A hypothetical carrier buy for the RAN?

[Volkodav]

Hermes and SHAR was offered as part of a post Falklands deal for Australia to buy a new build 4th Invincible from the UK. Basically Hermes would be for free for the cost of the SHARs and the new build carrier.

That would have been a good deal and it is too bad we didn't sign up to it prior to the 83 election. It would have been a lot harder to justify disbanding the carrier capability if we actually had a RAN crewed carrier in the water.

It’s a moot discussion now but I wonder what an Invincible, built for Australia, incorporating Falklands experience, would have looked like. Hermes would have easily provided a decades service so it is not difficult imagine that a late 1980s early 90s HMAS Australia have been significantly different to the original Invincible design.

Deletion of Sea Dart, incorporation of a substantial hull plug, point defence missile system etc she could have been larger, more capable and potentially cheaper, while still retaining sufficient commonality with her RN half sisters to reduce support costs.

The real trick would have been to retain Hermes to cover Fiji, Desert Storm, Somalia etc and use this as justification for a second ship to share the carrier, LPH roles.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It’s a moot discussion now but I wonder what an Invincible, built for Australia, incorporating Falklands experience, would have looked like. Hermes would have easily provided a decades service so it is not difficult imagine that a late 1980s early 90s HMAS Australia have been significantly different to the original Invincible design.

It would have been a repeat Ark Royal without the Sea Dart. It would have been in commission by 1988/89 if ordered in 83. I very much doubt there would have been any kind of exotic design changes.

The best post VietNam carrier replacement for the Melbourne was the Sea Control Ship. It could have been built cheaply and efficently at Cockatoo Island to replace both Sydney and Melbourne. Even a third ship is feasible allowing for two in commission at any time: one for the sea control/strike carrier role and one for amphibious transport.

 

[Volkodav]

It would have been a repeat Ark Royal without the Sea Dart. It would have been in commission by 1988/89 if ordered in 83. I very much doubt there would have been any kind of exotic design changes.

The best post VietNam carrier replacement for the Melbourne was the Sea Control Ship. It could have been built cheaply and efficently at Cockatoo Island to replace both Sydney and Melbourne. Even a third ship is feasible allowing for two in commission at any time: one for the sea control/strike carrier role and one for amphibious transport.

The SCS would have been a good fit with the machinery and other commonalities with the FFG. I imagine an SCS would not have been much different in price to an FFG once you deducted the cost of the GMLS.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The SCS would have been a good fit with the machinery and other commonalities with the FFG. I imagine an SCS would not have been much different in price to an FFG once you deducted the cost of the GMLS.

Sans combat system it would have cost a lot more because it’s a much bigger (x3), more complex hull with a far more extensive fitout. Aircraft carriers, even sea control ships, need a capable combat system for fighter guidance including air search and track radar. The USN SCS and Spanish PdA also required a sonar processor because of the use of LAMPS helicopters. So a SCS would cost a fair bit more than a FFG even while using the same propulsion system. The Mk 13 GMLS is chicken feed compared to all this.

 

[icelord]

Just a side note on the Durance Class (Success), I note that it is to be double hulled in Singapore ? Seems like a waste of money ? but we are obviously constrained by international requirements for double hulling anyway, has anyone seen any reference to what implications this will have on Success' capacity ? and has there been any firm favourites for her replacement suggested as yet ?

Considering success was meant to decommission in 2015 with a replacement sailing then, this is a surprise and a joke made by someone in an office who's sea experience was a week on Kanimbla. Ask any sailor onboard and they will tell you how bad the whole ship is, hopefully while getting another hull they replace the first one, and 90% of the interior...its that bad
There was early talk of linking with the Kanucks on their Combat support ship program, but this died out shortly after someone mentioned it.hwell

The firmest favourite for a new RAN AOR was the US Navy’s Lewis and Clark T-AKE ship. But that was a few years ago before the project was put on the backburner until 2020ish.

While the TAKEs are impressive, having done countless RAS with 4 of them, the only issue is they are designed for Ammunition and Heavy Jackstay. Refuel is an extra thing they do. They hold 4 Jackstay points and 2 refuels, and there internal storage for Goods out ways Success completely. While this may be what they are going for, it seems a little overboard for something that may never deploy at full capacity. The RAN is moving away from heavy jackstay and utilising more helo lift RAS.

