Sea trials, LHD (JCI)

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
But we can point the ran fleet fronted an hostile fleet, what weapons has the ran? 2 four harpoon launchers from the ship position (awd), and collins..
Nearly everything that floats in the RAN has harpoon launches on them. SM-2/SM-6, Cbass torpedo's and probably navalised Tomahawks with shipping capability. Add to that, 100 F-35's with one of the largest refuelling fleets with the longest range munitions. Combined to that 24 Superhornets with a huge range and self refueling capability. We also have Butterworth airbase to strike from off the mainland. JORN gives us enough warning to be able to organise what ever we need from land bases.

A few 35B's really aren't going to save Australia. I think they would be more useful for intelligence, recon, CAS etc. It might be the sort of thing the US or UK might want to base off a ship for a while as part of a larger mission to provide those specific elements. Or if a US carrier or amphib is delayed they could send a few over to sit ready on a deck to deter other forces.

The LHD may be useful to operate F-35B during traning exercises. While the UK or the US may not send a amphib or carrier for a training exercise, troops and personel can get experience calling in airstrikes.

I didn't think Spain was going to use the BPE as a carrier, just for training or emergency purposes.
 

agc33e

Banned Member
Nearly everything that floats in the RAN has harpoon launches on them. SM-2/SM-6, Cbass torpedo's and probably navalised Tomahawks with shipping capability. Add to that, 100 F-35's with one of the largest refuelling fleets with the longest range munitions. Combined to that 24 Superhornets with a huge range and self refueling capability. We also have Butterworth airbase to strike from off the mainland. JORN gives us enough warning to be able to organise what ever we need from land bases.
Ok say 8 harpoons per surface ship, plus the subharpoons of the subs. But sm2 or sm6 are not shipping strike (?), surface ships torpedos maybe are not the best to throw them to an hostile surface ship that is for ex at 60 kms from the ran fleet (in this case too far away), navalised tactoms for ships i dont know if the ran would put them instead of the real tactoms (unless you have 64 cell in the vls of the anzac ii).
Then you count the raaf, say that the raaf cannot go there, for ex because the fleet is in hostile zone, that is under the superiority of the hostile air force, ok maybe the ran wouldnt put the fleet in such a condition, maybe yes with the awd´s 96 essms per ship (for ex), maybe they are there without wanting it.

A few 35B's really aren't going to save Australia. I think they would be more useful for intelligence, recon, CAS etc. It might be the sort of thing the US or UK might want to base off a ship for a while as part of a larger mission to provide those specific elements. Or if a US carrier or amphib is delayed they could send a few over to sit ready on a deck to deter other forces.
In terms of fleet things, without counting raaf, having 3, 4 or 5 f35b´s inside your awd-anzacs umbrella allows you launch your missiles or missile-torpedos (probably 2 per jet because you need a final torpedo for at least 16 or 17 kms (?)), each wave of 4 f35b´s gives the same as each surface ship (8 harpoons), if you run out of the surface ship´s ones...
One of the standard config for wasp class is 6 harriers.

The LHD may be useful to operate F-35B during traning exercises. While the UK or the US may not send a amphib or carrier for a training exercise, troops and personel can get experience calling in airstrikes.

I didn't think Spain was going to use the BPE as a carrier, just for training or emergency purposes
.
They are doing, they are goint to put all the jets, they have a powerful electronic suite (radars, controllers, comms) for managing more than 4 or 5 jets, these capacities in the jci in terms of jets needs are very well covered compared to the light carrier pda can give. Maybe they think that spain will use the bpe for jets just when the pda is in refit, but now the refit for the pda has been cancelled in some of the aspects, from the budget cuts. In case spain had more jets, i wouldnt be surprised to see exercises of both ships at the same time full of jets.

The thing is if the f35b is really stealth it might suite very well the naval warfare, with the electronic warfare of the ships and the below-horizon space to be fully unseen.
 
Last edited:

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
Why in the name of god would major RAN surface vessels be operating in waters in which a hostile air force had air superiority? Please, think about it for a second. Do you really think PROFESSIONAL MILITARY OFFICERS, people who know the scenarios, risks, and their jobs far better than you or I ever will, are going to commit BILLIONS of dollars worth of Navy shipping to an area in which they will be at the mercy of a hostile air force? Or do you think it's perhaps a touch more likely that they'd either find a way to degrade that air force's capability or modify their plan of attack accordingly BEFORE they committed ships to the area?

Why in all these scenarios involving the wonder of the F-35B in RAN service does the RAN seem to be practicing independent expeditionary warfare? Do you have any idea how incredibly, incredibly unlikely (to the point of being removed from reality) it is that such a scenario would eventuate in the knowable future?

