Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

F-35_launches_Joint_Strike_Missile.jpg

us-south-korea-drill.jpg

this-year-12700-us-troops-are-participating-alongside-many-more-south-korean-soldiers.jpg

the-us-routinely-dedicates-an-extremely-large-contingent-of-soldiers-and-marines-to-the-drills.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

This is a discussion on Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by LancasterBomber Looks like we might be able to break Moore's law finally with memristors. I hope GF ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 36 votes, 4.14 average.
Old April 11th, 2010   #3556
Super Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,453
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LancasterBomber View Post
Looks like we might be able to break Moore's law finally with memristors. I hope GF and DSTO and the new DMTC in Bendigo are right on top of this stuff. I'm sure its old news to them.

Memristor discovery could lead to faster HPC | Emerging Tech | ZDNet UK

The official paper was released in Nature:

Access : |[lsquo]|Memristive|[rsquo]| switches enable |[lsquo]|stateful|[rsquo]| logic operations via material implication : Nature
Very interesting article LB, thanks for the link. Would be interested to hear what GF et al make of this.
Bonza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3557
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
Hi all

Hey everyone, new to the site and just wanted to say hi. I was in the RAN from 87-95. Still find it interesting to keep tabs on what is happening in the "PUSS". Just a couple of quick ones (probably been covered before, but don't have time to read through 238 pages !!), Do you think the RAN will operate f35 b's from the canberra class in the future ?? (I would love to think so !!)
and also in the 2009 White paper, the Army will be getting many new vehicles including new Armoured Personnel Carriers, does anyone think it a possibility we could get a number of the new USMC EFV to operate from the canberra class ??

Thanks, and hope to have many great discussions in the future with so much changing in the RAN

Glenn
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3558
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienscale View Post
Hey everyone, new to the site and just wanted to say hi. I was in the RAN from 87-95. Still find it interesting to keep tabs on what is happening in the "PUSS". Just a couple of quick ones (probably been covered before, but don't have time to read through 238 pages !!), Do you think the RAN will operate f35 b's from the canberra class in the future ?? (I would love to think so !!)
and also in the 2009 White paper, the Army will be getting many new vehicles including new Armoured Personnel Carriers, does anyone think it a possibility we could get a number of the new USMC EFV to operate from the canberra class ??

Thanks, and hope to have many great discussions in the future with so much changing in the RAN

Glenn
Outside of possibly a few allied F-3Bs landing on the Canberra class LHDs, no. The LHDs don't have the fuel or munitions bunkers to operate F-35Bs effectively. There is much more to a light carrier than a flat top...

The EPVs are much more likely to be used on the Canberras, if only with USMC vehicles in an exercise. At a later date the ADF may buy some, although I don't know of any plans to do so...

I know the Australians are very proud of their former Melbourne light carrier, but the ship Australia missed more during the East Timor crisis was the former Sydney... By the way something the ADF will soon correct, not once but twice....

Last edited by Sea Toby; April 11th, 2010 at 04:57 AM.
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3559
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Outside of possibly a few allied F-3Bs landing on the Canberra class LHDs, no. The LHDs don't have the fuel or munitions bunkers to operate F-35Bs effectively. There is much more to a light carrier than a flat top...

The EPVs are much more likely to be used on the Canberras, if only with USMC vehicles in an exercise. At a later date the ADF may buy some, although I don't know of any plans to do so...

I know the Australians are very proud of their former Melbourne light carrier, but the ship Australia missed more during the East Timor crisis was the former Sydney... By the way something the ADF will soon correct, not once but twice....
I understand this, I in no way think of the canberra class as an aircraft carrier, there is very much more to it than that, I am talking about the possibility for us to operate the jsf, as the USMC currently does with the harriers on the Wasp class. It is not intended for high sortie rates on an extendd period of time, but for air support of the landing force in the first instance. The Austtralian Government view that the RAAF can cover us from land based fighters on the mainland, I think is very short sighted. Heavens forbid if we had to land any force outside of the flight distance of our fighters. OH wait thats when as usual we expect the Americans or Brits to get us out of the ****. Not every situation in the future will have immediate support of our allies, expecally if we have to lift not only our own, but other country's expats at short notice, among many other possibility's.
The 2009 Australian Defence White Paper stated that the Army would aquire over 1,100 "various" vehicles including APC. Would be nice to think they would be smart enought to use an "EFV" type vehicle with the new LHD capability coming, especially if we dont have anything to offer air support from the LHD, would not be to keen to try and land troops in Choppers and LCM'S without at least some basic protection for the initial forces ?
Just a thought ?
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3560
Super Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,453
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienscale View Post
I understand this, I in no way think of the canberra class as an aircraft carrier, there is very much more to it than that, I am talking about the possibility for us to operate the jsf, as the USMC currently does with the harriers on the Wasp class. It is not intended for high sortie rates on an extendd period of time, but for air support of the landing force in the first instance. The Austtralian Government view that the RAAF can cover us from land based fighters on the mainland, I think is very short sighted. Heavens forbid if we had to land any force outside of the flight distance of our fighters. OH wait thats when as usual we expect the Americans or Brits to get us out of the ****. Not every situation in the future will have immediate support of our allies, expecally if we have to lift not only our own, but other country's expats at short notice, among many other possibility's.
The 2009 Australian Defence White Paper stated that the Army would aquire over 1,100 "various" vehicles including APC. Would be nice to think they would be smart enought to use an "EFV" type vehicle with the new LHD capability coming, especially if we dont have anything to offer air support from the LHD, would not be to keen to try and land troops in Choppers and LCM'S without at least some basic protection for the initial forces ?
Just a thought ?
I know it's a long way to go back, but I'd recommend re-reading this thread from about page 165 onwards. The LHDs and their utility (or lack thereof) as fast jet carriers are discussed pretty exhaustively, and some of the points discussed might interest you. Also if you search around the Navy forums there are quite a few old threads pertinent to the Canberra class. Hope you enjoy.
Bonza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3561
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
Ty, will do
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3562
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468
Threads:
About the former HMAS Sydney III, I recently saw this video. As the Vung Tau ferry, it took six days to turn her around, Later during the Vietnam War after some improvements they were able to turn her around in six hours.

The Vung Tau Ferry - Royal Australian Navy
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3563
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
Smile

He He, you guys are funny !! have looked back at the threads on the LHD's and the F35B argument, and while it basically comes down to the government of the day, a lot of the argument as to the capability of the LHD seems to come down to personal opinion !! can ANYONE show me the specifications of the JC1 or the Canberra LHD's ??. I have done extensive searches and can't find this information. I can't find anywhere how much JP5, ammunition, workshop space, spare parts storage,etc, etc, etc, etc !! and it goes on, that these ships actually have !! all that you find on the net is basic specs (and that varies from site to site) all of which once again comes down to guessing and (I would assume maybe some educated) comparison to dedicated aircraft carriers, and to some extent the american wasp class.
Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3564
Super Moderator
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,453
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienscale View Post
He He, you guys are funny !! have looked back at the threads on the LHD's and the F35B argument, and while it basically comes down to the government of the day, a lot of the argument as to the capability of the LHD seems to come down to personal opinion !! can ANYONE show me the specifications of the JC1 or the Canberra LHD's ??. I have done extensive searches and can't find this information. I can't find anywhere how much JP5, ammunition, workshop space, spare parts storage,etc, etc, etc, etc !! and it goes on, that these ships actually have !! all that you find on the net is basic specs (and that varies from site to site) all of which once again comes down to guessing and (I would assume maybe some educated) comparison to dedicated aircraft carriers, and to some extent the american wasp class.
Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
FYI, there are a number of members in here with military or industry experience. whose opinions on the viability of the Canberra class for a given role could be accorded more weight than that of idle speculation. People whose names appear in blue (and most of the mods with names in red or maroon) have, in my experience on these boards, quite a lot of useful knowledge to share.

It's also worth noting that the specifications of the Canberra class are absolutely not the be-all and end-all of its applicability for fast jet operations. For example, something brought up by gf0012-aust earlier in the thread, and something that has nothing to do with the specifications of the Canberra class, is that we do not have anyone overseas learning fixed-wing carrier operations from our allies, while we do have people overseas looking at amphibious operations. This is, according to gf, a bigtime indicator that we're not interested in F-35Bs for the Canberras, as if we were putting together a workable doctrine for deploying fixed wing aircraft from the ships then it would be a priority. Might be something you want to take into account when forming your opinion as to the chances of such an eventuality.
Bonza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3565
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienscale View Post
He He, you guys are funny !! have looked back at the threads on the LHD's and the F35B argument, and while it basically comes down to the government of the day, a lot of the argument as to the capability of the LHD seems to come down to personal opinion !! can ANYONE show me the specifications of the JC1 or the Canberra LHD's ??. I have done extensive searches and can't find this information. I can't find anywhere how much JP5, ammunition, workshop space, spare parts storage,etc, etc, etc, etc !! and it goes on, that these ships actually have !! all that you find on the net is basic specs (and that varies from site to site) all of which once again comes down to guessing and (I would assume maybe some educated) comparison to dedicated aircraft carriers, and to some extent the american wasp class.
Don't mean to sound cynical guys but im a factual person, show me some real, verifiable specifications on the JC1/Canbera LHD ! otherwise it is speculation, because if we don't know or understand the true spec's and capability's of the ship, the arguement of whether we will or will not get F35B any time in the future is mute !!
I suggest you search and read quite a bit of information available on the world wide web of the Juan Carlos I BPE, much of it in Spanish. Use babel fish to translate. You will be able to read this stuff with your own eyes....
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3566
Banned Member
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: costa blanca
Posts: 160
Threads:
Here there is data for the wasp class:
USS Wasp (LHD-1) class

Here for the canberras data in spanish:
Asociación Milicia Naval Universitaria

To resume for you, canberras, weapons bunker: 600 sq mt., jp5: 800 tonnes (wasp 1230 tonnes).


and in english (select the language) from the spanish minister site but without some data:
Background - Modernization - Armada Española


Cheers.
agc33e is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3567
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
Ty for the facts, that's what im talking about. As I said I am a factual person. I know our current focus is not on the F35B and the current (and future) governments are unlikely to obtain them, was just curoius as to the "capability" of such operations, even though compared to the wasp for instance the capability is smaller, but we would never do operations to the level of the Americans anyway. I think you guy's are right in that we may see some cross dock operations in the future with the americans etc. You must admit it would be a sweet thing to see ?
I am still working my way through the 200 and something odd pages so will slowly get up to speed on what the thread has covered, sorry if this has been covered before. Any thoughts on what the Navy's ASW helicopter will be ? will certainly add a fantastic capability to the fleet. We currently seem to be favouring the European made choppers at the moment. Do they have any suitable off the shelf ASW units, or could we possibly use the NFH version of the current MRH 90 ? Would seem to be a smart way to go, as I understand the MRH 90 were built in Brisbane, so the ability to build in Australia would be hard to pass, and we already have the infrastructure, parts, trained crew and maintenence in place ?
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 11th, 2010   #3568
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,613
Threads:
Yes cross decking with the poms and the yanks would be very interesting and be a fantastic ship for the RAN and the ADF.

About the helos, most people seemed to think the NFH offer will be most favoured and given every opportunity, however if it can't cut it (particularly in the time frame we need it which is now) we can buy american. Obviously the benifits of aussie build, high commonality with existing helicopter fleets for logistics, capability and training won't be overlooked.
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010   #3569
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,193
Threads:
I think you are right, the NFH 90 version would be hard to pass up by the government, but as you said we need them now. Which american chopper do you think would suit the bill ?? they have several to choose from ?
I have also noted while catching up on the thread the discussion on the replacement LCH. I must admit it is something I have not given much thought to ! It is amazing the variations available, does anyone have any thoughts on what style would operate best with the LDH's and potential new sealift ship, would they also have to take into consideration what form the new OCV will take ? as this multi role ship could potentially have numerous capability's
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 12th, 2010   #3570
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,468
Threads:
The latest I heard of ADF's thinking is this with the 24 ASW helicopter acquisition... Its several months old now, but I have yet to hear or read anything different...

Defence chiefs prefer the U.S. for new RAN ASW helicopters « ELP Defens(c)e Blog
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:12 AM.