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.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
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.
I read something some where some time ago that outlined the cost of the Seahawks, including the modification to the RANs Flight I FFGs to operate them, and also the price we were offered Hermes for and (I may be wrong on this bit) the cost of a new build Invincible. Long story short, the cost of the Seahawks themselves, with each individual helo being priced at A$32 million, (for a total of over half a billion A$) was significantly more expensive than replacing Melbourne and continuing to operate the Seakings in the ASW role. Add in support and training costs as well as the mods to the FFGs and I would not be surprised if it would have been cheaper to acquire two or even three helo carriers to operate our existing Seaking and Wessexs.
Another angle would have been with the DDL being an indigenous design, upon the decission not to replace Melbourne, the RAN could have specified subsequent batches be designed to operate Seaking in place of Lynx as required, much as the RN did with the later Type 22 as well as the Type 23 and Type 45.
weegee
Active Member
Hmas Canberra is on her way
Hey Guys, I have seen a couple of reports today saying that our lovely LHD has left Spain on her way home, apparently there is an official release from Defence but I got the info from the SMH. They also had a link to the defence website image library and it has some nice photos of Canberra leaving and being lifted on the Blue Marlin here is the link.
All Images - FotoWeb 7.0
Hey Guys, I have seen a couple of reports today saying that our lovely LHD has left Spain on her way home, apparently there is an official release from Defence but I got the info from the SMH. They also had a link to the defence website image library and it has some nice photos of Canberra leaving and being lifted on the Blue Marlin here is the link.
All Images - FotoWeb 7.0
Last edited:
Gordon Branch
New Member
There was a press release by the Defence Materiel Minister announcing the sailing of the departure of CANBERRA. The gallery link in the release is same as the one above.
ETA in 7 weeks.
Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence Materiel – LHD 01 departs Spain, Australia bound
ETA in 7 weeks.
Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence Materiel – LHD 01 departs Spain, Australia bound
Nice to see Canberra on her way 
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
Cheers
BBC News - MoD reveals design of Royal Navy future warships
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
Cheers
BBC News - MoD reveals design of Royal Navy future warships
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.
Too bad there wont be an Australian industry to build them by the time they are ordered in 2035. That was tongue in cheek but rumour is the new subs and OCVs are being delayed to save money which will pretty much kill off shipbuilding again.
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).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 ?
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 ?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/AWD_contenders_(DN-SD-06-07081).jpg
Just trying to put a picture together of future capabilities and the coming networked systems for the RAN
Cheers
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’m sure they could fit 32-64 ESSM in there somewhere. Just not where the soft launch CAAM is located (either side of the forward Phalanx). In the super structure is probably not such a good idea as this would be two decks higher than the forward missile magazine and even 16 SDSS length Mk 41 VLS cells with 64 ESSM is a lot of weight to put up high on the ship.
The higher the radar is the longer its radar horizon. AUSPAR technology is light weight for radar power (compared to SPY-1) so it shouldn’t be too much of a problem. Though realistically it should be in two separate masts for combat survivability like the Germans designed in their MEKO-D with Auspar.
SPY-1 antennas are a deck higher on F-100 class compared to DDG-51. Since Spanish and Australian DDGs are likely to be the only AEGIS ship in a task force this gives better coverage. For the US where they will have 4-5 AEGIS ships per task force it’s not such a big deal. The Evolved AWD design raised the SPY-1 antennas a deck higher to match the F-100.
I think this boat ended up in Gladstone and was in the news recently because the guy who brought it couldn’t pay his harbour fees or taxes or something and was going to lose it and he wanted to turn it into a museum or something…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
EDIT: Was Bundie:
Man told 'pay up or sink boat' | Bundaberg News | Local News in Bundaberg | Bundaberg News Mail
This boat (ex HMAS Aware) was scrapped in November/December last year.
http://wojo12.blogspot.com.au/2011/12/hmas-aware-final-chapter.html
You might get an email from Ross Gillet. Aware was supposed to be the "Mystery" ship in issue #70 of "Australian Warship"
Only a lunatic (seems appropriate
) would consider using these for passengers.It was quite common for them to roll 30degs when at anchor in some god forsaken place like Scott Reef or Ashmore. I reckon the crew could function for no more than 48hrs in anything above sea state 4.
Cheers
Blas de Lezo
Member
Again coming from Fotosdebarcos, the best pictures I have seen Blue Marlin´s departure.
Most of you know by now the fotosdebarcos site but I can see that most Australian visitors go straight to the RAN dedicated page. This pictures are posted on to Blue Marlin´s page.
It becomes quite apparent what 55 metres overhanging means.
[ame]http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af297/senalero101/Agosto%2012/120817-Blue-Marlin-114.gif[/ame]
My apologies if you gentlemen have seen them already.
http://www.fotosdebarcos.org/viewtopic.php?t=1822&start=40
Godspeed.
Most of you know by now the fotosdebarcos site but I can see that most Australian visitors go straight to the RAN dedicated page. This pictures are posted on to Blue Marlin´s page.
It becomes quite apparent what 55 metres overhanging means.
[ame]http://i1017.photobucket.com/albums/af297/senalero101/Agosto%2012/120817-Blue-Marlin-114.gif[/ame]
My apologies if you gentlemen have seen them already.
http://www.fotosdebarcos.org/viewtopic.php?t=1822&start=40
Godspeed.
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.
It is more about the mission set/capabilities set out in the Sea 5000 project not the displacement, Absalon is not what is required for the project. F125 also not there, although no doubt they will put in for a modified Australian version, but it would be pretty heavily modified to suit our requirements and operating conditions, range of the F125 is a major worry at only 4,000 nm and a bit slow for my liking
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.
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.
Agree, it won't stop them from putting in a submission though
The F26 or Fremm are potentials for sure, particulary the F26 timing looks pretty good and as discussed above should not be too difficult to build around the AUSPAR, but just the issues pointed out by Abe.I still think a F100/Hobart class hull based frigate would not be out of the question, but the gap between finishing them and the start of build for Sea 500 could be a problem, but that has never worried the Government in the past
Cheers
- Status