Ocean Class Helicopter Carrier (LPH) (1998-2018) (ex RN)

[shark bait]

I accept the need for amphibs with more self defence capability, I don't see why that means you need a combined frigate/amphib. I think adding CAMM to our future amphibious shipping is a perfectly reasonable way of protecting them against most threats they could expect to face.

I don't see the point in that. If we don't see the need to add self defence to the carrier's, why would we the LPD's.

When we are spitting out utterly defenceless landing craft we couldn't land on a beach with any resistance any way.

[WhitestElephant]

I'm sure that China and Russia are quaking in their boots with the thought of 1,800 RMs running over a moderately defended beach via slow / exposed LPDs.

The Royal Navy does not maintain amphibious capabilities with Russia or China in mind. Though considering our amphibious capabilities exceed both Russia and China at range, then they might have a certain level of respect for the things we can do, that they cannot.

Are you saying that the forces with the highest technology has always won the day? Scale has its own value

Never has top end technology mattered so much. Scale is important, but massive navies such as Russia or China do not have the capacity to project quantity or quality, in any meaningful way, beyond their neighbourhoods. The French can.

NATO possess both scale and the top end technology, to an extent that massively exceeds any potential threats. Peers such as Russia and China remain rather underwhelming in both scale and top end technology outside their regional waters, and slightly beyond.

[R686]

sorry for the late reply but my head still hurts from NYE, heading down the beach for some after action drinking.

OK, HMAS Choules was a "steal"

Choules was a steal and we thank you for that every day, even with the minor setback of her transformers.

But we should never have been placed in that position but that comes back to political doctrine of DOA (1972) over an expeditionary sealift capability for which we saw with the previous Fast Troop Transport conversion of HMAS Sydney (The Vung Tau Ferry )which ultimately came back to bite us on the arse in the 80’s with operation Morris Dance, which was the catalyst to the long and winding road where we are now.

but what do the two Canberra’s, with that small addition on top, add up to, in the way of shipping for an ARG?

Our amphibious capability is set up to be scalable joint force capable of executing a number of different of amphibious operations, from the Ready Combat Team(QRF) to an Amphibious Ready Element (ARE) and then onto ambitious Amphibious Ready Group (ARG)
HMAS Choules role fits in as a key enabler as only having 2x LHD, for sustainment issues risk management and mitigation as we saw with the Kanimbla class being worked so hard. The RAN’s three major amphibious platforms—HMAS Choules (LSD), Canberra (LHD) and Adelaide (LHD) will stand at varying levels of readiness, on a two-year cycle that accounts for necessary maintenance and has a trained and ready crews available at all times. In other words we will either have 1x LHD and a LHD/LSD available at all times with the third surge capability.

In a force generation cycle context for an ARG in shipping terms is a one shot capability there is no ‘Ready’ ‘Reset’ & ‘Readying’. But also keep in mind if we were to deploy at that level it would be in a coalition or INTERFET environment.

there was an excellent slide on the capability of our ARG from within defence, but I dammed if I can find it now. ill keep searching for then add it later for you

I can see the attractiveness of Absalon-type to the Australian (rather, Pacific islands) circumstances as two of them could Command a patrol fleet

If we had a combination of amphibious shipping capability of say 2x Canberra’s 4x Absalon’s 1x Bay & 6x enhanced LCH. It would give ADF flexible multi role force capable of number of different mission sets everything from small self-supporting raids to large scale medium intensity Ship To Objective Manoeuvre (STOM) and all can ships can support helicopter operations and can act independently or part of a larger task force, with a low level range of redundancy leaving the Bay as she was intended as strategic sealift.
The ADF is never going to large enough to be able to sustain an ARG indefinitely we have taken large strides to become a medium level maritime power whereas the UK has a broad level of both maritime and a naval power which are significantly different concepts.

[ArmChairCivvy]

leaving the Bay as she was intended as strategic sealift

Thanks for the overview, and as for the TV images of the Sydney fire works, it is always a good reminder for putting more champagne on ice.

As for the quote, the original UK designation was Logistics ship(s), which I think concurs well with the quoted intention. I am coming back to it as Donald quoted the crew for Choules at almost double the RN crewing:
- is it an indication that HMAS Choules is continuously operational whereas the RN vessels are more like a surge capability, or
- are they being used differently?
(Sources could be inconsistent, too, e.g. troop carrying capacity normal vs. in overload, which distinction is not always made.)

[shark bait]

are they being used differently?

Yes, ours are auxiliary vessels with civilian crews. I believe the Australians are naval vessels with military crew's.

The crew listed for ours is the standard civilian crew required to operate the ship. Further military personnel are then embarked depending on the task but not included in the ships head count, standard RFA.

[R686]

As for the quote, the original UK designation was Logistics ship(s), which I think concurs well with the quoted intention. I am coming back to it as Donald quoted the crew for Choules at almost double the RN crewing

No doubt that when things turn hot crewing would increase, as from what I understand the RFA are under civilian rules but must be part of the Navy reserve when entering a combat zone or something along those lines.

- is it an indication that HMAS Choules is continuously operational whereas the RN vessels are more like a surge capability,

yeah it is now that Tobroken has been paid she has to take up the slack whilst Canberra/Adelaide work up to FOC, Tailsman Saber 2017 is the one to watch as the plan on put a ARG through its paces

- are they being used differently?

routinely I don't think there would be much in it between the UK and the RAN, whereas the RAN would most probably do more with Army related exercise's than the RFA be more sealift, but that's only an assumption

[WhiteWhale]

On the subject of what to replace Ocean with, why not another Ocean?

Existing design, few R&D costs.
Crew experienced in the design.
Direct swap of transferable equipment.
No need for latest and greatest stealthy design.
Proven platform, but hopefully built a little straighter!

Another 20/25 years and importantly not messing around with the CVF's being meddled with.

[R686]

On the subject of what to replace Ocean with, why not another Ocean?

Existing design, few R&D costs.
Crew experienced in the design.
Direct swap of transferable equipment.
No need for latest and greatest stealthy design.
Proven platform, but hopefully built a little straighter!

Another 20/25 years and importantly not messing around with the CVF's being meddled with.

and put a ski jump on it

[shark bait]

On the subject of what to replace Ocean with, why not another Ocean?

I suppose a similar question is do we judge building to commercial specification to be a success?

My issue with a direct ocean replacement is we would have to loose the Albion's to support it, and with that loosing the big chunk of our well dock capacity.

For that reason I think the ocean replacement will need a well dock, and as @R686 states, a ski jump would be nice.

[WhitestElephant]

Better to replace Ocean and both Albions with two proper LHDs, like the Canberra-class in the 2030s. No more cheap Ocean style LPHs.

[marktigger]

basically ocean has to go without replacement to release manpower for the carriers

[Repulse]

The best chance is getting a more capable replacement for RFA Argus which can support Amphibious Ops as well as being a PCRS.

[Engaging Strategy]

The best chance is getting a more capable replacement for RFA Argus which can support Amphibious Ops as well as being a PCRS.

I've seen this idea floated a few times before and I have to say that I think it could have some real legs. Let's not forget that Argus began life as a helicopter training ship, and although she was refitted at the time of the Gulf war, which added her hospital and the PCRS role, she still (nominally at least) hasn't relinquished her original role. Seeing as both her duties require aviation facilities I don't see any reason why the successor to Argus shouldn't have a big aviation deck on the back and a hangar. Now, moving from that to a full-blown LPH/PCRS hybrid is where it gets tricky imo. I think a merchant conversion would be fine for the former, but for the latter you'd need to purpose build; and that could get expensive. There'd also be the matter of who would operate such a ship? Would it be an RFA, operated to their standards with leaner manning or an RN ship? You'll certainly need a big regular RN crew component for the air group if you expect to use it as a proper LPH on occasion.

Honestly I think I'm getting to the point where I just can't see good justifications for not replacing all the RN & RFA's "capital ships" with ships featuring through decks or large landing pads. Adding aviation facilities, even if it's just a simple flat top and the ability to act as a lillypad for helos it's not difficult or extraordinary expensive to achieve.

[Repulse]

It will be interesting to see what the MARS JSS design ends up looking like, as they could be expanded in my view to take on some of the Aviation Support duties. In fact, perhaps with the right design (and a 4th ship) the PCRS role could be spread.

[shark bait]

Interesting points about combining the argus and ocean replacement.

Its starting to sound like what the Americans are doing with their Afloat Forward Staging Base. Perhaps we could do something similar, but with a converted tide class tanker instead of the Alaska class the Americans base their design on.


We could fit a very big flat top onto the tides if we wanted. It is right that any new assets is made vastly more useful and flexible with a big flat top. Another commercial standard helicopter carrier, that maximises commonality with a cheap design.



Too much to put a ski jump on the end ?

[R686]

Interesting points about combining the argus and ocean replacement.

Its starting to sound like what the Americans are doing with their Afloat Forward Staging Base. Perhaps we could do something similar, but with a converted tide class tanker instead of the Alaska class the Americans base their design on.


We could fit a very big flat top onto the tides if we wanted. It is right that any new assets is made vastly more useful and flexible with a big flat top. Another commercial standard helicopter carrier, that maximises commonality with a cheap design.

might be a bit too much of a specialist ship, and the UK doesn't use LCAC.
other option if you look at USNS Benavidez (T-AKR 306) and with a bit of modifying could become the next Argus and Ocean replacement.

Remove the 4x forward heave compensated cranes and replaced with one aft there may be space for a couple of LCU MK10, I'm estimating the now free space should be between about roughly 140m & 32 wide (170m long and 32.6m wide Ocean flight deck) that should see you with space for 3-4 helicopter spots with a large centerline aircraft lift to hanger aircraft below deck.

