Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Richo99]

I posted this question on the Italian navy thread 6 months back, but no responses. It may be relevant here though....
At least some of the PPAs are meant to carry the 21inch Black Shark Advance (BSA) torpedoe, which as far as i am aware is a first for a modern western major surface combatant. I assume it is primarily intended for ASW but cant find anything definative online. If so, it appears to significantly close, if not nullify the range advantage sub launched torps have over surface ship launched ones, which have generally been limited to short range 12.75 inch weapons for many years. is this the way forward, or just an aberation?

 

[Takao]

One for recent history.

Does anyone know if the old Leopard 1 MBT were ever carried on the LCM 8 Landing craft.
I would suspect they were too heavy but would be interested to know.


Regards S

It isn't perfect, but the fourth photo in the album at the bottom seems to indicate a yes (noting there is no indication if it is loaded or not).

Leopard AS1 Main Battle Tank Part One by Paul D. Handel

 

[Stampede]

It isn't perfect, but the fourth photo in the album at the bottom seems to indicate a yes (noting there is no indication if it is loaded or not).

Leopard AS1 Main Battle Tank Part One by Paul D. Handel

Hi Takao

I appreciate the follow up however I feel this maybe off the stern of HMAS Tobruk, not the LCM 8.
Just my observation and thanks again for the input.

Regards S

 

[spoz]

Certainly Tobruk, no LCM had that sort of ramp, and the starboard quarter of the ship is visible.

 

[OldNavy63]

It isn't perfect, but the fourth photo in the album at the bottom seems to indicate a yes (noting there is no indication if it is loaded or not).

Leopard AS1 Main Battle Tank Part One by Paul D. Handel

A more descriptive link is Google Image Result for http://anzacsteel.hobbyvista.com/Armoured%20Vehicles/Images/leo12ph_1.jpg which notes the stern door marriage between HMAS TOBRUK and an LCM-8 took place in Sydney Harbour.

It was dodgy enough seeing HMAS JERVIS BAY or an LCH conduct this serial with TOBRUK offshore. I am unaware of an LCM-8 transferring an MBT to or from TOBRUK offshore (but would be eager learn otherwise).

 

[capmal]

“
The RAN will never be at sea without Helo ASW assets embarked across multiple platforms and at least some of these are expected to airborne even if, in adverse weather, operating from a major unit.
.

Except when not tasked, or too distant, and a contact is gained in the screen. Only seconds to react, not minutes, and an engagement must be conducted urgently with an SLT the only choice.

 

[seaspear]

Is there then an argument for the missile fired anti submarine torpedo , with a longer range than a compressed air fired torpedo from the surface ship ,not forgetting that a mh-60r helicopter may require hours of maintenance between flight time

 

[ASSAIL]

Except when not tasked, or too distant, and a contact is gained in the screen. Only seconds to react, not minutes, and an engagement must be conducted urgently with an SLT the only choice.

Some ASW realities: if there are ASW helos in a force they will always be tasked on a screen, they play the same role as an ASW frigate.
If a contact is gained within the screen the ASW battle has been lost and naturally SLTs may be used and this is precisely why most tacticians regard them as a “weapon of last resort” as I described in my post.
My point was the expense and space given to making them a primary weapon which includes a magazine and reloading system is not warranted, there are enough last resort weapons carried already loaded into their tubes within the force.

 

[Pusser01]

Some ASW realities: if there are ASW helos in a force they will always be tasked on a screen, they play the same role as an ASW frigate.
If a contact is gained within the screen the ASW battle has been lost and naturally SLTs may be used and this is precisely why most tacticians regard them as a “weapon of last resort” as I described in my post.
My point was the expense and space given to making them a primary weapon which includes a magazine and reloading system is not warranted, there are enough last resort weapons carried already loaded into their tubes within the force.

Concur with your reason above Assail, the Anzacs are unable to have their SVTT's reloaded while at sea. I can't remember if the Perth class DDG's were able to either.
Cheers.

 

[ASSAIL]

Concur with your reason above Assail, the Anzacs are unable to have their SVTT's reloaded while at sea. I can't remember if the Perth class DDG's were able to either.
Cheers.

CFA DDGs could not be reloaded but also remember they originally carried 64 Ikara, 32 per side.
I’m not sure why they ditched them although I assume that once CVS Melbourne had gone they needed to become leaders and that required the space for Flag Staff and their niceties?

 

[Redlands18]

CFA DDGs could not be reloaded but also remember they originally carried 64 Ikara, 32 per side.
I’m not sure why they ditched them although I assume that once CVS Melbourne had gone they needed to become leaders and that required the space for Flag Staff and their niceties?

Wasn’t the problem with Ikara that it could only lift the MK 44 Torpedo and with the move to the heavier MK 46 it couldn’t lift it?

 

[StingrayOZ]

Not to mention P8's would I assume also be around if there was any credible threat to a RAN taskforce. Why reload when you can have a much faster platform, already in theatre, that carries more anyway, do that and can be rearmed and moved much faster and is basically untouchable by a sub?

Which is why I guess why have ASROC/VLT, when anything further than SLT or would be launched from an air asset or from another sub. At least for the RAN and its area of operations.

