The MRHs are allocated to AAvN and Navy from a common pool.
Only a few have Navy service titles, and they have no bearing on allocation.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Only a few have Navy service titles, and they have no bearing on allocation.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Maybe it’s time to drop the Army and Navy titles and replace them with ADF
If service titles have no bearing on allocation then this would seem like a common sense approach. Likewise the EC-135T+ helos, assigned to 723 Squadron, although in this case a mix of Army/Navy signage may be appropriate.
Whilst I can understand the economics of shared pools I am a traditionalist and I would prefer to see navy owned helos assigned to navy squadrons, especially frontline units. But I accept that maybe I am a bit of a dinosaur.
Tas
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Especially operating off the LHDs which are regarded as Purple Assets with crews drawn from all 3 Services
I acknowledge defence does not have a blank cheque regarding finances but helicopter numbers are a concern.
Adding to the mix above, you could include HMAS Choules, plus in the future,add a new supply / Amphibious ship and also the new Pacific support ship.
Even with just an LHD and Supply ship going on a major exercise across the Indian ocean it seems a waste not to utilise the deck and hangar spaces with more than two aircraft.
If it was nothing more than getting some aircraft aboard to have the handlers practise in a working ship environment the moving and servicing of aircraft at sea it would be worth it.
One each of Chinook / Taipan / Romeo / HATS EC135 helicopters would provide some meaningful training at sea.
If the LHD is not carry troops / Vehicles/ Logistical cargo and also not carrying a meaningful helicopter compliment then what is the point
Thoughts
Regards S
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Maybe when the new Lt SOF/Utility Helicopters enter service they will take some of workload off the MRH-90s and we may see more on the LHDs. At present the MRH-90s are the Army’s only real Workhorse for more mundane tasking that in the past was carried out by the Kiowa’s. In many ways the Army will be missing the Kiowa, not so much in there Primary role as Recce Helicopters but in their secondary light Utility role.
IMO there would certainly be merit in taking greater advantage of the aviation capability of the LHDs during major deployments, to give Army Aviation crews more time to find their sea legs. However, we need to recognise the fact that this will take time.
Army Aviation achieved its goals last year when it was able to deploy 2 Chinooks and 4 MRH-90s in one exercise (plus the MHR-90 of the ship’s flight). A great photo on the ADF site shows 7 helos on the flight deck of HMAS Canberra.
This year it has been stated that the goal is to be able to deploy ARH Tigers as well. Additionally, the RAN has now begun to deploy the MH-60R on a small scale. Last year the LHDs also worked with a range of USMC rotary wing assets during RIMPAC 2018, so the LHD aviation departments have certainly moved from crawling to at least walking. However, the run stage may still be some way off. As more army crews gain deck landing qualifications it may be possible in future to deploy a limited number of Army Aviation assets to accompany the LHDs on deployments that don’t involve full scale amphibious exercises or HADR missions. As well as valuable training I believe it would be excellent PR to support the navy's need for these ships. Australia does not have a marine corps with its own aviation assets and it is unrealistic to expect our LHDs to ever be able to match the large USMC aviation complements that are so impressive during port visits by USN LHDs.
More helicopters deployed on a regular basis, however, would certainly result in Canberra and Adelaide making a greater impact during port visits.
I guess the question that has to be asked is whether Army Aviation will have sufficient assets to be able to make greater use of the LHD's capabilities without reducing its ability to meet all the other demands made of it in support of land based operations.
I hope to see the RAN doing all it can to exploit the aviation capabilities of the LHDs during the times when they are not needed for amphibious exercises. Embarking the MH-60R this year was a good start.
During the next few years I believe it will be vital for the ADF to clearly and continually demonstrate the need for two fully operational LHDs. Otherwise I fear a repeat of the decision made by government in the mid 1950s that only one of its two aircraft carriers needed to be kept operational, with the second relegated first to training and shortly afterwards to reserve!
