Did the carriers Melbourne and Sydney carry any missile systems? Apples and oranges, to put it mildly the LHDs are amphibious ships which will always be escorted in the same manner as the light carriers in the past. And if events do get drastic, there is plenty of room and hopefully time to mount RAMs or another short range missile system during the next forty to fifty years.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Did the carriers Melbourne and Sydney carry any missile systems? Apples and oranges, to put it mildly the LHDs are amphibious ships which will always be escorted in the same manner as the light carriers in the past. And if events do get drastic, there is plenty of room and hopefully time to mount RAMs or another short range missile system during the next forty to fifty years.
Melbourne had a pretty significant number of 40/60 bofors which was the standard outfit for a light carrier of its era.
Yep. Exercise Bersama Lima is on at present.
The shoe on the over foot is that it sends a strong political message, that we are not to be messed with on this op.
However the reason these ships aren't fitted with rather than for is cost. You've got to save a lot of money if you want a Navy with 10,000 sailors to have over 50 Admirals.
With 50 admirals there are quite a few unexpected overheads, imagine the size of the tea bill for instance, the staff cars, the drivers, the stewards, not cheap.
On a more serious note it takes less time to up-arm a ship you have with systems it has been designed to embark than it does to acquire a ship you don't have. While I would prefer to see the LHDs fitted with CIWS and ASMD etc I am just glad that we have them at all.
In 2002 there were 9 RADMs and above. Sometime after I left in the 1980's there were substantive 1 stars (Commodores) created to be compatible with the other services (up to that point there was no substantive 1 star equivalent in the RAN )and the grand total then was 16 IIRC.
Please tell me you guys are having a lend when you say there are now 50?
The Defence Annual Report lists staffing by rank in brackets. The top bracket is one star and higher.
2012-13 Estimated Actual:
Navy
58 One star and above (Commodore, Admirals)
532 Senior Officers (Commander, Captain)
2,813 Officers
10,392 Other Ranks
Now 14 x 2 star and 2 x 3 star but 39 x 1 star muck fee what do they do!
Quite a few of them are running or working on projects with DMO, my old boss for instance had a one star as his DMO counterpart. There was another made up to a one star (or may have been 2 star) to work with Risso on his review. I suppose it has to do with equivalence to CPS levels (although I don't know exactly what equates to what), if you have an EL2 level role a uniform filling the role needs to be a one star etc.
there's more in CIOG and CDG at that level than in DMO
In fact with the cut back in slots they tend to go to those 2 Divs instead as they're seen as "more exciting"
the Naval CAPT and RAAF Group CAPT slots in DMO are usually non establishment as well
Why do we keep converting our rank system to the US equivalent? Like currency.
Really, apart from Americans, who cares what our equivalent rank is?
Yes, it seems we have a lot of brass, good to have if we need to expand in a hurry.
Really, apart from Americans, who cares what our equivalent rank is?
Yes, it seems we have a lot of brass, good to have if we need to expand in a hurry.
In all Serriousness here (nor war mongering). The Indonesians are still very angry at the Australian government over the whole spy saga. Over on the Jakarta Post there are people calling for "war". How serrious is this taken and would there be any preventative measures taken in the event of conventional or non conventional "conflict"? Ie; like the build up to ET.
the road runner
Active Member
A bunch of 15-20 year old kids calling for war.
Politics is being played out here ,SBY wants to be seen as a strong leader as they have an election coming up in Indonesia.Anyone who thinks War will break out over this spying ,is serious deluded.
Give it 6 months and watch our political/defence ties strengthen as this is in both countries interest.
This is nothing new. Groups had previously called for war with Malaysia and had even declared that they were ready to invade Malaysia and 'expel' all Malaysians found in Jakarta after publicly shaving their heads. In a few months all this will be forgotten.
t68
Well-Known Member
Don’t think it would even take that long the Indonesians need us more than we need them, but I did read somewhere that the EX RAAF Hercules were to be handed over last week not sure what’s happening now, we always give them to the Kiwis they could use some extra least they would appreciate them.
Aboutt should have just trotted out the standard national security line and said nothing more no further comment, everyone knows it goes on the Chinese embassy did not gets its nickname the radio shack for nothing. I am just grateful it wasn’t rudd as PM he would have cried and said sorry, then called them rat&uckers in his private study!!!!
Getting back to officers/Seamen, there is basically one officer for every three seamen. That is completely out of proportion, bearing in mind amongst the seaman numbers you have the Chief Petty Officers etc. Now we need to add a few thousand seamen to have a more reasonable sized RAN.
I have no issue with the ratios. Since I left (1980) ships no longer have legions of stokers and gunners. Their Combat Management Systems have become totally automated so in short, those old officer/sailor relativities have changed.
Don't forget the shore side changes as well. Contractors now fill all those shore billets previously filled by sailors.
The RAN will grow only when the voters want a larger service and that will be both enlisted and commissioned ranks.
In the UK we have a good chunk of officers from all services embedded at various levels in the Ministry of Defence, so our top-heavy establishment can be offset slightly because of this.
Service figures =/= people actually serving in the forces, if that makes sense.
I'd imagine this situation occurs in Aus too.
Service figures =/= people actually serving in the forces, if that makes sense.
I'd imagine this situation occurs in Aus too.
Don’t make the mistake of thinking the current extreme top heavy nature of the ADF is an outcome because of design. It’s entirely a product of changing the personnel system from up or out to a public service style job for life. It means masses of almost unemployable senior personnel that have to be found jobs somewhere. Which creates much of the bureaucratic mess that the ADF has to muddle through. It also costs heaps of money and skewers the personnel figures so as to not indicate just how comparatively small the ADF is in capability deliver compared to the past. In the more technical services like the Navy and Air Force the top heavy system can be managed better because a 50 year old mechanical engineer can still pretty much do the job of a 25 year old mechanical engineer (and so on) but the effect on the Army is far more extreme where a 50 year old infantryman can’t do the job of a 25 year old.
- Status