Wasnt the problem with the Varyag, that the Turkish didnt allow an engineless hull to be towed through the Bosporus? I m not sure about the actual costs though.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
If in doubt
Was frustrating me trying to find the reference so I sent an email to the BAE LHD Project office and went straight to the horse's mouth so to speak.
They said the Canberra will be transported to Williamstown by the MV Blue Marlin !
That will be a hell of a site to see that going through the rip into the bay
Was frustrating me trying to find the reference so I sent an email to the BAE LHD Project office and went straight to the horse's mouth so to speak.
They said the Canberra will be transported to Williamstown by the MV Blue Marlin !
That will be a hell of a site to see that going through the rip into the bay
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Ouch, that would definately be a sight, considering the overhang over the back. Wouldn't that be a fair bit of stress on the hull as well?
You would think so ? the Marlin isnt an open back so the Canberra would have to be on an angle with overhang either side
Wiki states that it has the capability for the weight of the Canberra but length wise you would have in the order of 30 meters of overhang port and stdb ? it would be one hell of a ride, here is a pic of the Marlin carrying the USS Cole which is 154 mtrs
http://fatvegan.com/wp/attachments/2007/09/800px-mv_blue_marlin_carrying_uss_cole1.jpg
The Marlin has a listed deck space of 178.2 x 63, with an overall length of 224.5 mtrs and a beam of 73 mtrs, versus the Canberra at 230.8 x 32 mtrs.
It will certainly be a very delicate operation ! Hope they use good quality bubble floats
Unless they can somehow have the bow of Canberra protruding through the two towers on the stern of the Marlin with Canberra stern up against the back of the superstructure, but that would mean a bow overhang of some 60 mtrs from Marlin's stern with maybe some other form of support for the bow ? Time will tell, one thing for sure though, there will be a lot of cameras out on the day
I am surprised they say that lockheed martin is developing at this moment the extended range version of the asroc with 4 or 5 times the range of the nowadays asroc, wow it seems too big extension, its like the old asroc (70-80´s technology) versus the new vla-er (xxi century tech).
But we can imagine our helo working in the anzacs ii perimeter, if any sub shots the helo and its inside the range of the vla-er (extended range) then our ship can throw some asrocs for the sub, in that aspect the hostile sub will be more carefull to show his position (or shooting an helo) if its in the range of the asroc.
I would thank to know if the shipborne light weight torpedos can be used to interpcept incoming hostile light-heavy torpedos, in fact hull sonars can be selected to search in depth or from some depth upto the surface, and if picks an incoming torpedo, the ship has torpedo launchers at both side of the ship, and here we see the utility of having the same light weight torpedo for the helo and the shipborne ones, if you have the mk 46 for the helo and you have the mu90 for the shiplaunched ones it would give you less flexibility because you cannot use the mu90 for the sikorsky helo (at this moment, probably), anyway i dont think you can use the mu90 from the awd or anzac ii, it will need an integration (possible?), because the ship is using systems linked to the mk torpedos.
The effectiveness of asrocs would be more clear to us if we would know the ranges of the ships sonars, and between these and the helos magnetic anomalies detector, sonoboyes or even the its active sonar, it seems they could be situations where some asrocs are going to be useful, if so then very useful. As you pasted its been months/years ago the 1000 th asroc out of factory, sufficient to be estimated as effective.
Cheers.:smoker
Wouldnt it be easier to bring the superstructure to spain with the blue marlin, finish the job in spain, and then sail normally to australia?You would think so ? the Marlin isnt an open back so the Canberra would have to be on an angle with overhang either side
Wiki states that it has the capability for the weight of the Canberra but length wise you would have in the order of 30 meters of overhang port and stdb ? it would be one hell of a ride, here is a pic of the Marlin carrying the USS Cole which is 154 mtrs
http://fatvegan.com/wp/attachments/2007/09/800px-mv_blue_marlin_carrying_uss_cole1.jpg
The Marlin has a listed deck space of 178.2 x 63, with an overall length of 224.5 mtrs and a beam of 73 mtrs, versus the Canberra at 230.8 x 32 mtrs.
It will certainly be a very delicate operation ! Hope they use good quality bubble floats
Unless they can somehow have the bow of Canberra protruding through the two towers on the stern of the Marlin with Canberra stern up against the back of the superstructure, but that would mean a bow overhang of some 60 mtrs from Marlin's stern with maybe some other form of support for the bow ? Time will tell, one thing for sure though, there will be a lot of cameras out on the day
Or if the hull can float just tie it with a couple of chains or ropes to other ship and bring it, instead of putting it above with an overhang of some meters, of course they choose a route with little sea state..
Thanks.
Last edited:
Movement of the LHD will definately be interesting.
Its not like they need to pass a little sea.. Indian ocean is pretty huge.
Its not like they need to pass a little sea.. Indian ocean is pretty huge.
Bloody oath mate. I will be there if I can!