Tas
I agree with these comments. I was very surprised when the last of the Kiowas were taken out of service without a replacement in the utility role. Likewise I was surprised and disappointed when the navy lost its Squirrels without replacement in the utility role other than a few Bell 429s. With just 15 EC-135T+ helos for training both army and navy pilots the RAN will be hard pressed to find a light helicopter available that will save it from having to draw on its MRH-90s or MH-60Rs for utility work. I believe I read somewhere recently that the Bell 429s are also to be disposed of but I can't find the link!
Tas
StevoJH
The Bunker Group
Not sure about the Bell 429's, but 22 Kiowa's went up for Auction at Avalon during the Airshow.
I just can't help but think that the ADF needs more Helicopters, I mean the two LHD's between them can just about carry the ADF's entire active inventory of MRH-90 and CH-47E by themselves, without even counting what replenishment assets and Choules can carry.
How is that sustainable if they are ever required to deploy somewhere together?
I just can't help but think that the ADF needs more Helicopters, I mean the two LHD's between them can just about carry the ADF's entire active inventory of MRH-90 and CH-47E by themselves, without even counting what replenishment assets and Choules can carry.
How is that sustainable if they are ever required to deploy somewhere together?
The fear of use it or lose it will always hover over major defence assets when economic times get tough.
On a positive, I feel the LHD's have already proven their worth on so many levels that they may be buffered from potentially hard economic times; but that aside, I must confess to still have wanted a quicker pace of progress in getting aviation to sea in meaningful numbers.
This of course is the layman admiral talking and not the professionals, but still I feel a case does need to be articulated as to why it is taking so long.
Appreciating we are building a complex skill set from scratch; are we not funding the development appropriately, or is it just such a monumental task.
Please advise.
PS-The image of seven helicopters on deck certainly looks impressive.
Good for Defence PR both domestically and Internationally.
Barren flight decks just don't cut it in a foreign port.
Regards S
Agree with your comments. The ADF probably would as well if funding was not an issue!
BTW, I found the link re sale of the Bell 429s:
Australian Navy farewells final Bell 429 helicopter
Tas
It is a monumental task.
It is a long time since Australia had an operational aircraft carrier and a long time since the RAN has been able to deploy self sufficient task groups. The ability to be able to embark and support a substantial aviation force at sea (albeit rotary wing only) has had to be learned again almost from scratch. IMO the RAN has done well to bring two large LHDs into service in the time it has and it great to now see them being deployed so widely.
I also believe that the army has done its best to take advantage of what the big amphibs can offer. But army pilots and ground crew, will need time to be able to adapt to operating at sea, particularly for a sustained period. The same applies to all units of the army (and RAAF) who will be deployed on these ships.
Yes, there have been issues and disappointments such as the inability of the landing craft to transport tanks as hoped, but this is to be expected with a program that is both complex and large for a comparatively small military. There seems to be agreement in this thread and elsewhere that the ADF could do with more helicopters. However, we have to face the reality that the ADF must live within its budget and more helos would mean less of something else.
Tas
Doesn't cut it in what way? The purpose of these exercises isn't gunboat diplomacy, showing off how powerful we are, or how powerful we want to be perceived. Our neighbours can read their int and count the size of our forces even without us taking them along. Hell, some even have the Internet.
The task .force is sailing to exercise with other countries which are our allies, or we'd rather continue to have as allies than enemies. The LHD will no doubt embark foreign troops and helicopters, in the process familiarising them with operating from her, and with the RAN and us with their standards and procedures.
A largely empty flight deck and only an Army cadre would enable this without the necessity of first disembarking our own assets in countries where they might be seen by some elements as unwelcome westerners.
I'm no admiral either, but it seems logical to me.
oldsig
It must be remembered that what gets embarked on the LHDs is dependent on the exercise objectives. Indo Pacific Endeavour is an international engagement exercise that is focused on the maritime domain. The LHD is there more as a flag ship than it is an amphibious platform. There are limited if any true ‘amphibious’ exercise objectives, with the small embarked army contingent only there to conduct some limited international engagement when they reach the various countries. There’s not much call for embarked army rotary wing in this case.
It is the sea series of exercises, which will be occurring on part while IPE is floating around the region, and culminating in Talisman Sabre that are the amphibious series of exercises. The army rotary wing capability will be concentrated there.