As built LSMR is capable of carrying 58 tanks(Abrams), 48 AFV (Bradley's), plus more than 900 other types trucks, that would be reduced with a hanger deck. The sealift ships will be capable of self-sustained RO/RO operations at a pier and in a Logistics-Over-the Shore by either lighterage or using LCU MK10.

its not a thru deck design but neither is Argus, it can perform a number of different mission sets from HADR to strategic sealift to Amphibious assault and also act as a casualty receiving ship, hospital faculty or troop accommodation can be via portable TEU/FEU

only downside its a bloody big ship almost as long as CVF and about just as heavy at full load, but then under RFA rules she has a ships complement of just 30(minimum)

http://www.msc.navy.mil/inventory/ships.asp?ship=104

http://www.navsource.org/archives/09/54/0954030407.jpg

[ArmChairCivvy]

estimating the now free space should be between about roughly 140m & 32 wide (170m long and 32.6m wide Ocean flight deck) that should see you with space for 3-4 helicopter spots with a large centerline aircraft lift to hanger aircraft below deck.

As built LSMR is capable of carrying 58 tanks(Abrams), 48 AFV (Bradley's), plus more than 900 other types trucks, that would be reduced with a hanger deck

That is a truly multi-use ship. The hangar deck intruding would not be a big deal as we have the Points as well (one more could be relieved from contract?)
- it does come across a bit oversized, but going down to less than 3 helo spots does not sound good, either
- after all, it would be an aviation support ship for those amphibs that only have a helo deck (heh-heh, all of them), so Chinook lift hangared on a CVF and Merlins,incl. any with a casevac fit-out, on this one? Would not compromise the CVF capabilities too much when only one of them to hand

[R686]

That is a truly multi-use ship. The hangar deck intruding would not be a big deal as we have the Points as well (one more could be relieved from contract?)
- it does come across a bit oversized, but going down to less than 3 helo spots does not sound good, either
- after all, it would be an aviation support ship for those amphibs that only have a helo deck (heh-heh, all of them), so Chinook lift hangared on a CVF and Merlins,incl. any with a casevac fit-out, on this one? Would not compromise the CVF capabilities too much when only one of them to hand

Well with a little bit of searching it appears Military Sealift Command is getting a smaller version with MV Cragside, Think Defence has got a good article and the most comprehensive list of capability on it, and has been mentioned in more than one spot. I tried looking for up to date info but came up short.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-n ... hip-2014-2



http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2014/01/r ... othership/

but anyway back to the T-AKR here is something to ponder, I don't know how to post altered photos or airbrush them(sorry I tried)but you will get the meaning hopefully,

Just imagine 2x LCU MK10 on the aft section from this Kanimbla class LPA http://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/fi ... /Cover.jpg
and this forward of the bridge http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircra ... ersion.gif

[WhiteWhale]

Converting a ship to such a role may not work to well, the higher the deck from the water line the greater the moment of roll, so if the ship is only in slightly unsettled waters the effect on deck is exaggerated, you would need something to be designed to be uber-stable. Round bottomed, stabiliser fins and baffled anti-role tanks.

All perfectly doable and I'm pretty sure an area the CVF is awesome at but you really want a ship designed with that in mind rather then adapted.

[Gabriele]

The thing that most fascinates me about the MV Cragside conversion (and most irks me) is that she is practically identical to the Point class ships. Same kind of RoRo, almost exactly the same design.

And while the Cragside is getting a big hangar, a huge flight deck and a very useful set of other features, the MOD just threw away two Points.



That could have been RFA Argus's replacement as well as an alternative to tying down a precious Bay LSD permanently in the Gulf.

[shark bait]

other option if you look at USNS Benavidez (T-AKR 306) and with a bit of modifying could become the next Argus and Ocean replacement.

That was very much along the line of my thinking, I just had no idea that class existed.

I very much like this idea for an Ocean / Argus replacement, especially as @Gabriele points out the possibility of using the point's makes it a very intriguing suggestion. Let's hope we can recharter the other two in five years time.

Affordable, common and very flexible, what's not to like!?

[Repulse]

I wonder if anyone has done a cost comparison between upgrading PoW for to carry LCVPs and converting an escorting RFA to do it instead.

[ArmChairCivvy]

upgrading PoW for to carry LCVPs

Isn't it just speculation that the enhanced amphib. ops support will mean that specific modification?

[R686]

I wonder if anyone has done a cost comparison between upgrading PoW for to carry LCVPs and converting an escorting RFA to do it instead.

why Bay already have the cranes all they need is the cradles to sit on the decks, if they did make room for a davit hope the make them for CB90-class fast assault craft with it faster speed to the beach over an LCVP, Operational Maneuver from the Sea (OMFTS) via the CVF is going to be all about speed(shock and awe) and light infantry no heavy equipment

[shark bait]

POW should not carry landing craft. It is a horrible, horrible idea.
Using an auxiliary is a much more sensible suggestion.