Ty, will do
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
About the former HMAS Sydney III, I recently saw this video. As the Vung Tau ferry, it took six days to turn her around, Later during the Vietnam War after some improvements they were able to turn her around in six hours.
The Vung Tau Ferry - Royal Australian Navy
The Vung Tau Ferry - Royal Australian Navy
He He, you guys are funny !! have looked back at the threads on the LHD's and the F35B argument, and while it basically comes down to the government of the day, a lot of the argument as to the capability of the LHD seems to come down to personal opinion !! can ANYONE show me the specifications of the JC1 or the Canberra LHD's ??. I have done extensive searches and can't find this information. I can't find anywhere how much JP5, ammunition, workshop space, spare parts storage,etc, etc, etc, etc !! and it goes on, that these ships actually have !! all that you find on the net is basic specs (and that varies from site to site) all of which once again comes down to guessing and (I would assume maybe some educated) comparison to dedicated aircraft carriers, and to some extent the american wasp class.Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
FYI, there are a number of members in here with military or industry experience. whose opinions on the viability of the Canberra class for a given role could be accorded more weight than that of idle speculation. People whose names appear in blue (and most of the mods with names in red or maroon) have, in my experience on these boards, quite a lot of useful knowledge to share.
Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
It's also worth noting that the specifications of the Canberra class are absolutely not the be-all and end-all of its applicability for fast jet operations. For example, something brought up by gf0012-aust earlier in the thread, and something that has nothing to do with the specifications of the Canberra class, is that we do not have anyone overseas learning fixed-wing carrier operations from our allies, while we do have people overseas looking at amphibious operations. This is, according to gf, a bigtime indicator that we're not interested in F-35Bs for the Canberras, as if we were putting together a workable doctrine for deploying fixed wing aircraft from the ships then it would be a priority. Might be something you want to take into account when forming your opinion as to the chances of such an eventuality.
I suggest you search and read quite a bit of information available on the world wide web of the Juan Carlos I BPE, much of it in Spanish. Use babel fish to translate. You will be able to read this stuff with your own eyes....
Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
Here there is data for the wasp class:
USS Wasp (LHD-1) class
Here for the canberras data in spanish:
Asociación Milicia Naval Universitaria
To resume for you, canberras, weapons bunker: 600 sq mt., jp5: 800 tonnes (wasp 1230 tonnes).
and in english (select the language) from the spanish minister site but without some data:
Background - Modernization - Armada Española
Cheers.
USS Wasp (LHD-1) class
Here for the canberras data in spanish:
Asociación Milicia Naval Universitaria
To resume for you, canberras, weapons bunker: 600 sq mt., jp5: 800 tonnes (wasp 1230 tonnes).
and in english (select the language) from the spanish minister site but without some data:
Background - Modernization - Armada Española
Cheers.
Ty for the facts, that's what im talking about. As I said I am a factual person. I know our current focus is not on the F35B and the current (and future) governments are unlikely to obtain them, was just curoius as to the "capability" of such operations, even though compared to the wasp for instance the capability is smaller, but we would never do operations to the level of the Americans anyway. I think you guy's are right in that we may see some cross dock operations in the future with the americans etc. You must admit it would be a sweet thing to see ?
I am still working my way through the 200 and something odd pages so will slowly get up to speed on what the thread has covered, sorry if this has been covered before. Any thoughts on what the Navy's ASW helicopter will be ? will certainly add a fantastic capability to the fleet. We currently seem to be favouring the European made choppers at the moment. Do they have any suitable off the shelf ASW units, or could we possibly use the NFH version of the current MRH 90 ? Would seem to be a smart way to go, as I understand the MRH 90 were built in Brisbane, so the ability to build in Australia would be hard to pass, and we already have the infrastructure, parts, trained crew and maintenence in place ?
