justsomeaussie
Member
Last I heard there wasn't any much on the OCV's having a helo amongst the top end. Just wishful thinking by everyone else. UAV platform sure, but no helos.
p.s IMHO the Lynx would have been ideal not just for the RAN but for the Army as well. No money wasted on Sea Sprites, Squirels etc. something more useful than a Kiowa and able to supplement the Blackhawks and Seahawks (assuming we bought Seahawks rather than just using the Lynx and Seaking as the RN did). Long term join the Wildcat project and keep using current platforms and support elements with minimum modification.
The Navy’s plan was just to buy a squadron of Lynx in the mid 1970s for the DDL. The Kiowas were built in Australia by CAC well before any Lynx could have been delivered or would have been ordered for the DDL. Also the Army Lynx would have been overkill for the Kiowa role which was still firmly an airborne scout based on VietNam experience. The Air Force provided all utility transport and gunships with the Huey.
The Seahawks were purchased to replace the ASW capability of HMAS Melbourne and her Trackers. Also to provide the FFGs with a proper maritime helicopter in place of the Squirrel. Ironically the Hawke Labor Government claimed political mileage with the Seahawks because the previous Fraser Liberal Government had brought Squirrels rather than a proper naval helicopter. But it was the previous to them Whitlam Labor government that had ordered the FFGs in place of the DDL without ANY naval helicopter when the whole point of the ship was to put naval helicopters into the fleet.
If DDL and Lynx had gone ahead in the 1970s there would be little room for the later Seahawk buy; literally as there would be no ships to fly them from as they would all have Lynx onboard. While in a perfect world the Melbourne would be replaced by a proper carrier the governments requirement to retain the ASW capability would require a new ship platform. Such a ship could operate the on hand Sea Kings (too big for the FFGs) retaining the fleet ASW capability without the need for a new aircraft. One possibility that was considered was the BHP gas turbine powered steel carrier. Two of which had been built in the 1970s but only one retained from the 1980s (and only left service earlier this year). BHP had offered this ship to the RAN as a helicopter carrier to replace Melbourne.
On another note, this article just posted by Stobie on the RN thread regarding the RN Type 26 design, this was touted as a possible/potential Anzac (Sea 5000) replacement, due in service from 2020, so timing fits, would be interested in peoples opinion on it ? quick look through article seems to tick the boxes, although possibly a bit light at approx 5,400 Tonnes
It’s certainly a looker. Nice touch with the sponsons for the anti boat guns. No doubt BAES will offer an Australianised version for SEA 5000. The only thing is SEA 5000 has been defined around the AUSPAR radar so the top hamper will have to be a bit different. But because AUSPAR is a lightweight system (compared to SPY-1) should not be a problem fitting it onboard.
It’s certainly a looker. Nice touch with the sponsons for the anti boat guns. No doubt BAES will offer an Australianised version for SEA 5000. The only thing is SEA 5000 has been defined around the AUSPAR radar so the top hamper will have to be a bit different. But because AUSPAR is a lightweight system (compared to SPY-1) should not be a problem fitting it onboard.
Would be nice, I am sure BAE would be smart enough to design it around AUSPAR, so would be nice to have the top weight taken into account from the start
She is a nice looking ship, and well withing the realms of being built locally of course, time will tell, still looking at 8-10 years or first pass ?
Having a closer look at the design the biggest problem would probably be fitting ESSM onboard. Looks like the T26 is designed for 24 MK 41 Strike VLS (land attack, etc) and 16 small cells for quad packed Sea Ceptor (CAAMM). Which would probably only allow for 16 ESSM in place of the 64 CAMM. So unless they eat into the Strike VLS they will to find space for more ESSM (32-64 in total).
Most recent sighting of them I can find on the internet is of KRI Sibarau (formerly HMAS Bandolier) on Apr 2011:
KRI Sibarau - ShipSpotting.com - Ship Photos and Ship Tracker
That's a 44 year old ship running around!
Being really old ships, the TNI-AL don't usually put them in their news articles, so I have no idea if they are still operational at the moment.
Do you think a potential Sea 5000 offering from BAE could incorporate that though ?
Sea 5000 is looking at something larger than the Anzac class (pretty loose definition) so could there be potential to allow for an ESSM mid ships in the superstructure ? and leave the MK 41 VLS forward for what it is designed for ?
As an aside, just curious, with the AUSPAR, it is obviously deisgned to be at the highest point (or there abouts) of the ship, what are the advantages of that ? and I also do recall discussion some time ago about incorporating CEC to AUSPAR ? It has also been a point brought up in the RN thread tonight about the Type 26 and CEC.
Also curious, while we are on the subject, about the Hobart Class and the position of the SPY ? Looking at the attached picture between the positioning on the Burke and the Alvaro/Hobart potential pro's and con's ?
I will see if I can find the magazine again, but I remember very clearly in the mid to late 80's there was an old Attack available for private sale in Aus, was advertised in one of the boat trader magazines.
I remember it very clearly with dullisions of granduer as a young fellow dreaming of saving the money to buy it![]()
I
This boat (ex HMAS Aware) was scrapped in November/December last year.
Around Bundaberg - History and Happenings: HMAS Aware - the final chapter
I have never been able to work out why the RAN thinks it needs a 7000 ton ship. That is bigger than the Hobart Class.On another note, this article just posted by Stobie on the RN thread regarding the RN Type 26 design, this was touted as a possible/potential Anzac (Sea 5000) replacement, due in service from 2020, so timing fits, would be interested in peoples opinion on it ? quick look through article seems to tick the boxes, although possibly a bit light at approx 5,400 Tonnes
I have never been able to work out why the RAN thinks it needs a 7000 ton ship. That is bigger than the Hobart Class.
The only contender I can see that would meet the RAN's size requirement is the F-125 ... which seems to be intended as a land attack/special forces/multi Role ship similar to the Absalon concept.
I agree that the F-125 / Absalon concept is not really right for the RAN.
That effectively only leaves 3 options in my mind.
The F-26, FREMM or an ASW variant of the Hobart.
The Hobart design will be getting a little long in the tooth by the 2020's which only really leaves the other two European contenders.
If the UK play their cards right they might be able score a win here.