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #3,868
Having been on newie last year, it was good to see the magnet fire off something, the boys who worked on it are still on a high, as are the whole crew after all the shit they went through to get that thing in the air, nothing beats weekday running to find out you Combat system is a an error in itself, then the big boxmagnet is whats stopping you from leaving Aus...The guys worked hard to get that thing in the air, and have done well to achieve it...BZ to them.Some very nice photos of HMAS Warramunga at RIMPAC 2010 firing the first Harpoon off an FFH can be seen at RIMPAC 2010 - Department of Defence
Also she conducted a SINKEX on the old USN New Orleans RIMPAC 2010 - Department of Defence I went to RIMPAC 2005 where Parramatta sunk an old Spruance DD, 20 rounds of 5" HEPD (High Explosive Point Detonating) hit her on the same place right on the water line and blew her bow off....she went down in minutes
Even more good pic's at RIMPAC 2010 - Department of Defence showing Warra and Newcastle blasting off multiple ESSM and SM2
All and all a good fun couple of days for the Gunbusters in the task group
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
One of the first images of HMAS Perth undergoing it's ASMD upgrade has been released:
Looks like the construction is coming along well....
Looks like the construction is coming along well....
A little bit more hereOne of the first images of HMAS Perth undergoing it's ASMD upgrade has been released:
Looks like the construction is coming along well....
Defence Materiel Organisation
Wonder who gets the blue and white seat - Mr Spock?
:rb
Wonder who gets the blue and white seat - Mr Spock?
rb
Captain Kirk. (or Smith, or Bloggs)....
Does it come with photon torpeados?
Heavy Lift ships are desinged for such loads and the over hang is not a real issue, provided you plan well. The have been some spectacular failures.You would think so ? the Marlin isnt an open back so the Canberra would have to be on an angle with overhang either side
Wiki states that it has the capability for the weight of the Canberra but length wise you would have in the order of 30 meters of overhang port and stdb ? it would be one hell of a ride, here is a pic of the Marlin carrying the USS Cole which is 154 mtrs
http://fatvegan.com/wp/attachments/2007/09/800px-mv_blue_marlin_carrying_uss_cole1.jpg
The Marlin has a listed deck space of 178.2 x 63, with an overall length of 224.5 mtrs and a beam of 73 mtrs, versus the Canberra at 230.8 x 32 mtrs.
It will certainly be a very delicate operation ! Hope they use good quality bubble floats
Unless they can somehow have the bow of Canberra protruding through the two towers on the stern of the Marlin with Canberra stern up against the back of the superstructure, but that would mean a bow overhang of some 60 mtrs from Marlin's stern with maybe some other form of support for the bow ? Time will tell, one thing for sure though, there will be a lot of cameras out on the day
2006 Nightmare M/V Mighty Servant 3
t68
Well-Known Member
I not sure how old this report from the ABC is, but is pretty biased imo, there are some interesting observations regarding Collins class and the future submarine.
[nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqQLBL3bh84[/nomedia]
Government acknowledges past problems in defence projects and the need to better manage sensitive projects in all three branches of the ADF.
Differing views on Collins seems to be that they are between a dog’s breakfasts to a one of the premier conventional submarine in the world; they are challenging Australia’s ability to go it alone to build from scratch for the next gen sub.
The general consensus is that it will be another disaster, they believe when Australia goes into cutting edge tech that the head sheds fail to understand the complexities involved and under estimate the difficulties in bring the tech to maturity. They also go on to say if we go for (their words) Rolls Royce of submarine we have no chance of getting the numbers of submarines in the white paper and we would be better of get OTS solutions, but what? Do a deal with the Japanese not even sure they can sell the tech under their laws.
What are the requirements for the Canadians regarding their Submarine fleet as there are reports that the ex UK submarine’s are causing a bit of grief at the moment, could Australia and Canada share costs in a new design, Victoria class should be nearing replacement at roughly the same time as Collins as their builds are only 5 or so years earlier.
[nomedia]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqQLBL3bh84[/nomedia]
Government acknowledges past problems in defence projects and the need to better manage sensitive projects in all three branches of the ADF.
Differing views on Collins seems to be that they are between a dog’s breakfasts to a one of the premier conventional submarine in the world; they are challenging Australia’s ability to go it alone to build from scratch for the next gen sub.
The general consensus is that it will be another disaster, they believe when Australia goes into cutting edge tech that the head sheds fail to understand the complexities involved and under estimate the difficulties in bring the tech to maturity. They also go on to say if we go for (their words) Rolls Royce of submarine we have no chance of getting the numbers of submarines in the white paper and we would be better of get OTS solutions, but what? Do a deal with the Japanese not even sure they can sell the tech under their laws.
What are the requirements for the Canadians regarding their Submarine fleet as there are reports that the ex UK submarine’s are causing a bit of grief at the moment, could Australia and Canada share costs in a new design, Victoria class should be nearing replacement at roughly the same time as Collins as their builds are only 5 or so years earlier.
jimmyjames
New Member
re: lhd staff and training
I'm just curios to know when the navy will start to do the training and crew selection for the LHD ships..i guess some of the crew will have to be selected earlier than others as some of the training is overseas?
I know the navy is setting up the aircraft handlers to work on the flight deck. what other training will the navy require? do the sailors need to do army aviation training or will the navy be soley responsible for the flightdeck operations.
i would be curious to see if the crews will be selected soon and will they do overseas training or will they sit at williamstown dockyard for ages doing contractor training just like they did for the anzac project.
I'm just curios to know when the navy will start to do the training and crew selection for the LHD ships..i guess some of the crew will have to be selected earlier than others as some of the training is overseas?
I know the navy is setting up the aircraft handlers to work on the flight deck. what other training will the navy require? do the sailors need to do army aviation training or will the navy be soley responsible for the flightdeck operations.
i would be curious to see if the crews will be selected soon and will they do overseas training or will they sit at williamstown dockyard for ages doing contractor training just like they did for the anzac project.
Since the vast majority of the fit out will be at Williamstown, expect a repeat of the Anzacs... I don't see many Aussies in Spain, except for maybe a handful overseeing the construction...
fortunately for the ADF the actual capability of some of our assets is not the result of youtube analysis..
when I go to UDT events do I see any journalists there? Nope - so where do they get their expertise about how the subs actually perform?
unfort collins and the future sub have become a political football - and we will suffer for continued media stupidity. it's like the vietnam/afghanistan analogies that get thrown around - convenient but intellectually lazy analysis
both sides of govt have acknowledged the problems with procurement - it would actually help if decisions were not polluted by Ministers overriding more experienced decision makers and the warfighters. The LHAs are a prime example of the executive ferking up the decision making process - as are the AWDs
what maritime engineering expertise does the ABC reporter have? for ferks sake, everyone who deals with collins on exercises comes away with increasing respect for what they can do. some journalists need to stick to doing lost dog reports - they know zero about the platforms capability.
oh for goodness sake, of course we understand the complex nature of weapons procurement. have a look at any major procurement process for any military asset in any country and you'll see that they also have difficulties
considering the fact that the design reqs for SEA2000 aren't defined and that we are still working
out what we need, then what the ferk would they know about the future sub developments?
I was around when we looked at getting the Upholders as a short squadron to backfill Collins when it was being built - we rejected them as a being a major problem - everything identified wrong with them in 99 has come to pass. we dodged a bullet.
you cannot design a sub for tropical and arctic work effectively - they are tuned to their environment, its one of the major initial problems with Collins is that the Swedes did not understand some of the boundary temp issues we deal with. any sub will be a compromise.
i do however see more synergies in co-designing with the japanese - they have probably the most acoustically and mechanically efficient design out there - and they have some very very tricky smarts inside. exchanging ideas would be useful - co-designing a sub is not.
Thanks for posting this t68 but I just could not be bothered replying to it or taking it seriously as a discussion point. Once again its been left to poor old gf to dissect it. I agree with everything he said.
We will manage the media in a far more proactive way this time round. There is (IMO) a much richer understanding of parent navy principles and this includes paying careful attention to PR from the project office. That is my personal opinion mind you!
You will find the conservative side of Australian politics far more amicable throughout the lifecycle of Collins Mark 2 by virtue of the technology treaty we now have with the US on submarine platforms. They will be quite reticent to abuse/threaten the project in the domestic political spectrum IMO. We will see how it plays out though I guess.
t68
just to reinforce matey,
my frustration is not with your posting of the article, but at the absolute inanity that some journos push as inciteful media commentary
the Collins have copped an unnecessary flogging, most journos would crap themselves if they knew what they could actually do and how well they're regarded by some of our allies.
now if journos spent more time looking at some of our other politically interjected purchases, then they'd have a real story - alas they don't have the brains to go for the hard subjects.
Most of the commentary is intellectually lazy - as are analogies about Afghanistan (how often do we see the nonsense about the mongols, poms and russians getting a belting in the ghan without drawing any approp bow to the relevance of those countries and their situations. eg, the russians were not "beaten" just by the afghan tribes - it is and was far far more complex.
just to reinforce matey,
my frustration is not with your posting of the article, but at the absolute inanity that some journos push as inciteful media commentary
the Collins have copped an unnecessary flogging, most journos would crap themselves if they knew what they could actually do and how well they're regarded by some of our allies.
now if journos spent more time looking at some of our other politically interjected purchases, then they'd have a real story - alas they don't have the brains to go for the hard subjects.
Most of the commentary is intellectually lazy - as are analogies about Afghanistan (how often do we see the nonsense about the mongols, poms and russians getting a belting in the ghan without drawing any approp bow to the relevance of those countries and their situations. eg, the russians were not "beaten" just by the afghan tribes - it is and was far far more complex.
- Status