The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: And now for something completely different...RAAF chooses EE Lightning over Mirage.
Volkodav    5/24/2009 4:55:42 AM
The Lightning was a contender for RAAF how serious a contender I don't know. The main choice always seemed to be between the Mirage and the Lockheed Starfighter with the Phantom and Lightning being only bit players.

The Lightning was apparently ruled out due to it's lack of ground attack capability, not that the Mirage was a wiz in the air to ground department either. The RR Avon and Ferranti Airpass radar of the Lightning were actually considered for the baseline Mirage III EO as they would have offered significantly improved performance.

Imagine now that the RAAF had selected an evolved derivative of the Lightning.

Would we have used it in Vietnam?
What modifications and improvements would it have incorporated?
What upgrades would it received during its life?
What weapons would it have been certified for,i.e. Sidewinder, Paveway?
What would the sale to Australia have meant for the program as a whole and then for the British and Austrlaian aviation industries?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT
StevoJH       6/9/2009 4:42:38 AM


There were also three Daring class destroyers. Voyager (later replaced by Duchess after getting in the way of Melbourne), Vendetta & Vampire (crew ~300 each).

Don't you need your gun destroyers then? They were fairly useful ships.

I'd rather lose a River then lose a Daring but i'd rather lose a Daring then a Perth. The Darings had everything the Rivers had except Ikara and Sea Cat. Sea Cat was useless, as proven in the falklands and the Perths had Ikara.

However if not for their large crews i would have preferred "evolved-counties" with Tartar or Thunderbird rather then the Perths. They were larger ships, they had a flight deck and hanger, they had the same 4.5" gun as the rest of the fleet and as a final advantage? They looked way better.
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/9/2009 6:19:09 AM
At the beginning of 1962 before the first of the Perths was ordered, the RN consisted of the following ships:
3 x Daring class
1 x Battle (+ 1 in reserve)
2 x River Class Frigate (+1 as Survey Ship + 6 In reserve)
1 x Leander class cruiser (in Reserve)
2 x Majestic class (Sydney Recommissioned March)
2 x Grimsby class Sloop
2 x Q class Destroyer (+2 Reserve)

4 x River Class DE were already under construction and could not be cancelled.

Total Complement (Escorts): 2,066
HMAS Melbourne: 1,350
HMAS Sydney was about to recommission as a troop transport, melbourne - air group was 1,000 so probably about the same.
 
 HMS Centaur became available in 1965 and HMS Albion in 1973. The Implacables probably could have been modernized but i doubt the RAN could afford it if the RN couldn't. The 3 x Daring, 3 x Perth, 6 x River Force required ~3,600 Sailors to crew and the last of the other ships were decommissioned by the time the last River entered service. The RAN could probably crew two Carriers had either 1 or both of the last rivers not been ordered. The Centaurs in service had a larger crew then the Implacable class, though that may have been due to the more complex aircraft operated.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       6/9/2009 9:19:34 AM
Stevo you are a mind reader. I have started a response the herald a couple of times suggesting a Tartar armed County for the similar reasons to those you outlined.
 
I imagine a County pretty much the same as the as the RN model forward of the aft funnel. The changes would be the replacement of the Seaslug launcher with a helicopter flight deck with a large hanger replacing the missile handling facilities and former helipad. A Mk13 launcher would be fitted where the Seaslug firecontrol radar was located with a pait of Tartar directors situated in the old hanger location. Finally an Ikara launcher would be fitted in a cutout on either bean below the old hanger position with the missiles being stored in the old Seaslug hanger.
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/9/2009 11:05:25 AM

Stevo you are a mind reader. I have started a response the herald a couple of times suggesting a Tartar armed County for the similar reasons to those you outlined.

 

I imagine a County pretty much the same as the as the RN model forward of the aft funnel. The changes would be the replacement of the Seaslug launcher with a helicopter flight deck with a large hanger replacing the missile handling facilities and former helipad. A Mk13 launcher would be fitted where the Seaslug firecontrol radar was located with a pait of Tartar directors situated in the old hanger location. Finally an Ikara launcher would be fitted in a cutout on either bean below the old hanger position with the missiles being stored in the old Seaslug hanger.

Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       6/9/2009 4:12:03 PM
Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?
 
Yes but dropped a deck into cutouts in the hull side fed from part of the old Seaslug magazine.
 
Another thought I have had is the forward section of the Seaslug magazine could be converted into a torpedo room for heavy weight and light weight torpedos with two fixed tubes for each type mounted in the hull side on each beam between the funnels. The Mk 48 HWT was originally designed for both surface and submarine launch. This would give the Australian County additional ASW capability as well as a significant ASV punch against a Sverdlov.
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/9/2009 4:56:10 PM

Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?
 

Yes but dropped a deck into cutouts in the hull side fed from part of the old Seaslug magazine.

 

Another thought I have had is the forward section of the Seaslug magazine could be converted into a torpedo room for heavy weight and light weight torpedos with two fixed tubes for each type mounted in the hull side on each beam between the funnels. The Mk 48 HWT was originally designed for both surface and submarine launch. This would give the Australian County additional ASW capability as well as a significant ASV punch against a Sverdlov.




A Sverdlov? but didn't the Indonesians basically trash the one they got given by the USSR?
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/9/2009 7:20:01 PM






There were also three Daring class destroyers. Voyager (later replaced by Duchess after getting in the way of Melbourne), Vendetta & Vampire (crew ~300 each).



Don't you need your gun destroyers then? They were fairly useful ships.




I'd rather lose a River then lose a Daring but i'd rather lose a Daring then a Perth. The Darings had everything the Rivers had except Ikara and Sea Cat. Sea Cat was useless, as proven in the falklands and the Perths had Ikara.



However if not for their large crews i would have preferred "evolved-counties" with Tartar or Thunderbird rather then the Perths. They were larger ships, they had a flight deck and hanger, they had the same 4.5" gun as the rest of the fleet and as a final advantage? They looked way better.

The Tartar missile was the first of the vertical storage ready round missiles. It was on the Perths and Charles Adams Class  that the US trialed the Mark 13 revolver launcher. Earlier I commented on why I hated SEA SLUG because of the stores and handling problem. The Counties, (handsome ships) used horizontal rack storage for Sea Slug as I noted, the missile has to be assembled in an automated mating process that slapped the components together under weather protection. 
 
 
Note the class. Everything from the forefunnel to the service doors aft  to the single twin arm missile launcher, above the engine spaces to the raised weather deck (where thee B gun mount is) is the magazine and handling machinery for that missile! The helo pad and shelter (they had one) has to squeeze in ahead of the Sea Slug launcher on the fantail on that deck..
 
 
 
Detail of the helo shelter and pad. Not a good safe place to land, eh?
 
These ships were beautiful, had excellent sea keeping, very good ASW, and were simply horrible rocket boats.
 
COUNTY Class
Specifications

Displacement: 6,800 tons full load 
Dimensions: 158.9 x 16.4 x 6.3 meters (521.5 x 54 x 20.5 feet) 
Propulsion: 2 shafts, COSAG;
                    Geared steam turbines, 2 Babcock and Wilcox boilers, 30,000 shp;
                    4 Rolls Royce Olympus G6 gas turbines, 30,000 shp;
                    30 knots
Crew: 471


Aviation

Helicopter:     deck and hangar for 1 Westland Wessex, with homing torpedoes and dipping sonar.

Surface Action

Guns:             2 - 4.5"/45 Mk.6 DP twin mounts ('B' mount later removed for Exocet in some)
Missiles:         1 twin Seaslug launcher for Seaslug Mk.2 missiles  (last 4 ships)        
                      4 MM-38 Exocet (NORFOLK, ANTRIM, FIFE, and GLAMORGAN after 1974)
Radar:            Type 992Q/993 surface/low-level air search
Fire Control:   Type 901 Seaslug tracker.