 

[ASSAIL]

Wasn’t the problem with Ikara that it could only lift the MK 44 Torpedo and with the move to the heavier MK 46 it couldn’t lift it?

No that’s not correct, Ikara could lift both 44s and 46s as well as, in the RNs case, Nuclear Depth Bombs (NDBs)

 

[alexsa]

No that’s not correct, Ikara could lift both 44s and 46s as well as, in the RNs case, Nuclear Depth Bombs (NDBs)

Thanks ... you beat me to it. Wiki is wrong, from memory the last version of the Ikara (not counting the stillborn super Ikara out of a box launcher) was the Ikara M46-Mod 2 .... the past bit denoting the torpedo.

I have been trying to find a picture of the box launch Ikara .... it was actually fired and had folding wings.

Found it .... sorry you will have to watch the slide show

Redirect Notice

 

[Redlands18]

Thanks ... you beat me to it. Wiki is wrong, from memory the last version of the Ikara (not counting the stillborn super Ikara out of a box launcher) was the Ikara M46-Mod 2 .... the past bit denoting the torpedo.

I have been trying to find a picture of the box launch Ikara .... it was actually fired and had folding wings.

Found it .... sorry you will have to watch the slide show

Redirect Notice

Thanks for the replies guys, not sure where I got my info from, it was from years ago.

 

[capmal]

' ASW helos in a force they will always be tasked on a screen,'

When they are available, or close enough, which is always less than you plan for. Your contact is underfoot and they are not airborne, or they are 5-10 miles away, in the dip - go figure. P-8 is 20 miles away - go fish.

The ASW frigates' role is to screen the HVU, immediately engaging valid contacts. If that can be done with a helicopter or MPA, in a timely manner, --- bonus. Else it is back to the SLT. Having a layer of Helos to 'play the same role as an ASW frigate' is almost as good as a layer of ASW Frigates playing the role of an ASW Frigate, 24/7. Without a multitude of MH-60Rs embarked in the force, 24/7 dip gang coverage is a forlorn hope. Obviously, both layers would be preferable.

The nature of the ASW battle is that the SM has to get to where the (properly designed) screen is positioned, because of sensor and firing limitations, in order to hit the HVU. Maximum torpedo range does not mean maximum employment range.

If a contact is gained within the screen the ASW battle has not been lost. It is the natural culmination of a submarine approach: getting into position to fire a torpedo. There is never any guarantee that preceding layers of defence will have been successful and one had better be ready with an SLT for the SM that has successfully avoided detection and prosecution in other defensive layers.

The last resort is, actually, Torpedo Self Defence (decoys etc). There may well be other 'last resort weapons carried already loaded into their tubes within the force' , presumably to deal with missile threats. But, a torpedo hit tends to be binary in outcome and I would prefer to have every layer available rather than depending on aircraft that may be airborne (or not), close enough (or not), or able to gain my contact (or not) in time to prevent a torpedo attack.

The analogy is relying on F-18s to provide your air defence and not bothering with all those shipborne radars, illuminators, missiles, medium calibres, CIWSs, small calibres, and leaving it to NULKA. If you want to save some space, start with the main ornament.

 

[capmal]

Wasn’t the problem with Ikara that it could only lift the MK 44 Torpedo and with the move to the heavier MK 46 it couldn’t lift it?

Ikara had Mk 44 and Mk46 payloads.

Sorry, didn't see earlier replies

 

[spoz]

CFA DDGs could not be reloaded but also remember they originally carried 64 Ikara, 32 per side.
I’m not sure why they ditched them although I assume that once CVS Melbourne had gone they needed to become leaders and that required the space for Flag Staff and their niceties?

While I agree with Chris that SLTs are a weapon of last resort, the Hobart class has the ability to reload them at sea, a legacy of the Spanish origin of the design.

Ikara was removed because of the change in strategic circumstances with the end of the Cold War, and the fact that the version then in use was becoming obsolescent. I’m pretty sure that’s also what stopped the development of the boxed version; it was seen at the time that the limited available funding could better be used for other things. The magazine ended up becoming a mess deck I think, I didn’t serve in a CFA after it was removed.

 

[ASSAIL]

While I agree with Chris that SLTs are a weapon of last resort, the Hobart class has the ability to reload them at sea, a legacy of the Spanish origin of the design.

Yes I saw that but it begs the question, once the magazine is converted to the LWT Mk45, where would the MU 90 reloads be kept?
I suspect that standard practice will evolve to only the four tubes being loaded, unless I’m missing something? Is there a ready use magazine near the tubes?

 

[Volkodav]

CFA DDGs could not be reloaded but also remember they originally carried 64 Ikara, 32 per side.
I’m not sure why they ditched them although I assume that once CVS Melbourne had gone they needed to become leaders and that required the space for Flag Staff and their niceties?

I heard from a former Ikara PM that the issue was that to get the best out of Ikara it needed a helo with a dunking sonar and once the Seakings lost this capability (and the navy a carrier to operate them, Ikara lost most of its effectiveness as it relied on the ships own sonar that offered nowhere near the targeting data or detection range required to get the best out of the system. Happy to stand corrected by those more knowledgeable on how the system was used.