The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 22, 2008

Dunnigan's and Bay's Latest
Advertisement
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Squad Battles: Winter War
2.Silent War
3.Manoeuvre
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Online Giving

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Australia Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: New Light Fleet Carriers for the RAN
Volkodav    9/12/2008 10:05:52 PM
India and China are both aiming to build substantial USN challenging carrier centric blue water navies over the coming decades.

The USN is working to intoduce carrier based UCAV's into service as soon as possible.

Would a new generation CVL with EM cats and arrestor gear combined with many of the invative features of the evolved CV21 follow on's, equiped with a mix of surveilence and attack UCAVs and perhaps a single 10-12 aircraft sqn of F-35C's, be an option for the RAN post 2030?

I have some ideas of what would work but am interested in the ideas of others.
 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2
Arty Farty       9/13/2008 3:13:26 AM
India & China, that's a lot of ocean to cover.
 
Answer as always, comes back to resources. Using the Royal Navy as an example, in choosing to operate 2 CVFs, have had to make severe cutbacks to their overall blue water fleet (ie. frigates and destroyers).
 
I'm in favor of the submarine and a chain of  airbases/allies route. Any carrier or gator navy-like capability is incidental.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       9/14/2008 3:44:51 AM
Submarines and aircraft are sea denial not control weapons.
 
If you desire to protect your trade routes, support allies and smaller regional nations, fight sea borne terrorism and piracy you need surface forces with organic airpower.
 
State of the art submarine and airforces are the best bang for your buck against a larger, stronger conventional opponent but surface ships and in particular aircraft carriers are the most flexible indeed even the best option for everything else from disaster relief, to trade route protection, to opposed military intervention.
 
You use the sea denial potential of your subs and land based strike aircraft to take out or protect your fleet from the big threats and then dominate everything else with surface forces with your organic naval airpower providing overwatch through constant surveillance and local air supremacy.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       9/14/2008 5:13:18 AM
 
Hmmm, protect our trade routes, eh?
 
Maybe we could buy up all the old B-52D's and KC-135A/E's still lying at AMARC.
 
Fly them down purple routes that mirror every major important sea lane route of commerce between Oz and the enlightened world and then blow some of this 13th biggest mil-budget keeping them aloft on maritime patrol.
 
I may be onto something here... 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       9/14/2008 6:05:32 AM

 

Hmmm, protect our trade routes, eh?

 

Maybe we could buy up all the old B-52D's and KC-135A/E's still lying at AMARC.

 

Fly them down purple routes that mirror every major important sea lane route of commerce between Oz and the enlightened world and then blow some of this 13th biggest mil-budget keeping them aloft on maritime patrol.

 

I may be onto something here... 


The USAF planned something similar in the 80's.  Loading the Buffs with as many Harpoons as they could carry and sending them of to sink every maritime target the satellites could find.
UCAV's are the way of the future and what better place to base them than a CVL or even better a modern day Armoured Fleet Carrier.
 
Say something 250 to 275m length 30,000 to 40,000 tonnes, an area air defence system with ABM capability with an airgroup consisting of LR armed MP roled UAV's, stealthy attack UCAV's and a small number of F-35C for targets where discrimination was paramount and AD.  ASW could be conducted by a UAV helo with a dipping sonar together with other sensors and maybe a a Torpedo or two, backed up by a few asw/asvw manned platforms with a secondary SAR role.
 
Imagine the CVL as a node, or mother ship, for UUV's, UAV's and UCAV's with an AWD's firepower.  It would be escorted by a number of minimum manned FFG's (50 crew) loaded with SM6, ESSM, RAM, Harpoon, VL ASROC and Tomahawks (or their replacements) in massive VLS batteries.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       9/14/2008 11:05:29 PM
The USAF planned something similar in the 80's.  Loading the Buffs with as many Harpoons as they could carry and sending them of to sink every maritime target the satellites could find.
 
Yeah, just finished reading a really good book on the history of SAC. Amazing all the different roles they used the BUFF in and still do!
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       9/15/2008 6:55:47 AM
Yeah, just finished reading a really good book on the history of SAC. Amazing all the different roles they used the BUFF in and still do!
 
I suppose the key is that they are big and they are also warplanes rather than converted airliners.
 
The Victor is another bomber from that time that proved to be very versitile, perhaps too much so resulting in its combat career being cut short because it was needed as a tanker.  Just imagine a maritime strike Victor.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav    And i thought i was being so clever and original!   9/15/2008 6:59:06 AM

MOTHERSHIP FOR UNMANNED VEHICLES LOOKS TO THE FUTURE

11 Sep 2007 | Ref. 286/2007

UXV Print

UXV Print

BAE Systems has developed a new concept warship, the UXV Combatant, designed to operate in a future battle space dominated by land, sea and air unmanned vehicles.

