I've had a bit of a read thru from post #30281 (seeing as I've been missing in action due to grand-parenting duties) & CHOULES & KAREL DOORMAN keep on getting mentioned. It has to be remembered that ONE design led to the other, as CHOULES or LSD(A), as they're called over here in the UK, are derived from the Dutch design for KAREL DOORMAN.
Long term acquisitions & the design ethos behind what 'X' ship will be required in 2030 is a bitter pill to swallow. Plan too early & CONOPS will have flipped 180 & you end up with a design / hull type that you're committed to build & almost instantly it's obsolete / needs heavily modified to even be useable. The other side of the design is that you wait 5 years, the pollies drag their heels, the programme gets delayed / cropped / rehashed & the fleet gets a ship 3 - 5 years after they really need it, that's not capable enough as the CONOPS have changed, costs too much & needs instant modifications to meet the needs of the fleet. Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't !
Australia needs to start looking at what she can design / produce / manufacture internally & if that means getting ideas from the likes of Damen / BAE / Navantia (NOT building under Licence, but actually designing from scratch, with external advice / consultation), then in the long term THAT would be better.
Know what you want the ship to do / think about leveraging with other nations in the Indo-Pacific rim (sourcing common components for the hull / hotel services / internal equipment/furnishings, to help leverage the bulk-buy options / reduce overall costs to each nation involved), THEN you'd be onto a winner !
SA
"Damned if ya do, damned if ya don't ! "
A lot of opportunity to do a good job with this project, both for the vessels themselves and also the potential to set up the ability to manufacture larger ships should we deem this necessary.
As to the vessels, part of the answer will be needs and time.
For the later the threat perception will play it's part in that decision.
I would of liked a Navy of three's, but in the Amphibious / supply group we have not gone done that path by just purchasing pairs of ships. ( Canberra and Supply Class ).
For the future, a Multi Role / Supply ship now makes a lot of sense.
Two or three would be a good fit to get our Amphibious / supply group up to a minimum total of six vessels.
What such a ship looks like; well many have recently been discussed and there are more such concepts listed at expo's to choose from.
Take your pick. All will have their merits and limitations
Navantia's concept looks good, but I'd double the helicopter compliment to four.
Re time , it would be fortuitous to acquire a second Bay Class now from the UK.
Unfortunately for us I think the UK value these ships too much to let another go.
What will be interesting for the RAN will be what modifications the UK carry out on one of their Bays Class ships to fulfill their requirements as a stop gap- Littoral strike vessel. ( What ever that is! )
www.navylookout.com
Upshot it will get a hanger and some other mod's. - Something for us to consider.
Regards S
PS - keep HMAS Sirius till we sort out the above!
