sold to Viva. Caltex Lytton is still operating at the moment, not sure what's happening with Kwinana refinery, but as far as I am awere that the import only terminal fuel is coming in from Sth Korea and Singapore mainly

Doesn't necessarily have to be refineries, Just storage but I do see your point. Doesn't help the government (all of them) hasn't had a long term strategy for this unlike other nations.

Looking at what we would need and what we have storage capacity would have to increase 600% over what the total current storage/refinery capacity is.

Might be a difficult task, But if the nation will grind to a halt in a week after the outbreak of major conflict then what is the point in investing into any of the stuff we are?

 

[Bonza]

Correct in there present state and the Stanfex modules the don't have strike lenght MK41, but I did find a proposal (not official) for a modified Canadian Absalon with MK41 as their next gen Destroyer. My thinking is that the modified Absalon could also hold a couple of CB90 Assualt craft for independent action away from the main body for raids or pirate hunting etc whist also supporting with the JSM or Tac-Toms

Even with a theoretical Stanflex capable of taking Tomahawks I don't think you'd be assigning your land attack portion of the fleet to independent raids/pirate hunting as in their primary role as land attack they are extremely valuable ships. I don't think haring off on their own away from fleet air defence and sub cover would be a particularly good idea for the one ship you've got executing strikes against valuable land targets. Don't you think it would be a better idea to mix up some Tomahawks amongst your other Mk. 41 carrying ships so it becomes a fleet distributed warload and you can dedicate the Absalons to anti-surface (16 anti-ship missiles is, after all, a decent payload) and, if necessary, tasking them to independent action doesn't endanger strike components? There's also the small problem of their carriage of Tomahawks coming from an unofficial and unbuilt Stanflex module, I realise this thread is highly theoretical but there are still more sensible ways of doing things...

 

[Bonza]

That should have been stipulated at the start, but who's current budget previous goverment with 1.5% of GDP or hoped budget of 2% GDP. PM Howard had us hovering around 2% and gave supplements which puts us over 2% at times, how long is a piece of string?




Unfortunatly you opened pandora box

Here on DT pandora's box can be closed, I promise you. So take the thread you've been given and use it appropriately, but not in such a way that it detracts from the forums at large. All good?

 

[t68]

Here on DT pandora's box can be closed, I promise you. So take the thread you've been given and use it appropriately, but not in such a way that it detracts from the forums at large. All good?

Yeah all good, as it was a mod who started the thread, if he wanted it defined with certain aspect he should have stated it from the start. That's all

 

[Volkodav]

Yeah all good, as it was a mod who started the thread, if he wanted it defined with certain aspect he should have stated it from the start. That's all

The assumption is we are, or should be, responsible adults on here and should be able to moderate their own behaviour and comments. Obviously any suggestion that is not only financially fanciful but demographically impossible will gain the wrong sort of attention from the mods and will likely see the thread locked.

Things were going well to start with, even the talk of battleships was ok as the RAN had operated a battle cruiser and aspired to a battleship in WWII, it was actually within the realm of reality. Modernised Essex, CVA01 and Centaur class carriers were recommended as suitable for the RAN but a USN CVN, even the Ford class with their reduced crewing, would be such a resource hog the ADF would never be able to support it. This is the sort of thing that needs to be considered when formulating these lists if we could afford it could we crew it, could we escort and support it?

Please keep this in mind and enjoy.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yeah all good, as it was a mod who started the thread, if he wanted it defined with certain aspect he should have stated it from the start. That's all

Better late than never....

spirit of intent issue from my perspective.... ie what was worrying myself and a few others was that the RAN thread was migrating back to unrealistic propositions which were totally ignoring real world constraints, the RAN Blue Paper direction and real politik.

So, from my perspective at least, and with some other nudging, there was a clear need to protect the broader integrity of the RAN thread and not have it dribble slowly (almost like biorhythms) into wally world territory.

We do try to maintain the core driver of the forum which is to have serious discussions and not have it degrade into Tom Clancy, PS3/PS4/Xbox mode... so again, from my perspective, I assumed (maybe incorrectly) that the longer term members would have picked up on expectations....

Again, from my perspective, I hope that newbies, lurkers etc pick up forum intent by osmosis more than direction. ie more experienced members try and guide discussion into real world constraints etc so that we don't go through the sufferings of some other forums which end up becoming platform centric debates and the newbies don't get to understand that platform acquisition still gets constrained by real politik, force balance issues, budgetary constraints, manpower limitations etc....

 

[t68]

It's a pity I am not more PC literate to be able to build a site similer to this, and have restraints on budget , it makes for an interesting exersise to keep a fleet within budget. Hats off to the bloke who built it, it's very good.

http://fantasyfleet.comuv.com/index.html

 

[RobWilliams]

IMO it's worthless. The most simplistic way of boiling down fleet structure with only one constraint - yearly operating cost. No consideration of anything else.

When it's that basic, it literally has no worth more than a 'I like this, this and this' shopping list.

May as well pick things of Wiki.

 

[t68]

IMO it's worthless. The most simplistic way of boiling down fleet structure with only one constraint - yearly operating cost. No consideration of anything else.

When it's that basic, it literally has no worth more than a 'I like this, this and this' shopping list.

May as well pick things of Wiki.

That's what the maker of the site intended it to be a fun game, that's why it's a fantasy fleet builder, it may not be the way goverments do things but it does make one think about choices to keep a set budget

 

[vonnoobie]

What may help if people can make heads or tails of it http://www.defence.gov.au/budget/14-15/2014-2015_Defence_PBS_Complete.pdf Various cost's for the different forces, programs, joint ops, Even flying hours for different air frames and days of use for army, air force and naval units.

Found a mentioning of 'Sustainment Capability' relating to the RAN on page 20, What that Is I have no idea honestly.

Also found other cost's relating to the Navy on page 33.

Best of luck to other's with it, Hopefully some place in there are some number's we can use as a base for what we could acquire/operate.