Also you seem to think having eight Harpoon missiles per major surface combatant (in addition to sub-launched variants) isn't sufficent. Could you please consider for a second the number of anti-ship missiles you're talking about here, and then give an indication as to what kind of realistic exchange is going to take place in which the RAN have to fire them in the vast barrages you envision? Who are they planning on fighting, exactly?

And for the record, yes SM-2 (and by extension SM-6) has a secondary anti-surface capability.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
I didn't think Spain was going to use the BPE as a carrier, just for training or emergency purposes.
Spain will use Juan Carlos 1 as a carrier, when Principe de Asturias (or her eventual replacement) is in repair or refit.

However, this will require docking, to have additional equipment (in containerised modules) to be fitted, & the stern gate sealed.

As I understand it, it is envisaged that during these periods the main role of JC1 will be to maintain aviation skills, but she will be available for active deployment if needed.
 

agc33e

Banned Member
Why in the name of god would major RAN surface vessels be operating in waters in which a hostile air force had air superiority?
When facing an hostile big carrier (russian, chinese, indian). In the case they are caught in such a situation, they could have the onboard few jets resource to attack from their umbrella, apart from deployment tasks and others as said Stringrayoz.
Exactly out of that context, but similar, we can imagne the canberras in the blockade of north korea with 12 asw helos working in asw, command and warehousing for other ships tasks. Because north korea has a big air force.


Why in all these scenarios involving the wonder of the F-35B in RAN service does the RAN seem to be practicing independent expeditionary warfare? Do you have any idea how incredibly, incredibly unlikely (to the point of being removed from reality) it is that such a scenario would eventuate in the knowable future?
The big amount of deployment the ran has with the canberras, deserves the best protection and capabilities, just given by the jets, helos good ok, but imagine this: some of the australian army demand air support because some insurgents have attacked them and are blocked running out of munition, the insurgents are waiting for the helo with a portable launcher, if the pilot arrives mounting an helo they kill him, if arrives in a jet more difficult for the portable launcher, and if engages it can eject. Apart from the fact that if the attack is at 150 kms off he lhd the helo is going to appear 4, 5 or 6 times later than the jet, that is our mates in the ground have to wait 50 mins with limited munition or 10 mins with the jet.
Its the ran to practice independent expeditionary warfare agains some rebels with granade launchers somewhere? Of course, if needed, and more than that (afganistan, irak).


Also you seem to think having eight Harpoon missiles per major surface combatant (in addition to sub-launched variants) isn't sufficent. Could you please consider for a second the number of anti-ship missiles you're talking about here, and then give an indication as to what kind of realistic exchange is going to take place in which the RAN have to fire them in the vast barrages you envision? Who are they planning on fighting, exactly?
Variious missiles at the same for a single hostile ship, they have sam, ram, rim, ciws, vls systems agains a single missile coming.

And for the record, yes SM-2 (and by extension SM-6) has a secondary anti-surface capability.
Probably not as ranged, fast, effetive, hard to destroy as an specialized antiship missile.
 

Sea Toby

New Member
When facing an hostile big carrier (russian, chinese, indian). In the case they are caught in such a situation, they could have the onboard few jets resource to attack from their umbrella, apart from deployment tasks and others as said Stringrayoz.
Exactly out of that context, but similar, we can imagne the canberras in the blockade of north korea with 12 asw helos working in asw, command and warehousing for other ships tasks.
Really? North Korea doesn't export or import much, and what it does goes to China over its land border. You can plug the bottle of their submarine egress from their submarine base with an ASW frigate and ASW patrol aircraft from a South Korean air base. Why does Australia or South Korea need a light carrier to plug the bottle against North Korean submarines? How will 6 Lightning IIs defeat a much larger air force? Sorry, that scenario has more holes than a colander...

Recall General Schwarzkopf remarks when he ridiculed Saddam Hussein as not being trained in the art of warfare? or as a tactician? or as a strategists? or as a general?

Turn the tables a bit. Why is Australia buying two LHDs instead of one light carrier? For the same price as the two LHDs Australia could buy a 40-45k ton carrier similar to what India is building... Study why Australia wants sealift, and why sealift was their greatest shortcoming and challenge during the East Timor crisis...
 
Last edited:

AegisFC

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
When facing an hostile big carrier (russian, chinese, indian). In the case they are caught in such a situation, they could have the onboard few jets resource to attack from their umbrella, apart from deployment tasks and others as said Stringrayoz.
Exactly out of that context, but similar, we can imagne the canberras in the blockade of north korea with 12 asw helos working in asw, command and warehousing for other ships tasks. Because north korea has a big air force.
If the RAN had to face a hostile carrier and the USN (or other ally) isn't around to help the best weapon will be the Collins class submarines not a Canberra with a handful of F-35B's. After the Collins the AWD's linked in with friendly assets (other Aegis units, MPA's, Hawkeyes or Wedgetails) will for the most part be able to deal with any inbound aircraft or swarm missile attack.

I am sure you saw the warning about discussing the RAN acquiring F-35B in the RAN thread, well the mods and several other users are sick and tired of hearing about it, from this point on ANY discussion of the RAN acquiring F-35B in the Navy & Maritime sub-forum will not be tolerated, any post to that effect will be deleted.
Discussion of how the Spanish will realistically use F-35B off the BPE's is fine however


Probably not as ranged, fast, effetive, hard to destroy as an specialized antiship missile.
The SM-2 is a VERY fast missile and yes it is short ranged in surface mode (limited by your radar and illuminator horizon) but over the horizon anti-ship missiles have a problem in identifying its target. The last thing anyone wants is for your missile to accidentally hit a neutral oil tanker. There is a reason why the USN, Europe, SK, Japan and Australia have not developed large, long ranged and very fast anti-ship missiles.
These missiles have been discussed in depth in the past, if you wish to know more do a search.
 

AegisFC

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Really? North Korea doesn't export or import much, and what it does goes to China over its land border. You can plug the bottle of their submarine egress from their submarine base with an ASW frigate and ASW patrol aircraft from a South Korean air base. Why does Australia or South Korea need a light carrier to plug the bottle against North Korean submarines? How will 6 Lightning IIs defeat a much larger air force? Sorry, that scenario has more holes than a colander...
.
It seems to me a squadron or two of P-3's (or P-8's when they come on line) protected by an agressive CAP with a few ASW frigates and associated helo's would do just fine bottling up any NK subs.
 

Marc 1

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
When facing an hostile big carrier (russian, chinese, indian). In the case they are caught in such a situation, they could have the onboard few jets resource to attack from their umbrella, apart from deployment tasks and others as said Stringrayoz.
Exactly out of that context, but similar, we can imagne the canberras in the blockade of north korea with 12 asw helos working in asw, command and warehousing for other ships tasks. Because north korea has a big air force.



The big amount of deployment the ran has with the canberras, deserves the best protection and capabilities, just given by the jets, helos good ok, but imagine this: some of the australian army demand air support because some insurgents have attacked them and are blocked running out of munition, the insurgents are waiting for the helo with a portable launcher, if the pilot arrives mounting an helo they kill him, if arrives in a jet more difficult for the portable launcher, and if engages it can eject. Apart from the fact that if the attack is at 150 kms off he lhd the helo is going to appear 4, 5 or 6 times later than the jet, that is our mates in the ground have to wait 50 mins with limited munition or 10 mins with the jet.
Its the ran to practice independent expeditionary warfare agains some rebels with granade launchers somewhere? Of course, if needed, and more than that (afganistan, irak).



Variious missiles at the same for a single hostile ship, they have sam, ram, rim, ciws, vls systems agains a single missile coming.


Probably not as ranged, fast, effetive, hard to destroy as an specialized antiship missile.
OK, I give up. Sea Toby, GF, Bonza I suggest you do the same. This guy clearly has done a far more through analysis of RAN requirements and employment than our entire defence force.

Perhaps if we just agree with him that the RAAF/refurbished fleet air arm be equipped with 6 x F35's or ex Spanish Harriers and we go into the carrier business so we can attack North Korea or the PRC (singlehandedly) he will stop this torment.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
North Korea doesn't export or import much, and what it does goes to China over its land border......
Not quite true. Some of North Koreas trade goes by sea.

As well as international trade, there's coastal traffic, particularly along the east coast.
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
If we don't take his advice then we won't be able to fight china's noexistant supercarrier force.!! Left wide open to the inevitable attack.

Hes very determined, hes got more staying power than airpower australia.
 

agc33e

Banned Member
If we don't take his advice then we won't be able to fight china's noexistant supercarrier force.!! Left wide open to the inevitable attack.

Hes very determined, hes got more staying power than airpower australia.
Its a debate, you have one side opinions and the other side, i am around one of the sides, just reasoning, ok i would do that or whatever but i dont know much of the ran or australian interests.ok.:rel
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Nice video. She looks very impressive. A modern clean look.

Cant wait two see two of them in sydney harbour.
 
Top