CARRIER FORCE 2005 - HMAS Melbourne in the modern era

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

DropBear Skipper 9/25/2005 12:02:47 AM

Have you seen this before? link ;)

Quote Reply

EW3 RE:US old folks 9/25/2005 12:12:27 AM

So many things wrong with that picure ;) My DE/FF was part of ASW Group 4. The carrier was the USS Intrepid. While off Murmansk Russia, we had 4 of those sweet A-4s to protect us. I've seen an A-4 from a lot closer than I'd like to remember, a wingtip between the bridge and the ASROC launcher.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust Scooters and Melbourne 9/25/2005 12:12:43 AM

The thing that attracts me to this is the fact that we could possibly run an ANZAC Scooter component. Or - the Kiwis could fund the Scooters and we could drop the FAA fixed wingers and focus on modifying the grumblies.Are the SeaHawks able to fold up on the elevators though? In practical terms - that ship would be a fuel spongue - you'd need to replace the guts of it to be efficient. At that point its cheaper to go with an LHA.

Quote Reply

DropBear RE: CARRIER FORCE 2005 - HMAS Melbourne in the modern era DB 9/25/2005 12:19:21 AM

I leave to you aussies to help DB get his marbles in one place. The thing that attracts me to this is the fact that we could possibly run an ANZAC Scooter component. Or - the Kiwis could fund the Scooters and we could drop the FAA fixed wingers and focus on modifying the grumblies.Are the SeaHawks able to fold up on the elevators though? You were saying EW3??? ;)

Quote Reply

southern cross RE: CARRIER FORCE 2005 - HMAS Melbourne in the modern era DB 9/25/2005 12:20:05 AM

>>>Now, what benefit (if any) would a modernised Melbourne have, say, on the Afghanistan theatre of ops.<<< Unless you can put her on wheels her then I would say not much ;) I would think She could have softened the Iraqi coast in 2003, but then again the RN didn't even use their carriers in a fixed wing role. They just loaded them up with choppers and marines. She would have been good in the '99 Timor scenario, Keep away those pesky indo's, recon over the jungle, scare the militia into death or submission. Probably many instnces around the pacific where a flat top off shore and jets flying overhead would have come in handy. I would think that at least a 15x frigate/destroyer and 8x collins navy would be needed, is that the case or is it everything we have now + Melbourne? I would like us to have kept the capability, but would habitability have been improved, because I've heard that only the medical facilities had air con leaving the crew to roast all day under the steel deck. How would the ship be after 25 extra years of flying and sailing though? From what I have read people back in 82 were saying she was run down and needed immediate replacing. Hypothetically of course, it might just be cheaper to buy a new ship. Or tell the Iron woman we want our Vince!

Quote Reply

DropBear RE:Scooters and Melbourne 9/25/2005 12:21:56 AM

Well, I did say the mechanicals had been modernised. I was even thinking of strengthening the elevator and up-sizing it to fit a Viking. All it would need is 10 feet extra in length and a couple of thousand pounds in weight and the Viking could be lifted between decks in an empty weight config. Sooooooooo many possibilities.

Quote Reply

doggtag RE: CARRIER FORCE 2005 - HMAS Melbourne in the modern era 9/25/2005 12:22:49 AM

Why A-4s? If we're going pure hypothetical, why aren't you using JSFs instead? If you must stick with the Scooter, do the pilots get JHMCS and AIM-9X? And can we upgrade the A-4 with all the other latest goodies? a) instead of stock J52 (5000kg thrust) or the F404 (4900kg thrust), can I opt for the PW1212? (new-technology J52 with a growth potential pushing 6000kg non-afterburning) b) can I swap out the pair of 20mm Mk12s & 200 rounds per gun for a pair of 27mm BK27 with 160-180 rounds per gun? (some Israeli models had twin DEFA 5-54s with 150 rounds per gun) If I was only going to be a surface attacker, I'd try shoe-horning in that 5-barrel 25mm GAU-12. c) if I'm using my A-4s as anti-air, can I re-shape the nose F-20 style and incorporate the APG-67(V) series multimode radar (or whatever incarnation it is now)? Or am I limited to only in-service avionics? ('coz I don't think the APQ-145 of Singapore's upgraded A-4 Supers can hang anymore, not against F-16s.) Of course, the new radar suddenly gives me AMRAAM capabilty...hmmm, 2 AMRAAMs, a belly tank, and 4 AIM-9Xs. Very promising. (Wonder if I can put 2 more AMRAAMs in place of my belly tank...or 10 AIM-9Xs on 5 hardpoints! Yeah, that's it!) I suppose, though, that a belly tank, twin AIM-9X on the innner wing pylons, and singles outboard (6 total) would be more of what DB had in mind (even though he suggests ASRAAM instead of AIM-9X. Either or.) d) if I'm going to be an air-to-air fighter (again, hypothetically speaking), can I incorporate TVC paddles like the X-31, or at least an AVEN exhaust on my PW1212? Even as nimble and agile as the Scooter is, one can never have too much maneuverability. e) do I get a new glass pit? Or do I have to be content with all the old analog bells, whistles, and dials? f) if I'm going to still get to play down and dirty with surface targets, do I get to use JDAMs and SDBs now, too, or just Mavericks and LGBs? What about quad-packs of an extended-capability Hellfire (or Brimstone?) carried on the inner pylons, and a triplet on the outers? (extended capability Hellfire: weighs about 60kg, has a 15kg multipurpose/HEDP warhead, and has a range of about 10km from a low-level launch. Should be fine against surface targets with pathetically-weak air defense capabilities.) I'd also want APKWS II 18-round launchers (twins on the inner pylons and single pods outboard, for a theoretical max of 108), these should get me to >10km with a 5-7kg warhead, fine for all the little stuff, and could even saturate destroyer-sized ships with great effect. g) what about Harpooon and SLAM-ER for anti-ship work? I don't think the little Scooter can get off a carrier comfortably with a pair of Popeyes under its wings. h) am I using another Scooter for buddy refueling, or do I get a dedicated "KS-2" type platform, in addition to the S-2 mini-Hawkeye and a Viking Jr variant? i) am I stuck with Super Seasprites for ASW, or do I get something better? I'm partial to the NH-90 myself. j) like the idea of adding VLS, but that's more for the escorts. The carrier's missile battery should be solely for defense. Offense is provided by her escorts and aircraft, although I would at least try to fit a few small-to-medium caliber autocannons for close-in work: something like 30mm Mk44, 35mm Millennium, or 40mm FF (the 450rpm OTO-Breda model, not the vanilla Bofors/UDLP model that only gets 330rpm.) Preferrably the 40mm: its 3P fuze is top-notch, and there's just something nostalgic about carriers and 40mm guns... k) ship missiles: 4 SeaRAM 11-round pods covering the quadrants, and if a surface-launched AMRAAM proves reasonably effective in warhead and range, I'd mount a pod each forward and aft high up on the island (like in the US Tarawas) that's clear of flight ops and can traverse to cover 180 degrees each. With all the protection from the escorts and SeaRAM, I think 16 ready-to-fire missiles in SeaSparrow-type launchers, 2x8, is plenty sufficient. If AMRAAM won't make the cut, use ESSM. But a VLS might take up internal space best suited to other equipment. At most, I shouldn't need more that 1 set of reloads for 32 rounds total (does 2 16-cell ESSM VLS take up less space?), in addition to the 44 SeaRAM and whatever my escorts have. Finally, being the asset that it is, I would make my carrier's CiC as high-tech as possible. It should be able to network the entire surface action group (I assume that's what the Australian CBG would be called?), providing a massive 360 battlespace virtual environment that can integrate and diseminate its tactical information from and to every other vessel as needed, including data transfer through satellite uplinks to and from other intelligence assets. Gotta see everything across the big picture. But hey, this is all hypothetical: money's no object, right?

Quote Reply

DropBear RE: CARRIER FORCE 2005 - HMAS Melbourne in the modern era DB 9/25/2005 12:23:18 AM

Unless you can put her on wheels her then I would say not much ;) What, like planes? Charles De Gaulle doesn't have wheels. Hmmm...

Quote Reply

DropBear SC 9/25/2005 12:24:59 AM

I would think that at least a 15x frigate/destroyer and 8x collins navy would be needed, is that the case or is it everything we have now + Melbourne? Why??? We didn't have those when she was around before. Don't remember 8 O-boats protecting Melby. Curious.

Quote Reply

DropBear doggtag - read the rules 9/25/2005 12:28:07 AM

JSF??? I stated Scooter because THAT IS WHAT WE OPERATED! Aaarrrggghhhh!!!! The whole idea of this hypothetical was to see if a MODERNISED HMAS MELBOURNE could be a goer in 2005. NOT interested in JSF or 90,000 tonners or LHD's etc etc etc Crikey! Stick with the original program people.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT