Be nice if I could read it but it wants me to log in & donate real money. I'm only a poor student at the moment.
I agree with you. In pointing out the capabilities of a carrier I do so just to try and dampen down some of the enthusiastic 'we don't need a carrier' arguments. The minimum carrier capability would be a ~20,000 tonne ship, two additional AORs fleet train (three in total), 24 strike fighters, 12 lead in fighter trainers, 16 additional ASW helos and a naval AEW&C capability, 2000 more sailors and 1000 more naval airmen. The cost of that in addition to the current RAN but minus the SM6 and surface ship LACM capability it could displace is quite extensive.
tryBe nice if I could read it but it wants me to log in & donate real money. I'm only a poor student at the moment.
I have to say I agree 100%. We could skimp on some of the costs using other structures and work on building capability only but, as noted, the costs are not to be sneezed at....... and have little support in the current climate.
Thinking on the carrier thing it really is too bad the UK offered Australia HMS Invincible in the first place. While the carrier replacement program dragged on for far too long it was the last minute offer of the Invincible and the subsequent withdrawal of the offer that dragged out the program until its cancellation by the incoming Hawke Labor Government. Had Invincible not been offered either the modified Iwo Jima or SCS, that had been short listed over the Garibaldi, (perhaps ironically) Invinsible and others, would have been selcted and ordered. HMAS Melbourne would have received her final major refit and continued in service until the delivery of the new build ship in the mid to late 80s.
The RN are doing AEW with the Sea Kings and Merlins so it would a matter if the Romeo can fly with a rather large drum poking out it's starboard side. I also remember reading somewhere that the UH60s were having aerodynamics problems with the stub wing aux fuel tanks fitted. Don't know if that has been sorted yet, but IIRC the article was last year. Maybe the NH90 would be better helo for it because it would have higher rotor clearance epsecially in comparison to the Romeo.
I know I will probably have my idea shot to pieces so please be kind. I'm no expert but I wonder whether if we had another LHD to bring our LHD fleet to three and had all three modified to handle the F35 if required i.e proper flight radars ect then would it be possible to have one LHD able to operate F35B's all the time and also have a one LHD available for its intended task with the other in maintenance. Would it be possible to have one modified for carrier functions and still be useful for its LHD role? This way in my limited view we could have our cake and eat it with a carrier if we need it always available or two LHD's always available.
in order to have one vessel active all the time you need a total of 3 so if you bought an extra Canberra (which i support btw) you could have it fulfilling its Amphibious role or its carrier role but not 1 performing each. because only 1 would be availableI know I will probably have my idea shot to pieces so please be kind. I'm no expert but I wonder whether if we had another LHD to bring our LHD fleet to three and had all three modified to handle the F35 if required i.e proper flight radars ect then would it be possible to have one LHD able to operate F35B's all the time and also have a one LHD available for its intended task with the other in maintenance. Would it be possible to have one modified for carrier functions and still be useful for its LHD role? This way in my limited view we could have our cake and eat it with a carrier if we need it always available or two LHD's always available.
Agreed, the RN intended to operate an Invincible as a Commando Carrier (LPH) as required and as such all three were fitted out to do so. End result, they bought a purpose designed LPH based on the Invincibles to fill the role, the carriers while capable as LPHs were more valuble as carriers.
Well it is possible. What the Italians did for their AEW&C version of the EH 101 was just to add a larger antenna to the naval radar of this helo. Plus of course ditch the sonar processer and improve the comms system. You could do this to the Seahawk but it would physically be harder because the main gear is closer to the radar antenna than on an EH 101. So this would limit antenna size. Probably a lot easier and cheaper just to buy EH 101-112s with the Italian AEW&C fit out.
Sure. If UAV based they could fly from the AWD itself. Such AEW will be crucial when SM6 comes online to provide cueing for the over the horizon capability. But the RAN can reasonably expect to have a Wedgetail AEW&C overhead most of the time. Much easier for the RAAF to do this with an aircraft that flies for 12 hours compared to 2-3 hours (fighter).
Now I guess the hard part is getting any government to have the balls to actually go down that road. I guess we can all dream, although it would be nice to see the RAN with a proper carrier capability with enough escorts and necessary funding of course. I guess defence isn't a sexy enough vote winner until the S#%$ has really hit the fan and its already too late. Anyway thats my whinge over with for tonight
Well although Australia entered WWII in September 1939 we didn't bother mobilising until early 1942, just over two years and a change in government later when the Japanese were on our door step. Much of the planned force we didn't acheive could have been completed had mobilisation occured on our entry into the war. Imagine 8 Tribal Class Destroyer instead of 3, just for a start.Now I guess the hard part is getting any government to have the balls to actually go down that road. I guess we can all dream, although it would be nice to see the RAN with a proper carrier capability with enough escorts and necessary funding of course. I guess defence isn't a sexy enough vote winner until the S#%$ has really hit the fan and its already too late. Anyway thats my whinge over with for tonight
Only two were available in 1942 with the last tribal coming online in 1945 when it was pretty much all over bar the screaming. I just hope like hell australia never gets caught with our pants around our ankles like that ever again, as if there is a next time we may not get so lucky.
Australia really needs a carrier. Even if we use our LHD's as harrier carriers or using F-35B's. All of these countries have at least one, INDIA, CHINA, America, Brazil, France, Russia, THAILAND and Spain. The countries with carriers in the pacific our area are in capitals. With India getting 2 more carriers and China getting more in the future. People say that carriers are too expensive but they are not. Just look at Thailands carrier. It is only 11,000 tons and it only costed 336 million (US dollar) to obtain. Thats about triple Larges Bay. It can also carry about 16 jets and helicopters. When people think carrier they think fleet carrier or light carrier, why not escort carrier. Its crew is a little more than 450 officers, aircrew and sailers. That wouldn't cost that much to train all of those men and buy all of the aircraft. We only got a carrier in the past because of experience in ww2. Now people think that things have changed. Yes, but they have changed for the worse of Australia.
You aint gonna get a carrier period. There is no political will or the funds to purchase one plus all the assetts that need to go with it. Then there is the training. How long do you think it will take you to gain full operational capability? Years? No try decades. It is not something you can pick and learn quickly. How are you going to man it? You haven't paid attention to what people have been saying. The RNZN used to have cruisers. Are you suggesting based on that premise we buy a freaking cruiser at the cost to all else. If the ADF acquired a carrier you would not have a viable RAN because all of it's resources would be required to keep that one vessel and its assets operational. Read what other people who are far more knowledgeable than you or I have said instead of persisting with the same line.
An RAAF official said that the RAAF can only support amphibious operations within 600nm no matter what.
Why is everyone thinking light carrier or fleet carrier. There is a type called ESCORT CARRIER. Thailands navy obtained one for 336 million ($US). It also has a crew of only a little over 450. Weighing about half an LHD and a little over 2 AWD's they are a good choice.