I am still working my way through the 200 and something odd pages so will slowly get up to speed on what the thread has covered, sorry if this has been covered before. Any thoughts on what the Navy's ASW helicopter will be ? will certainly add a fantastic capability to the fleet. We currently seem to be favouring the European made choppers at the moment. Do they have any suitable off the shelf ASW units, or could we possibly use the NFH version of the current MRH 90 ? Would seem to be a smart way to go, as I understand the MRH 90 were built in Brisbane, so the ability to build in Australia would be hard to pass, and we already have the infrastructure, parts, trained crew and maintenence in place ?
Yes cross decking with the poms and the yanks would be very interesting and be a fantastic ship for the RAN and the ADF.
About the helos, most people seemed to think the NFH offer will be most favoured and given every opportunity, however if it can't cut it (particularly in the time frame we need it which is now) we can buy american. Obviously the benifits of aussie build, high commonality with existing helicopter fleets for logistics, capability and training won't be overlooked.
About the helos, most people seemed to think the NFH offer will be most favoured and given every opportunity, however if it can't cut it (particularly in the time frame we need it which is now) we can buy american. Obviously the benifits of aussie build, high commonality with existing helicopter fleets for logistics, capability and training won't be overlooked.
I think you are right, the NFH 90 version would be hard to pass up by the government, but as you said we need them now. Which american chopper do you think would suit the bill ?? they have several to choose from ?
I have also noted while catching up on the thread the discussion on the replacement LCH. I must admit it is something I have not given much thought to ! It is amazing the variations available, does anyone have any thoughts on what style would operate best with the LDH's and potential new sealift ship, would they also have to take into consideration what form the new OCV will take ? as this multi role ship could potentially have numerous capability's
I have also noted while catching up on the thread the discussion on the replacement LCH. I must admit it is something I have not given much thought to ! It is amazing the variations available, does anyone have any thoughts on what style would operate best with the LDH's and potential new sealift ship, would they also have to take into consideration what form the new OCV will take ? as this multi role ship could potentially have numerous capability's
The latest I heard of ADF's thinking is this with the 24 ASW helicopter acquisition... Its several months old now, but I have yet to hear or read anything different...
Defence chiefs prefer the U.S. for new RAN ASW helicopters « ELP Defens(c)e Blog
Defence chiefs prefer the U.S. for new RAN ASW helicopters « ELP Defens(c)e Blog
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Regarding the Future Naval Helicopter, IMO there are only two real candidates. These are the NFH-90 or the MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawk. On a comparison basis between the two helicopters, there are pros and cons for both of them in terms of capabilities, operations, etc. What I suspect will determine which helicopter is chosen is just when the RAN has to have the Future Naval Helicopter enter begin entering service. The earlier the date, the greater the likelihood of the 'Romeo' being chosen. The later the in-service date, the greater the chances are that the NFH-90 will be the chosen helicopter.
Unfortunately, no one knows (or if they know, they are not saying) what the deadline is for the Fleet Air Arm. However, given how long the S-70B-2 Seahawks having been operating, particularly when the 16 helis were operating when the plan had been for 27 helis in-service, I suspect that the date is sooner rather than later. Also, articles by ASPI arguing for delaying the 'matter of urgency' replacement of the Seahawks long enough to almost coincide with what had been planned Seahawk replacement date under the AIR9000 Phase 8 project to rationalize the ADF helicopter fleet. Incidentally, it appears that due to work being undertaken under the S-70B-2 Seahawk SCAP, the current Seahawks might not be retired until ~2019, instead of the 2016 target date previously given under AIR9000.
This service life extension SCAP is intended to provide is despite a ~11% increase in the fleet's annual flight hours in 2009-2010. By the 2011-2012 timeframe, the Seahawk fleet's annual flight hours is expected to be ~35% greater than it was prior to the cancellation of the SH-2G(A) Seasprites. Between that, and the corrosion and system obsolescence issues from operating 20+ year old naval helicopters, the SCAP seems rather ambitious.