Using a proven naval hull form to launch, operate and recover large numbers of small unmanned vehicles for extended periods, the UXV plays the role of mother ship - a permanent base and control centre for the futuristic unmanned land, sea and air vehicles before, during and on completion of their missions. The 8000-tonne vessel, an evolution of the multi-role warship, is not expected to enter service until post 2020.

The design provides a cost-effective solution to the evolving challenges facing the modern navy. Features will include:

  • Flexible and efficient twin flight decks
  • Variable ski jump
  • Rotary aviation facilities
  • Below-deck hangar
  • Smart munitions

The weapons are a future development of the Type 45 combat suite. With the UXV support capability, performing multiple roles combined with an easily adaptable design, which moves the concept of stealth to the next level.

Propulsion options include full integrated electrical propulsion with twin propeller shafts/motors supplied by gas turbine and diesel alternators. Alternatively, cruising power can be supplied by two shafts/motors and diesel alternators with boost power from one gas turbine driving two water jets.

The concept brings together naval technologies developed through collaboration with partners such as Rolls Royce and across BAE Systems business units, as part of a programme of continuous improvement.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
 
Now if it was bigger and had a through deck design with EM cats and arrester gear......you get the picture?
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       9/15/2008 7:03:45 AM
It's a 21st Cent version of the Moskva - same bloke - different haircut. :)
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       9/15/2008 8:14:28 AM
It's a 21st Cent version of the Moskva - same bloke - different haircut. :)
 
That is but I want a through deck.  Same principle though it is a mothership for UCAV's.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       9/15/2008 5:36:29 PM

That is but I want a through deck.  Same principle though it is a mothership for UCAV's.

it would be ideal for LHA's and small pretend carriers in the UAV rotory ASW role.
 
eg Yamaha RMAX, Sea Eagles, Firefly's etc....  
 
The docking well would be ideal for the new long range UUV's
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       9/15/2008 8:50:57 PM
Just imagine a maritime strike Victor.
 
I would have been happy just imagining a Victor in roo roundels in their day!
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       9/17/2008 9:54:15 AM



That is but I want a through deck.  Same principle though it is a mothership for UCAV's.





it would be ideal for LHA's and small pretend carriers in the UAV rotory ASW role.

 

eg Yamaha RMAX, Sea Eagles, Firefly's etc....  

 

The docking well would be ideal for the new long range UUV's


Is that a hint?
 
Last time i looked, the Canberra's were LHA/ LHD's.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       9/18/2008 7:22:50 AM
I made the suggestion in another post some time ago that a hybrid frigate with a small docking well and a large aft flight deck might be an interesting partial replacement for the ANZAC's for the exact reason it would be suitable to operate as a mothership for a variety of manned and unmanned combat vehicles.
 
A load out for operations in the Gulf would include a mix of a couple each of CB90's, RHIB's, and say Protector USV's with a couple of helo's and armed Firescouts. 
 
Think about it, changing what it carries in its dock and hanger could tailor these vessels for anything from sea control, ASW, MCM, or even disaster relief.
 
Quote    Reply

Lawman       9/29/2008 2:40:21 PM
Arguably the best bet is to develop the 'forward' bases, e.g. Christmas Island, and make routine detachments for flag-waving purposes. Beef up the maritime patrol fleet, i.e. pick up a good size batch of AP-8 Poseidons, and some Global Hawk or Mariner UAVs. Rather than forking out a lot of money for the dubious gains of a 40,000 ton carrier or two, forward bases, more aircraft, and more tankers should be pursued. If you really want to make a point, add a network of long range radars, and some land-based SM-2/SM-3 missiles, for anti-air and ABM use. Routine deployments of a squadron or so of Bugs/Rhinos to forward bases, for 'exercises' with the Navy will make its point quite effectively.
 
All a carrier would do is end up stealing money from the Navy's other projects, and steal valuable personnel. As it is, the Navy is shaping up pretty well, with the new AWDs, LHDs, FFH upgrades, Collins etc... The LHDs could take on some power projection roles if necessary, even if it is little more than operating UAVs. For the price of one large carrier, we could invest in a heck of a lot of other projects, and be a heck of a lot more useful!
 
Quote    Reply

hairy man       9/29/2008 7:29:13 PM
Maybe its time to drag out the Incat 112m mini carrier plan again!    Incat have since increased the size of their yards and can build up to 150m now.  The original plan sowed 5 F35's plus several helicopters below decks, with a heap of trucks, armoured vehicles etc. The aircraft used only about 35-40% of the available space.  If devoted solely to aircraft would have held perhaps 12 F35s and 8 helicopters below decks.   Increase its size and you can see the potential.    Was said to cost about $100m then.
This was about 2001/2.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy