RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
11:30AM it still hasn't gone yet.. lol flipper is hungry, it doesn't help they are ringed in by spectator boats.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, well I was running some TIC there.... should have appended it with a smiley...
So... does anyone have a good OTS design that could be a good replacement for the Balikpapan class LCH?
what i have been wondering about is just how much "Larger" their replacement will be, maybe a 1000-2000 Ton vessel or maybe something even larger like the Bacolod City class (4,200 ton)
any thoughts?
what i have been wondering about is just how much "Larger" their replacement will be, maybe a 1000-2000 Ton vessel or maybe something even larger like the Bacolod City class (4,200 ton)
any thoughts?
Sorry, linear mts is the exact expression from RN site not lane mts., and in engineering linear mts is for length, then to calculate area mts you multiply by the width, and the width is not something fixed, it is not 2 always, it is what is required by the particular engineering, 2 mts. or 3 mts or 4 or 1 mt.
Note that if it would be fixed for 2 mts. always, as you or wiki say or interpret, then would give the amount of 2400 sq mts for vehicle deck parking area in Bay which contradicts with 24 Challenger 2 tanks, or contradicts with size of Bay compared to Cavour´s hangar 2500 sq mts, or Canberra´s hangar 3000 sq mts, contradicts with the length and width of those ships compared.
Finally my guess is what you mean, reduce Galicia dock and increase with that or little more from wherever in dimensions to get 1200 sq mts. in Bay, if they referr just to vehicle deck with that.
"The flight deck can accommodate two Merlin or Chinook helicopters, and a hanger could be fitted in future if required"
I am sure many will make mountains out of mole hills, but a lane meter consisting of 2 meters in width is in a direct relationship with a container width, containers are transported on land by truck trailer rigs.... To be a figure of consistent value the figure has to be fixed...
In America bobtail trucks have a direct relationship with the width of 2 skids, and are sold in cargo lengths of 12, 16, 20, and 24 feet, i.e.; 3, 4,5, and 6 skids in length with a few inches to spare, its not a tight fit... The truck manufacturers don't make or sell a 22 feet length bobtail truck... We live in a world of standard size skids and containers involving width concerning freight today... I am sure the rest of the world would convert these American figures into meters...
One could wish to use a different figure of 2.5 or 3 meters for a lane meter width complicating matters considerably on a ship to ship basis, but why bother to list a inconsistent figure without any real relationship to a container or a skid? Understanding cargo's basic tools isn't rocket science...
While an airliner's container isn't exactly a square box, one skid fits in them nicely, not two or one and a half...
24 Challenger tanks has nothing to do with the deck area! Tanks are large & heavy. They don't necessarily fit neatly, they may (depending on deck strength*) need to be spaced out, & there may only be a limited area of deck suitable for parking tanks.
All these attempts to prove that Galicia has a vehicle deck as large as or bigger than the Bay class are silly & childish. It's a different ship, for a different role. It's better in some areas, worse in others. And it's smaller, with everything that goes with that.
*The Point-class ro-ros have greater capacity for heavy AFVs than commercial ro-ros of the same size because their decks are stronger & heavy AFVs can be packed more densely, for example. They have 2600 lane metres (called that, not 'linear metres') of vehicle parking, in a ship only 17 metres longer than a Bay class.
All these attempts to prove that Galicia has a vehicle deck as large as or bigger than the Bay class are silly & childish. It's a different ship, for a different role. It's better in some areas, worse in others. And it's smaller, with everything that goes with that.
*The Point-class ro-ros have greater capacity for heavy AFVs than commercial ro-ros of the same size because their decks are stronger & heavy AFVs can be packed more densely, for example. They have 2600 lane metres (called that, not 'linear metres') of vehicle parking, in a ship only 17 metres longer than a Bay class.
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
There are a couple of British designs that look ok (from memory). One was a catamaran and the other looked a bit like a small LST. Both would probably be significantly more seaworthy then the current LCH's.
Caiman 200 was one I think? Forget the name of the other.
Caimen 200
Pretty close to a direct replacement for the Balikpapan class. A bit bigger (longer - about the same beam - 840 tons vs 530 full load). Quite a lot faster, but you don't have to go flat out.
Pretty close to a direct replacement for the Balikpapan class. A bit bigger (longer - about the same beam - 840 tons vs 530 full load). Quite a lot faster, but you don't have to go flat out.
Who will operate the combat boats, army or navy? If army will they be RAE or RACT?
Depending how many CBs are acquired it would be interesting to see some stationed around the various military districts to providing familiarisation training for local units. They could make for a very interesting reserve capability.
The money was there, its just the old man took it with him when he retired and left the hollow shell to his son. The sad fact is they likely would have done a better job for a better price on the keel blocks. The whole country has missed out due to this little fiasco.
Galicia is 160 mts, Bay is 176, 16 mts longer, the width of the garage should be +-16mts, as Bay is 26 beam, 16x16 is 256 sq mts.
Point Class roros are 23000 t. so maybe they even have 2 decks for vehicles.
I don´t think how 17 mts longer than Bay can give 1200 linear mts in Bay vs 2600 linear mts in Point, in just one deck.
You said Bay had "much more", i say "a bit more", to detail things.
As Rn site says, Rn took into account to be able to put a hangar if wanted. You never know how big is Australia and Asia when you´ll prefer to send the Bay alone instead of spending more money sending a Canberra also. Or might need to place fatships in different locations, simultaneous necessities.
The lift between container deck and heavy deck points you will be able to carry containers also in the vehicle deck, and vehicles in the container deck.
IIRC they were the preferred vendor to build Collins as well.
bet that as it may, having dealt with the former principal over a number of engineering issues when I was in consulting and contracting both overseasd and upon returning to Oz was an "unrepeatable" experience...
he was looking at making a run for "son of collins" at one point...
I have doubts on that. I don´t think the surplus comes from the government that has a general budget surplus and asigned to militar expenses, but that surplus i think it is from the militar budget itself, so something Adf has saved during last years, can it be the Awd programme or similar?
Money spent by the Navy and Air Force.
Phase c of the Jp 2048 sealift program was scheduled for 2016-18, and it has been bought now without using the future asigned budget for the Phase c, so future budget surplus hehe ? Budgets are aproved year after year, independently or or with payments that extend various years budget.
If the surplus was to be the Phase c budget, then they would call like it like that, not like a "surplus", a surplus is not the official previsions for an acquisition (budget).
It is not the same to say that the surplus gave for both the ship and plane, or just for the Globemaster, if this, then probably the surplus is the part left from the Phase c budget after acquiring Bay?
basically correct
defence budget is emargoed from general revenue issues
defence surpluses do not go back into consolidated revenue (ie the govt "bucket"), any defence savings as such go back into defence. the fact that the govt has already pulled money means that any savings made will just stay where they are anyway.
defence operations are separately funded/maintained
defence currently has a significant "underspend" on projects
Ok, significant underspend, maybe related to "delayed" projects like the Lcm´s or similar, some cancellations, the naval helos, asw program helo or general naval helo program. The oilers program.
And the impressive figures for the Collins replacement.
But note the money went back to the Adf who then decided to share it between the ship for the navy and the Globetrotter, i suspect any of the Navy or Air force was who saved the money. If preference was to be given to the ship before than to the Globe, i guess money saved by the Navy. So that if money was to be saved by the Army in their acquisition programs, probably at least some that saved money was to be spent by the Army itself.
Army via 10 FSB at Townsville. The RAE transferred the water transport role to the RACT on the formation of the later. Its 35 Water Transport Squadron at Ross Island Barracks in Townsville that is the Army's last water transport unit.
Its about 24 and that will never happen. If the reserves can't even get M113AS4s then they won't be getting high tech, ultra gucci combat boats. Used to be 34 Water Transport Squadron (Reserve) at Bulimba Barracks in Brisbane before the Defence of Australia axe. Apparantly you don't need coastal water transport to defend the north west of Australia from invasion...
This is crazy beyond belief. Not only is the Bay class longer but it has a very different internal layout to the Rotterdam/Galacia class. The most significant difference is the size of the floodable well dock. In the Bay class it is much smaller, being able to accommodate only one LCM/LCU compared to the 4-6LCM/LCU well dock of the Rotterdam/Galacia class. This frees up considerable space for further garage space.
Yes and that hangar is a tent. It’s just to keep the rain of for storage. As to the size of Australia and Asia it is well known within the ADF. The requirement for the Bay class is to support the LHDs by ferrying cargo to and from them while they are supporting amphibious operations. Its not up to YOU to decide how the ADF will fight its wars though I’m sure such clear logic won’t penetrate your world view.
Last edited:
What certain people have to remember is the Bay's where designed specifically to support the Albion's and the designated LHP (Ocean).
The Albion's carry the offensive landing elements of 3 Commando with MK5/10's loaded to the gunnels with RM++ in their armoured Vikings. The Bays are there to provide the logistical back-up ready to send ashore the heavy kit (Army + Tanks/SPA/Armoured engineers) and ammunition/POL supplies to sustain operations over extended periods after the beachhead is secure. The Bays welldock is really there to provide a weather protected environment for loading LC's coming from the Albion's. The RN planners considered it far more important to have space for equipment/stores than for storing additional landing craft during the journey to a conflict zone, hence it was designed only to take a single MK10. The Bay's large open helo deck can also if required carry the UK's air-cushion fleet loaded by the fixed crane.
Exercise Cougar illustrates how the Albion/Bays work together as part of an amphibious package, each complimenting the other.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/operations/auriga/news/cougar_11_vanguard_s.htm
The Bay will dovetail very nicely with the Canberra's fullfilling the same role, it's a near perfect fit. The Canberra deploying a Commando spearhead force deployed by helo/LC, and the Bay carrying M1's/APC's/Infantry and stores for follow-up. If the concept works well then the RAN might opt for second new-build of a similar design.
The Albion's carry the offensive landing elements of 3 Commando with MK5/10's loaded to the gunnels with RM++ in their armoured Vikings. The Bays are there to provide the logistical back-up ready to send ashore the heavy kit (Army + Tanks/SPA/Armoured engineers) and ammunition/POL supplies to sustain operations over extended periods after the beachhead is secure. The Bays welldock is really there to provide a weather protected environment for loading LC's coming from the Albion's. The RN planners considered it far more important to have space for equipment/stores than for storing additional landing craft during the journey to a conflict zone, hence it was designed only to take a single MK10. The Bay's large open helo deck can also if required carry the UK's air-cushion fleet loaded by the fixed crane.
Exercise Cougar illustrates how the Albion/Bays work together as part of an amphibious package, each complimenting the other.
http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/operations-and-support/operations/auriga/news/cougar_11_vanguard_s.htm
The Bay will dovetail very nicely with the Canberra's fullfilling the same role, it's a near perfect fit. The Canberra deploying a Commando spearhead force deployed by helo/LC, and the Bay carrying M1's/APC's/Infantry and stores for follow-up. If the concept works well then the RAN might opt for second new-build of a similar design.
Last edited:
weegee
Active Member
USN and RAN Relationship.
Hi Guys, I want to try and get a grasp on Australia's military relationship with the US and specifically the Navies of the 2 nations. Are we really as close an allied force to the US as is made out by the media? Is this only because of the ANZUS treaty if we are?
If we are so close why? what is in it for the Americans? I can see what's in it for AUS but our defence force is a drop in the ocean compared to theirs so what is in it for them Or are they really just helping out a smaller nation with similar interests in the world.
And lastly regarding Anzus if someone were to directly attack AUS would the USA drop everything and come running to our defence (providing we could not sort out the problem ourselves) or would this only happen if it served them to do so?
I am sorry for asking possibly stupid questions but when you search for things like this on the web there is so much conflicting information, I know for sure on here there are professional people in the industry who know the whole story and are not going to be blinded by which way they swing or country pride etc
Thanks
Hi Guys, I want to try and get a grasp on Australia's military relationship with the US and specifically the Navies of the 2 nations. Are we really as close an allied force to the US as is made out by the media? Is this only because of the ANZUS treaty if we are?
If we are so close why? what is in it for the Americans? I can see what's in it for AUS but our defence force is a drop in the ocean compared to theirs so what is in it for them Or are they really just helping out a smaller nation with similar interests in the world.
And lastly regarding Anzus if someone were to directly attack AUS would the USA drop everything and come running to our defence (providing we could not sort out the problem ourselves) or would this only happen if it served them to do so?
I am sorry for asking possibly stupid questions but when you search for things like this on the web there is so much conflicting information, I know for sure on here there are professional people in the industry who know the whole story and are not going to be blinded by which way they swing or country pride etc
Thanks
- Status