A single Seahawk can send more pallets across in one lift then an hour of jackstay...this im very well aware of! if anyone was unsure, the FFH is not designed for Jackstays, FFG is easy by going AFT onto flightdeck, Anzac is forward and all stores go down AFT, lotta people for big Evoloution. If a ships short manned, it would struggle to conduct one.
Still accomadation is sweet onboard, and it is a nice ship to pull up alongside

Noting that the Juan Carlos I has a refuel probes on their superstructure, i wonder if this is leaning toward ADF thinking. Sending ships out with an LHD which can be used as Refueler and supply ship, its a dangerous avenue of thought but not surprising compared with other "genius" ideas
If an issue developed with Success while in dock, i wonder if the USN would be willing to sell or loan a Henry J Kaiser thats mothballed?:roll

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Noting that the Juan Carlos I has a refuel probes on their superstructure, i wonder if this is leaning toward ADF thinking. Sending ships out with an LHD which can be used as Refueler and supply ship, its a dangerous avenue of thought but not surprising compared with other "genius" ideas

It’s a very good idea. I wrote an article about 3 years ago arguing the same and as a means to pay for a third LHD ny using the Success/Sirius replacement (SEA 16XX?) and the sealift ship. With Success hammered and Sirius only built for a 15 year life its all going to be a very interesting decade for the RAN support force. Fortunately there should be plenty of surplus to requirements, near new ships available from the RN fire sale. Assuming the DoD could ever organise a procurement.

 

[SASWanabe]

If an issue developed with Success while in dock, i wonder if the USN would be willing to sell or loan a Henry J Kaiser thats mothballed?:roll

Dont the Americans have 2 of those sitting in reserve 90% complete? seems like a cheap replacement for both Success and Sirius to me

 

[icelord]

Dont the Americans have 2 of those sitting in reserve 90% complete? seems like a cheap replacement for both Success and Sirius to me

I believe so, they did sell one to a South american country recently, and activated a few for use in the MEAO. I found it funny when we had to RAS with a HJK that was listed on Janes as incomplete, while another was inactive...and this is with full membership to the site!

Siruis greatest problem is it doesnt have a large enough crew, so full day RAS are impossible as the Hazard Risk rises as each ship comes alongside, and starts over.
Watching the USNS ships do full day RAS evoloutions with multiple ships from numerous countries and stay be able to rotate crew and conduct Helo replenishments, leaves our ability limited.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Assuming the DoD could ever organise a procurement.

Buying its not the issue (assuming that the Govt changes their position on 2nd hand vessels.

the issue is the navy engineering assessment, and navy is on the govt schitt list for what happened with bill and ben. Govt has declared a fundamental disinterest in buying second hand major capital vessels since then.

we've lost the option on probably 10 vessels since then.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Double hulling does seem to suggest that the vessel could have commercial value after its retirement from military service ie resold...

 

[SASWanabe]

Double hulling does seem to suggest that the vessel could have commercial value after its retirement from military service ie resold...

its possibe but remember,Success will be 20 or so when she is decommissioned ...

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

~1 in 7 oil tankers are aged 20 years and above but IMO requirements reduces the number of available tankers significantly. Many of the older tankers will never get converted to double hull due to lack of funds and that could create a supply shortage or demand for the vessel...

 

[Volkodav]

Buying its not the issue (assuming that the Govt changes their position on 2nd hand vessels.

the issue is the navy engineering assessment, and navy is on the govt schitt list for what happened with bill and ben. Govt has declared a fundamental disinterest in buying second hand major capital vessels since then.

we've lost the option on probably 10 vessels since then.

Its a shame because buying good gear second hand would free up more than enough money to build the stuff we can't buy MOTS. The KIDDS would have been top of the list and would have served us well into the 2020s depending how much we spent upgrading them and a Tarawa class LHA would have been an interesting addition to the fleet post Timor instead of the LHDs.

As an aside a modified GT powered LHA with an airgroup of 50 helos and Harriers was one of the designs on offer to replace Melbourne. Now that would have been an impressive ship to see, I would assume that vehicle stoage would have been sacrificed for magazine space and airgroup facilities. I don't know if the dock would have been deleted (as per AMERICA) but it would still be able to swing back to an LPH role as required.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Its a shame because buying good gear second hand would free up more than enough money to build the stuff we can't buy MOTS. The KIDDS would have been top of the list and would have served us well into the 2020s depending how much we spent upgrading them and a Tarawa class LHA would have been an interesting addition to the fleet post Timor instead of the LHDs.

The Kidds would not have lasted until 2020 at the rate the RAN would have sailed them. OK to last another 20 years spending most of the year tied up pierside waiting for the big one in Taiwan. There was a good reason the USN scrapped or SINKEXed all of its Spru-Cans rather than pass them on to needy re-homers.

As to the Tarawa LHAs they were only disposed of recently. Even the first one to be stricked LHA-3 was in 2005. The RAN would have struggled to find the 600-900 people to crew it even with laying up the two LPAs. Plus the RAN was no longer in the bolier business so would have REALLY struggled to keep the engines turning. Great ships but not the right opportunity for the RAN. Also their long term condition has to be questioned with the speed at which the USN has sent them the way of Spru-Cans.

 

[spoz]

its possibe but remember,Success will be 20 or so when she is decommissioned ...

Ahm Success is 24 now; commissioned in '86. Did the RAS trials with her in Hobart - she pulled our high point out - in about March or April I think, and she commissioned soon after.

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Ahm Success is 24 now; commissioned in '86. Did the RAS trials with her in Hobart - she pulled our high point out - in about March or April I think, and she commissioned soon after.

Which doesn't change the possibility of resale as a commercial double hulled tanker. The Westralia was ~32 when it got sold to AGR for conversion to a FPSO.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Which doesn't change the possibility of resale as a commercial double hulled tanker. The Westralia was ~32 when it got sold to AGR for conversion to a FPSO.

Yes the possibility still remains zero. Westralia as a Leaf class tanker was a civil tanker with add on RAS gear so is quite well suited for commercial use. Success can carry far less cargo oil for crew and fuel burn of any civil tanker. It makes no commercial sense as a civil tanker even if it wasn't in such poor condition, new hull liner or not.

 

[aussienscale]

Success was in a bad enought state in 98 when I left, can't imagine what she would be like now ! Yes zero chance of her being sold as a commercial tanker let alone any other purpose, hell the Chinese would not even buy it for pretend scrap !

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Yes the possibility still remains zero. Westralia as a Leaf class tanker was a civil tanker with add on RAS gear so is quite well suited for commercial use. Success can carry far less cargo oil for crew and fuel burn of any civil tanker. It makes no commercial sense as a civil tanker even if it wasn't in such poor condition, new hull liner or not.

I disagree. The complement of a replenishment vessel is far more than required for a tanker. As to size, there are many harbour tankers as well as handysize tankers with smaller displacements esp in the refined oil markets. As to zero possibility, no point rebuting such assertions. We'll see in 2015 when the Success retires from military service.

As to condition, I doubt if it would have been any worse than the Westralia.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I disagree. The complement of a replenishment vessel is far more than required for a tanker.

Of course but that’s not what I am talking about. Even without the replenishment crew an AOR requires more than a civil tanker because it has multiple, higher speed diesel engines.

We'll see in 2015 when the Success retires from military service.

Success won't retire until around 2020.

As to condition, I doubt if it would have been any worse than the Westralia.

Very different ships, very different missions.

Since the number of ex surplus military AORs that have entered commercial use as tankers or even static tankers is currently running at a steady state of zero it’s a pretty fair call to say that Success will have the same post service career path. Also almost every ship with long service histories in the RAN in recent years has been disposed of as a dive wreck so it’s a fair bet that the same fate awaits Success. She just might not need as much in the way of demolition charges to get to the sea floor…

But please ’62 feel free to hold your pet theory. It’s just unreasonable to expect the rest of us to not shoot holes in it when it just doesn’t add up. Don’t take it personally but.