Air Defence

Guns:             6 - 45"/45 Mk.6 DP twin mounts
                     2 - 20mm single mounts
Missiles:        1 twin Seaslug launcher for Seaslug Mk.1 missiles (Mk.2 in last 4 ships)
                     2 quad Seacat GWS21 launchers (GWS22 in later ship)
Radar:            Type 965 AKE-1 or -2 air search
                      Type 277/278 air search
Fire Control:   Type 903/904 tracker for MRS3 (Medium Range System No.3)
                      Type 901 Seaslug tracker

Undersea Warfare

Armament:        Helicopter launched torpedoes.
Sonar:               Type 170,
                         Type 174/177 medium range seach (replaced by Type 184)

Electronic Warfare

Attack:
ESM:
ComInt:

   
 No doubt about it, ASW wise these were the standard when they slid into the water in 1963. 
 
Hazegrey  is the data source.   
 
 
 
That may look clunky to you, but the lover of machines and engineering in me, calls her beautiful. Her single arm launcher could spit a missile at you every eight seconds. Once she received STANDARDS she could outshoot any British SAM ship including the Type 45s with their crap PAAMS (Sea Vipers), though the Tuper 42s with the Sea Dart (GOOD missile) could give her a run for her money At ASW (US version below Perth) she wasn't that great but she was good enough..
 
 
Perth Class Destroyers Class Overview

Dimensions, Machinery and Performance

Length:
440' 6 "
Engines:
2 General Electric geared steam turbines
Beam:
46' 9"
Boilers:
4 Babcock & Wilcox 1,200 PSI (oil fired)
Draft:
20'
Shafts:
2
Displacement:
3,370 std. / 4,618 full
SHP:
70,000


Speed:
33 knots
Crew:
310
Range:
4,500 NM @ 20 knots / 6,000 NM @ 14 knots

Notes:
The Perth Class were modified Charles F. Adams class destroyers built in the USA under contract for Australia. (Charles F. Adams Class Overview)


Armament As Built



Number Carried
Type
Arrangement
Maximum Range / Ceiling
2
5"/54 (127mm)
Mk 42

single turrets
25,909 yards @ 45° (14.7 miles)
AA ceiling 51,600' @ 80°
70 lb. HE shell

1
Mk 13 launcher
single launcher
(a)
2
Ikara missile system
2 single launchers
(b)
6
12.75" (324mm)
Mk 32 torpedo tubes

2 triple launchers
(c)
2 (d)
20mm Vulcan Phalanx
MK 15 CIWS
single mounts
6,000 yards (max effective 1,625)
3,000-4,500 Rounds per minute

Armament notes:
(a):
Able to launch SM-1 (SAM) and or Harpoon (SSM) missiles. Up to 40 missiles carried.
(b):
The Ikara missile systems were fitted in place of the ASROC launcher used on U.S. ships. They were
removed from 1989-1991.
(c):
Mk 46 torpedoes 8,000 yards @ 45 knots (4.5 miles), 99 lb. PBNX-103 warhead
(d):
Mounted beginning in 1990 and rotated between ships.


Name
Builder
Launched
Commissioned
DeFoe Shipbuilding Co.
Bay City, Michigan

Sept. 26, 1963
July 17, 1965

Fate



Sunk as dive site Nov. 24, 2001.

Location: 5 miles SE of Albany, Western Australia (35.04.790S - 117.58.060E).





Name
Builder
Launched
Commissioned
DeFoe Shipbuilding Co.
Bay City, Michigan

Jan. 9, 1964
Dec. 18, 1965

Fate



Sunk as dive site Nov. 5, 2000.

Location: 4 NM west of Marina Vincent, Yankalilla Bay, South Australia
(35.28.51S - 138.09.26E).





Name
Builder
Launched
Commissioned
DeFoe Shipbuilding Co.
Bay City, Michigan

May 5, 1966
Dec. 16, 1967

Fate



Sunk as dive site July 31, 2005.

Location: 4.2 NM NNE of Point Cartwright, Queensland, Australia
(26.36S - 153.10E).




 
 
 
 
You saw them coming for you in the 60s and 70s your day was ruined. 

Charles F. Adams Guided Missile Destroyers Class Overview

Dimensions, machinery and performance (USN Version)

Length:
437'
Engines:
2 geared steam turbines (a)
Beam:
47'
Boilers:
4 oil fired 1,200 PSI (b)
Draft:
20' 1" / 22' max.
Shafts:
2
Displacement:
3,277 std. / 4,526 full
SHP:
70,000


Speed:
33 knots (c)
Crew:
330+
Range:
4,500 NM @ 20 knots / 6,000 NM @ 14 knots

Construction notes:
(a):
General Electric in DDG-2, 3, 7, 8, 10-13, 15-22.
Westinghouse in DDG-4-6, 9, 14, 23, 24.

(b):
Babcock & Wilcox in DDG-2, 3, 7, 8, 10-13, 20-24.
Foster Wheeler in DDG-4-6, 9, 14
Combustion Engineering in DDG-15-19.

(c):
Best speed ever achieved was 35.2 knots by USS Joseph Strauss DDG-16 in 1979.


Armament (USN Version)


Number Carried
Type

Arrangement
Maximum Range / Ceiling /Missiles
2
5'/54 (127mm)
DP
2 single turrets
25,909 yards @ 45° (14.7 miles)
AA ceiling 51,600' @ 80°
70 lb. HE shell
1 (a)
Mk 11 missile launcher
Mk 13 missile launcher

twin launcher
single launcher

34-36 - SM-1-MR (SAM) missiles
Mk 11 - 4 Harpoon (SSM) missiles
Mk 13 - 6 Harpoon (SSM) missiles

1 (b)
Mk 16 ASROC launcher
8 cell launcher
4 reloads (some units)
2
Mk 32 12.75" (324mm)
torpedo launchers
2 triple launchers
Mk 46 torpedoes
8,000 yards @ 45 knots (4.5 miles)
99 lb. PBNX-103 warhead
4
.50 cal (12.7mm)
Machine guns
single mounts
6,003' (1.1 miles)
Rate of fire up to 550 RPM

Armament notes:
(a):
Mk 11 double launcher mounted on DDG-2 thru DDG-14.
Mk 13 single launcher mounted on DDG-15 thru DDG-24.
(b):
ASROC (anti-submarine rocket) warhead was either Mk 44 torpedo, Mk 46 torpedo
or an Mk 17 nuclear depth bomb with a rocket booster for launch.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/9/2009 7:49:27 PM




Stevo you are a mind reader. I have started a response the herald a couple of times suggesting a Tartar armed County for the similar reasons to those you outlined.



 



I imagine a County pretty much the same as the as the RN model forward of the aft funnel. The changes would be the replacement of the Seaslug launcher with a helicopter flight deck with a large hanger replacing the missile handling facilities and former helipad. A Mk13 launcher would be fitted where the Seaslug firecontrol radar was located with a pait of Tartar directors situated in the old hanger location. Finally an Ikara launcher would be fitted in a cutout on either bean below the old hanger position with the missiles being stored in the old Seaslug hanger.




Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?

New rockets?
 
1. Too much weight for Ikara in that position as a side thrower. GAGH! SEACAT was lightweight and appallingly bad.
2. If you are going to use the Mark 13 or Mark 11 with a revolver magazine and American rockets , why not stick TWO where the helo shelter was, rework all that freed up storage and missile handling machinery of the clumsy GWS 1 for personnel spaces and put the helo pad and the shelter on the fantail like god and competent shipwrights intended?  Install Ikara where B-gun mount is and put a pair of triple torpedo tubes amidships between the funnels! Never have I seen a more beautiful 7000 tonne hull than that wasted so much potential.. 
 
Herald
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/9/2009 8:30:38 PM










Stevo you are a mind reader. I have started a response the herald a couple of times suggesting a Tartar armed County for the similar reasons to those you outlined.







 







I imagine a County pretty much the same as the as the RN model forward of the aft funnel. The changes would be the replacement of the Seaslug launcher with a helicopter flight deck with a large hanger replacing the missile handling facilities and former helipad. A Mk13 launcher would be fitted where the Seaslug firecontrol radar was located with a pait of Tartar directors situated in the old hanger location. Finally an Ikara launcher would be fitted in a cutout on either bean below the old hanger position with the missiles being stored in the old Seaslug hanger.










Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?




New rockets?


 

1. Too much weight for Ikara in that position as a side thrower. GAGH! SEACAT was lightweight and appallingly bad.

2. If you are going to use the Mark 13 or Mark 11 with a revolver magazine and American rockets , why not stick TWO where the helo shelter was, rework all that freed up storage and missile handling machinery of the clumsy GWS 1 for personnel spaces and put the helo pad and the shelter on the fantail like god and competent shipwrights intended?  Install Ikara where B-gun mount is and put a pair of triple torpedo tubes amidships between the funnels! Never have I seen a more beautiful 7000 tonne hull than that wasted so much potential.. 

 

Herald


 


 

 


One word, Bristol. Bigger then the counties and She doesnt even have a helicopter.
 
 The suggestion earlier was to move the flight deck after to the quaterdeck where the Sea Slug was fitted with the Hanger where the original flight deck is, buried into the unneeded missile handling areas. With a full width hanger there is easily enough space for a pair of helicopters.
 
Fit the Mk.13 launcher in place of the original hanger with a pair of illuminators behind there. If you moved the boats forward could you fit a pair of Ikara's between the funnels, one on each beam similar to the layout in the perth's? Use whatever is left of the old missile magazine for improved crew quarters. The other possible SAM system if the ship isnt ordered until 1967 or so would have to be Sea Dart.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/9/2009 9:43:04 PM






















Stevo you are a mind reader. I have started a response the herald a couple of times suggesting a Tartar armed County for the similar reasons to those you outlined.















 















I imagine a County pretty much the same as the as the RN model forward of the aft funnel. The changes would be the replacement of the Seaslug launcher with a helicopter flight deck with a large hanger replacing the missile handling facilities and former helipad. A Mk13 launcher would be fitted where the Seaslug firecontrol radar was located with a pait of Tartar directors situated in the old hanger location. Finally an Ikara launcher would be fitted in a cutout on either bean below the old hanger position with the missiles being stored in the old Seaslug hanger.






















Ikara in place of the two Sea Cat launchers?










New rockets?






 



1. Too much weight for Ikara in that position as a side thrower. GAGH! SEACAT was lightweight and appallingly bad.



2. If you are going to use the Mark 13 or Mark 11 with a revolver magazine and American rockets , why not stick TWO where the helo shelter was, rework all that freed up storage and missile handling machinery of the clumsy GWS 1 for personnel spaces and put the helo pad and the shelter on the fantail like god and competent shipwrights intended?  Install Ikara where B-gun mount is and put a pair of triple torpedo tubes amidships between the funnels! Never have I seen a more beautiful 7000 tonne hull than that wasted so much potential.. 



 



Herald






 






 



 






One word, Bristol. Bigger then the counties and She doesnt even have a helicopter.

I forgot about Bristol.
 
 The suggestion earlier was to move the flight deck after to the quaterdeck where the Sea Slug was fitted with the Hanger where the original flight deck is, buried into the unneeded missile handling areas. With a full width hanger there is easily enough space for a pair of helicopters.
 
Could work. Like I said, its a remarkably brilliant hull until you work your way into the raised weatherdeck. 

Fit the Mk.13 launcher in place of the original hanger with a pair of illuminators behind there. If you moved the boats forward could you fit a pair of Ikara's between the funnels, one on each beam similar to the layout in the Perth's? Use whatever is left of the old missile magazine for improved crew quarters. The other possible SAM system if the ship isnt ordered until 1967 or so would have to be Sea Dart.

Yes you could. I'm a little worried about topweight  (actually I'm a lot worried about topweight) Ikara weighs almost as TWICE  as much as the Mark 13 missile launceher loaded. That is why I favor a single launcher on the centerline covering the FX arcs..
 
I like the Sea Dart a lot, but my original brief was to see what was possible late 1950s to early 1960s.That limits you to Terrier/Tartar or HAWK.. The British Thunderbird of the era was a vert good  largish two step land combat missile with the same kind of strap on boosters that would have required the complex handling at sea as SEASLUG. When you look at Sea Dart, you see TALOS improved after some very good engineers have had ten years to work on it, to shrink her down to Tartar size.  
 
I wish Mauler had worked, or that TYPHON had been funded. That would have given Sea Dart a decade early and a point defense missile that we didn't get until.SEARAM. The British names could have been Sea Drake and the Sea Mauler.
 
Shrug. The rockets worked. It was the radars and computers that failed. The British were still ahead of us then with radar FCS systems and directors as a result of their 1950s rainbow coded radar programs.
 
Herald
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/10/2009 8:21:24 AM

Yes you could. I'm a little worried about topweight  (actually I'm a lot worried about topweight) Ikara weighs almost as TWICE  as much as the Mark 13 missile launceher loaded. That is why I favor a single launcher on the centerline covering the FX arcs..


 

I like the Sea Dart a lot, but my original brief was to see what was possible late 1950s to early 1960s.That limits you to Terrier/Tartar or HAWK.. The British Thunderbird of the era was a vert good  largish two step land combat missile with the same kind of strap on boosters that would have required the complex handling at sea as SEASLUG. When you look at Sea Dart, you see TALOS improved after some very good engineers have had ten years to work on it, to shrink her down to Tartar size.  


 

I wish Mauler had worked, or that TYPHON had been funded. That would have given Sea Dart a decade early and a point defense missile that we didn't get until.SEARAM. The British names could have been Sea Drake and the Sea Mauler.

 

Shrug. The rockets worked. It was the radars and computers that failed. The British were still ahead of us then with radar FCS systems and directors as a result of their 1950s rainbow coded radar programs.


 

Herald


 


 


 

What would you have done then? The lack of a Helicopter on the DDG's was a major limitation, especially since our Rivers unlike the UK Type 12's did not carry a helicopter. The RAN was literally built around HMAS Melbourne with all its ASW aircraft being carrier based, this meant that for about 4 or 5 months of the year the RAN did not have any ship based ASW aircraft.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       6/10/2009 2:44:02 PM



Yes you could. I'm a little worried about topweight  (actually I'm a lot worried about topweight) Ikara weighs almost as TWICE  as much as the Mark 13 missile launceher loaded. That is why I favor a single launcher on the centerline covering the FX arcs..

I like the Sea Dart a lot, but my original brief was to see what was possible late 1950s to early 1960s.That limits you to Terrier/Tartar or HAWK.. The British Thunderbird of the era was a vert good  largish two step land combat missile with the same kind of strap on boosters that would have required the complex handling at sea as SEASLUG. When you look at Sea Dart, you see TALOS improved after some very good engineers have had ten years to work on it, to shrink her down to Tartar size.  

I wish Mauler had worked, or that TYPHON had been funded. That would have given Sea Dart a decade early and a point defense missile that we didn't get until.SEARAM. The British names could have been Sea Drake and the Sea Mauler.

Shrug. The rockets worked. It was the radars and computers that failed. The British were still ahead of us then with radar FCS systems and directors as a result of their 1950s rainbow coded radar programs.

Herald


What would you have done then? The lack of a Helicopter on the DDG's was a major limitation, especially since our Rivers unlike the UK Type 12's did not carry a helicopter. The RAN was literally built around HMAS Melbourne with all its ASW aircraft being carrier based, this meant that for about 4 or 5 months of the year the RAN did not have any ship based ASW aircraft.


Well, the USN had a whole bunch of Essex leftovers that we turned onto ASW helicopter carriers. What we did was use them.
 
Suppose you bought the Counties and modified them to use the layout you originally described? You now have a 7000 ton destroyer that will use almost 500 men. I want to get that crew down to a more manageable 350. Getting rid of SEASLUG and SEACAT and using a pair of Mark 11 or Mark 13 launchers gets you 80 TERRIER/TARTAR rockets for about half the men you used for SEASLUG and SEACAT. Keep the British 3D radars, but add a pair of track illuminators. THUNDERBIRD type Type 83 "Yellow River", Mod 2s will work fine with TERRIER.
 
Now you have your Wessex helo on the fantail. Land the ASW Mark 44 torpedo tubes; save another 12 men. Get rid  of the B gun mount and install Ikara there. Net savings another 12 men. Then you have better accomodations. It becomes a 1960s version of a Tico.   
         
You have just bought a CRUISER. That isn't a destroyer. Its an AAW ship. You can afford one or two, but not three.Now we have this mix: around 1963fopr about 4000 men.
Centaur class            Armed
RANS Melbourne    8 Skyhawk 12 Sea Vixen 4 Wessex
RANS Sydney         8 Skyhawk 12 Sea Vixen 4 Wessex  
County class
RANS Canberra      1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), Mk 13 (40 msls), Mk 13 (40 msls), 2 Wessex
RANS Shropshire    1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), Mk 13 (40 msls), Mk 13 (40 msls),  2 Wessex
Adams class             
RANS Perth             1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 5' single (300 rds), Mk 13 (40 msls),  
RANS Hobart          1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 5' single (300 rds), Mk 13 (40 msls),
RANS Brisbane      
Type 12s and inproved Leanders revised)
RAN Yarra              1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 Wessex
RAN Parramatta       1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 Wessex
RAN Stewart           1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 Wessex    
RAN Dewent           1 5' single (300 rds), Ikara (16 msls), 1 Wessex
 
Now I don't know about you, but you just got rid of all of the Darings and two of the Rivers to buy a pair of revised Counties as your aircraft carrier bodyguard ships. That means you have to uses the Perths for the gun destroyer role which is fine by me, since the Adams class was good at that role too.    
   
Notice I specified a 5' Mk 42 single across the entire procurement? Nothing against the British 4.5' Mk 6 twin, but when it comes to cutting manpower, I go with the US automatics.

Same for missiles. Put the men into where I need them as a budget programmer, the carriers aircraft divisions, the helo complements, and all ships' engineering and operations divisions and combat information divisions . Eliminate as many "swab" positions as I can. Sailors are very expensive and I need them working the ship 24/7, not just joyriding until the ammunition needs to be passed from magazine to barrel when called to GQ. If I could ready round Ikara from a magazine instead of assemble it to launch, or use a better version of ASROC, I would.    
 
 Herald
 
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/10/2009 5:07:25 PM
Just looked at the Darings they only commissioned in 1957, 1958, 1959, so disposing of them in the early 1960's would be unpopular, so you'd probably end up keeping those and not getting the perths. Since they had a similar crew requirement to the Darings (slightly higher actually) you could possibly buy that third county class mod from not buying the perths, crewing it would be the problem though.
 
If you could remodel the rear superstructure of a daring to fit a flight deck and hanger you could probably sell some River's back to the RN. I suppose it all depends on where we depart from reality. In reality though, the RAN should have no problems crewing their ships from 1951-1959 and 1964-1973 as during these periods Australia had national service.
 
Quote    Reply

StevoJH       6/10/2009 5:19:15 PM
For carriers replace Sydney with Centaur in 1965, they have similar crew requirements and even though not modernised to the extent of Hermes, she can operate any RAN carrier aircraft in service. After that the only RN carriers the RAN could purchase would be Hermes pre-commando conversion (RN keeps albion in service instead of decommissioning her) or Victorious in 1968, however Victorious requires a much larger crew.
 
Essex class require ~2,600 crew so they are ruled out right away.

 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       6/10/2009 8:16:52 PM
Hermes was offered to the RAN in 1968 as a replacement for Melbourne and Eagle was looked at in the early 70's as part of the original Two Ocean Navy plan which would have required 3 carriers and 24 destroyers / frigates, plus support vessels.
 
One option I would look at is skipping the Rivers all together, keeping all 4 Q class Type 15 ASW Frigate Upgrades in service through the 60's and maybe 70's while upgrading the Darings with Ikara inplace of Limbo. This would free funds to build 3-6 Tartar Counties instead of the Adams before switching to the DDL (a cancelled Australia destroyer project) in the late 70's to replace the Q's and Darings and increase hull numbers due to their lower crewing requirements.
 
If we went for 6 Counties we could have gone for the proposed Broad Beam Amazon armed with Light Weight Seawolf instead of Seacat instead of or as a supplement to the DDL.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.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