Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[Jeneral2885]

Don't need to take baby steps at all to regain the instructional knowledge, look at the UK with embedded pers on USN carriers, and they are getting the knowledge on a catobar carrier.

Granted by using the LHD it gives our mob something to work on till something was built but by the time we get the B we could in theory nearly have the ship as well.

Many military forums seem to bring up the idea of an Australian carrier/mini carrier. Again, it takes more than just a ship and planes to create one carrier. The deck material (for B version landings), the choice of pilots (RAAF? RAN FAA or a mixture of both), the number of helicopters plus F-35Bs (Can it still be a troop transport with fighters onboard? What about ASW? No maritime AEW?), the strategic defence of the ship (move beyond just the 25mm? CIWS?), and ultimately the task group. And then the training.

No one can stop what the government wants, but it isn't going to happen immediately. I suppose (as I've said in other locations) the ADF/RAN can partner up with the USMC and the Royal Navy (the next largest supposedly operator of the B model) to learn not just the B version but carrier ops. USMC probably, RN (as and when there's the FPDA. exercises..)

 

[Excal]

What would the opinion of the ADF/RAN brass be on the idea of modifying the Canberras to support F-35B and compromising their role?
Would they be strongly opposed on the basis of not wanting to muck with what what our damn fine LHDs are designed to do? Or would they actually see value in the possibility of getting a foot in the door to possibly expand to full carrier capability in the future?
I mean, I assume the Government will ask for their opinions on the matter.

I would have expected some opposition to the idea, since it's been done to death in this very thread that we don't have a requirement for operating fighters from the LHD, it doesn't fit RAN CONOPS, and it would be massively inefficient to operate the LHDs in such a role.

Do the brass even want a carrier on their shoulders?

 

[hairyman]

If the RAN ever gets serious about a carrier, tt should look to Japan. Its last two efforts at 19'000 and 27'000 tons could appeal.

 

[Volkodav]

If the RAN ever gets serious about a carrier, tt should look to Japan. Its last two efforts at 19'000 and 27'000 tons could appeal.

Converting the LPHs into carriers would have the effect of cutting the amphib fleet down to one ship which I would hope recent lessons have taught is a very dangerous situation. With the time involved before a F-35B purchase could even hope to be concluded a new or used ship could be procured to cover off the role no problems leaving the LHDs to do the very important job they were bought to do

 

[t68]

Converting the LPHs into carriers would have the effect of cutting the amphib fleet down to one ship which I would hope recent lessons have taught is a very dangerous situation. With the time involved before a F-35B purchase could even hope to be concluded a new or used ship could be procured to cover off the role no problems leaving the LHDs to do the very important job they were bought to do

Agree hopefully those at the top of the totem pole will heed the lessons learned with bill and Ben when we have so few assets to do all that goverment asks.

If we ask too much of the asset we will end up with the same boat as before an overworked asset.

How often are the Spanish using their LHD as an aircraft carrier?

 

[ancientcivy]

Sea 1778 Deployable MCM

Given the tasks and weight limitations on the escorts, is it likely that such asserts would be deployed from the LHDs?
There are at least two options, which if they prove operationally viable would seem mots the US MR-60S Mine Hunter and the unmanned launch the British are testing,as reported on the 17th of April in the news section of this website.
There seem to be advantages eg costing, interoperability, effects on other capabilities and load outs etc for both.Are either of these preferable or are there other better options or is this a capability liable to be dropped from the next white paper?

 

[alexsa]

Agree hopefully those at the top of the totem pole will heed the lessons learned with bill and Ben when we have so few assets to do all that goverment asks.

If we ask too much of the asset we will end up with the same boat as before an overworked asset.

How often are the Spanish using their LHD as an aircraft carrier?

The JC1 is the only fixed wing capable ship Spain have at the moment. As such it does carry a flight of AV8B+ but how often I could not be certain.

The LHD can operate AV8B's and I understand it is intended to be capable of operating the F-35B as well, however, as noted by others, it could not sustain the same sortie rate as a dedicated carrier and this would be at the expense of much of the Amphib capability of the ship.

 

[knightrider4]

The JC1 is the only fixed wing capable ship Spain have at the moment. As such it does carry a flight of AV8B+ but how often I could not be certain.

The LHD can operate AV8B's and I understand it is intended to be capable of operating the F-35B as well, however, as noted by others, it could not sustain the same sortie rate as a dedicated carrier and this would be at the expense of much of the Amphib capability of the ship.

Could we just purchase a third Canberra class modified for and used soley as a carrier?

 

[aussienscale]

Could we just purchase a third Canberra class modified for and used soley as a carrier?

It is one of the many suggestions that have been made in the past on this thread and several others, it would give some commonality with the LHD's, give you back up when the dedicated carrier is out of service to keep pilots, crews etc up to standard and current.

So it would come down to what the mods are ? and comparison to other available ships and what would suit best. The problem at the moment is it is just some comments that we "are looking/have not ruled out" the F-35B.

How will they be used ? how will they fit into the force structure, what will be the carriers role ? you can't just buy a carrier and planes and then figure out what to use it for, it has to be the other way around, look at the requirements and needs then look at what is required to fill that capability gap

Cheers

 

[ngatimozart]

Lets put all this ADF F35B and CVF dream into perspective with an analogy. A fulla down the road (in Australian terms) has a thought about throwing a barbie and yaps in his sleep. Next thing every man and his dog, plus the neighbours dog, is all of a sudden after the local shrimp population, talking about raiding the local butchery and filling up the cool store with beer. The fulla hasn't even woken up from his sleep yet. That is where this notion is. It may or may not even make it to the 2015 DWP. So I would humbly suggest to people not to get carried away and start organising how many bulkheads there are on 4 deck between the heads and the beer store of a non existent carrier. Just my can of XXXX worth.

 

[the road runner]

Seems F-35B are being considered and the PM has instructed the author of the white paper to look at F-35B flying off the LHD

We may find out in the up and coming white paper if F-35B are seriously being considered.

White Paper to consider F-35Bs for LHDs – report | Australian Aviation

Abbot seems big on defence to me.

 

[ngatimozart]

Seems F-35B are being considered and the PM has instructed the author of the white paper to look at F-35B flying off the LHD

We may find out in the up and coming white paper if F-35B are seriously being considered.

White Paper to consider F-35Bs for LHDs – report | Australian Aviation

Abbot seems big on defence to me.

It quotes The Australian story by Brendan Nicholson and is a typical (The) Australian defence story never letting the truth, facts or half truths, stand in the way of a story. I would not call that a good story and I quote the most important part of it: "It is understood Mr Abbott has instructed ... " In journalistic terms that means I don't know but it sounds good. He quotes no source what so ever. Now I am used to writing in a professional capacity being trained and worked in the science field. So if I see the phrase: "It is understood" I expect to be aware of what is understood and the source(s) cited. That may be a high expectation but if you state something like that you have to back it up. Nicholson has not, therefore the whole article is worthless - it is manure of the bovine kind.

With regard to Abbott being big on defence I'd wait until I see the colour of his money.

 

[Monitor66]

Seems F-35B are being considered and the PM has instructed the author of the white paper to look at F-35B flying off the LHD

We may find out in the up and coming white paper if F-35B are seriously being considered.

White Paper to consider F-35Bs for LHDs – report | Australian Aviation

Abbot seems big on defence to me.

Whilst a dedicated carrier capability would be great, the Government has made no mention at all of such a prospect. Only the "possibility" of acquiring a small number F-35B to operate off the two LHDs.

Not meaning to pour cold water here, but I see virtually zero chance of Australia acquiring a carrier. There's not enough money (the investment to firstly build it then sustain it over 30 years would be massive), manpower or evidence of professional debate within the ADF or capability development circles for such a capability.

 

[rjtjrt]

With regard to Abbott being big on defence I'd wait until I see the colour of his money.

Is that meant to be irony?
A bit rich for a New Zealander to spray any overseas politician in terms of allocation of money.
What proportion of GDP does NZ spend on defence, now and on average over the last 20 years. What does Australia?
And before you think I am criticising NZ politicians, they just reflect what the NZ people think important and will vote for. Their military do a lot with little, but it is little they get from their population in financial support.

 

[ASSAIL]

With regard to Abbott being big on defence I'd wait until I see the colour of his money.

You don't have to wait, the 14/15 budget just released boosted defence by 9.6 bn,
Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence – Budget 2014-15

 

[Volkodav]

ASW is a critical capability that has to be addressed and something that will still be lacking if billions is spent embarking a small number of F-35B onboard the Canberras. Better to supplement the destroyer and frigate force with two or three affordable helicopter command ships that have provision for a half a dozen or more F-35B, as require, than mess with the needed capability of the LHDs.

 

[Jeneral2885]

ASW is a critical capability that has to be addressed and something that will still be lacking if billions is spent embarking a small number of F-35B onboard the Canberras. Better to supplement the destroyer and frigate force with two or three affordable helicopter command ships that have provision for a half a dozen or more F-35B, as require, than mess with the needed capability of the LHDs.

True. ASW is lacking in lots of modern navy current and future carrier/amphibious groups as well. But I thought Australia is sort of well placed in terms of the upgrades to its FAA helicopters and frigates--just more well placed than say the UK Royal Navy.

 

[Volkodav]

Not yet, Romeos are on order with the first couple of machines delivered for training in the US but they are still a long way from service and there will only be 24 of them. As for the ASW capability of the surface fleet, hull numbers are reducing and the ships going first are those that can embark a pair of, rather than a single helicopter. Factor in the SSNs, Merlin, 13 Type 23s and 6 Darings the RAN is a very long way behind in everything bar MPA.

 

[Astute]

True. ASW is lacking in lots of modern navy current and future carrier/amphibious groups as well. But I thought Australia is sort of well placed in terms of the upgrades to its FAA helicopters and frigates--just more well placed than say the UK Royal Navy.

Disagree , any of the the nations who would deploy a carrier/amphibious group now or in the future would definitely assign at least one hunter killer sub to the task force { the USN deploy up to four Virginias } and that would be just the first line of protection .
I'm a believer that the best way to deal with a enemy sub threat is having your own meaner hunter killer near by .

Then there's asw frigates and asw helicopters , and of course MPA all very effective counter measures to a possible sub threat . And the countries who can afford these high value assets such as carriers will definitely not be lacking in asw .

 

[Cadredave]

Is that meant to be irony?
A bit rich for a New Zealander to spray any overseas politician in terms of allocation of money.
What proportion of GDP does NZ spend on defence, now and on average over the last 20 years. What does Australia?
And before you think I am criticising NZ politicians, they just reflect what the NZ people think important and will vote for. Their military do a lot with little, but it is little they get from their population in financial support.

Calm down NG doesn't trust Politian's at all he very consistent in his dislike of those who rule both our countries.