I am tempted to say that it would be a better idea to drop the SCAP and instead have the current RAN Seahawks re-manufactured into MH-60R 'Romeo' Seahawks now. Once completed, this would provide the RAN with modern, updated and 'like-new' naval helicopters with significantly greater capabilities than are currently available to the RAN. This would also give the RAN time to pick and choose exactly what they wanted in the Future Naval Helicopter (either keep the MH-60R or switch to a NFH-90 variant) without having quite as much pressure on making a decision now. If the MH-60R was the 'winner' of the selection, then some would already be in or being readied to enter RAN service, just a few more would need to be purchased. OTOH if the MH-60R was not the winner, I am sure that the USN or Sikorsky would be happy to purchase the ex-RAN MH-60R's since they will still have service life remaining in the airframe.
Incidentally, AFAIK the -R in the MH-60R designation stands for "Re-manufactured" and Sikorsky has been scrambling somewhat the get their hands on used Seahawk airframes to put through the re-manufacture process to fufil USN orders for the MH-60R. This makes me think that even if the NFH-90 does get chosen as the Future Naval Helicopter now or at a latter date, the current Seahawks will be kept in service for some time by someone, even if not the RAN.
-Cheers
Does anyone follow the RAN Flickr feed? There are some great historical shots. Some great ones of AE2 and the Melbourne too.
Flickr: Royal Australian Navy's Photostream
I liked them anyway.
Flickr: Royal Australian Navy's Photostream
I liked them anyway.
Good points, the "RE-MANUFACTURED" part of that does make me cringe though ! the word "Sea Sprite" comes to mind, and I think would be something the current government may be very hesitant to do after all the political point scoring they gained with the doomed project. If we did go that way though, if the USN are in dire need of old airframes, I would not think we would be high on the priority list when it comes to upgrading our fleet ? which may leave us with the same problem of lead in time and not having a gap in capability ?todjaeger said:
Last edited by a moderator:
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
I thought the -R was just the next letter in the alphabet after the latest varient of the Blackhawk/Seahawk.
If they are remanufactured airframes, with available airframes probably already claimed by the USN, that just makes the NFH-90 more attractive as a proposition in my opinion.
If they are remanufactured airframes, with available airframes probably already claimed by the USN, that just makes the NFH-90 more attractive as a proposition in my opinion.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
It is hard to say, since some of the letters in the alphabet have been skipped, like the -I 'India' and the -O 'Oscar', and others have been re-used, like the -A, -R and -S.
Something to keep in mind though is that the MH-60R is currently in USN service, now. Basically what is happening is that SH-60B/F Seahawks are taken and comprehensively upgraded and re-worked. In short, it is like the SCAP being planned/done on the RAN S-70B-2 Seahawks, but it seems a bit more comprehensive.
What might be possible is for the RAN Seahawks to enter the pipeline for upgrade to MH-60R standard and the USN might be willing to let the ADF purchase from some of their (USN) stock or upcoming production lot. Remember, the Future Naval Helicopter is only supposed to be 24 in number, if the 16 S-70B-2 Seahawks can be converted, the RAN would only need 8 more to reach the intended number
-Cheers
The -R was initially designated for Remanufacture, but that idea was given up some time ago. All the USN airframes are new.
Here is a new computer graphic video of the new Canberra class LHDs. Enjoy the 32 seconds. NH-90s, Tigers, and Chinooks on the flight deck...
Canberra Class - Royal Australian Navy
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
It needs some patriotic/nationalistic Music to go with it.
why would a zeroed airframe make you cringe?
you do understand that the issue of the sea sprite was about trying to automate capability at the expense of a crew member and that it was due to changing scope to meet the technology demands expected by the users and drivers?
a zeroed airframe is not the same as an old airframe
btw, the Romeos are not remanufactured.
there are any number of people in the RAN who prefer the Romeos over the the NFH-90. We do get inputs and feeds from other users, and as much as the builders of the NFH try to disregard the current noise re problems, those problems are real and travelling amongst allies and friends.
if there aren't problems then they need to deal with the users, - not the general public
- Status