It is the sea series of exercises, which will be occurring on part while IPE is floating around the region, and culminating in Talisman Sabre that are the amphibious series of exercises. The army rotary wing capability will be concentrated there.
I always appreciate your knowledge and your input to these discussions.
I see exercises such as Indo Pacific Endeavour, where amphibious support needs are limited, as just the sort of deployment when additional naval aviation assets such as a flight of 2 or more MH-60R Seahawks would be a valuable addition to the ships flight of MRH-90s. This would greatly enhance the task groups ASW and surface warfare capacity. I am really pleased to see the RAN making good use of the LHD's in maritime and diplomatic focused deployments.
Tas
Thanks for the reply
I've heard some other country's have the Internet as well so I guess they know what we have in advance of our capability's on these friendly visits.
However you do raise a good point in that perception is important. These fleet visits need to have a positive outcome to help build bridges with neighbouring countries we wish to foster good relationships with. A deck occupied with a half a dozen helicopters however is not gun boat diplomacy, and should it be an issue with country A versus Country B, then easy fix, park them below deck.
At the same token we do need to show that we actually have the capacity to use these ships as an aviation asset. In this current Indian ocean exercise, logistic and ASW helicopters would be the Aircraft of choice.
Perception can go both for and against you.
A certain SE Asian country has had a small aircraft carrier for a couple of decades, but to the point of comedy this good little ship has being under funded and for much of its life been a tourist attraction rather than a true defence asset for its intended role. On paper Thailand has had a aircraft carrier, in reality they have had a tourist attraction.
We have spent many Billions of dollars on the LHD's, Romeo's Taipan s and Chinooks, to create a specialised capability.
For myself it would seem folly not to take advantage of absolutely every opportunity the LHD's go to sea, either in our own waters or those way over the horizon to conduct aviation training at sea.
If the LHD's can carry up to eighteen helicopters in the hangar/garage and many more parked on the flight deck I wonder in what year we will see
such numbers aboard our ships
Next year / the year after / mid 20's / ???????
Regards S
But we don't typically operate the MH-60R's as ASW platforms from the LHD.
Indopacific is more about pitching capability we have and photo ops.
I believe part of it is to get other nations to think about participating in Australian centric exercises, like Talisman Sabre (or other relevant). Some nations might even try out loading some of their equipment onto the LHD's and what would that look and feel like, in a relaxed environment. Building low key relationships.
It isn't a high end nut flexing exercise. Rimpac/Talsiman Sabre provide those. Different message, different operation etc.
This is about as high end as it got, with the Philippines:
Most of it was more like this:
If this all sounds too low level and stuff that shouldn't be done by the ADF, it was still high level enough to attract the attention of the Chinese to shadow them pretty much everywhere they went.
It was after ip2018 that this magical pacific ship was floated. Which I have to say, looks pretty dicey now with the election on the way, exactly what it will be if anything.
True but a positive start was made to test the concept in Ocean Explorer 2019 and the navy seems quite excited by this development.
OCEAN EXPLORER 2019 showcases Anti-Submarine Warfare capability
You have made some really good points in an informative post.
I just make the following comments:
The primary role of the big amphibs is obviously to support the army but the LHDs are very versatile platforms and I am sure the RAN will want to make good use of them when they are not required for amphibious operations or exercises. They have already been successfully deployed for HADR operations, working with allied assets, goodwill visits like the ones you have mentioned and as command ships. The ability to use their aviation capacity to boost their ASW screen seems a logical next step. Even when not embarking Army Aviation units the current MH-60R inventory will severely limit the number that can be embarked so we are not talking large numbers. If the concept proves successful, however, it is possible that an increase in that inventory may be sought down the track. It will all depend on future RAN and wider ADF priorities along with the ability of the government of the day to fund those priorities.
Tas
Thanks Stingray for the post.
Absolutely no problem with doing the low level stuff.......It's importance should never be under estimated.
But I think on a ship as big as the Canberra class you can have your cake and eat it to.The good PR stuff as well as meaningful aviation training at sea every time the ship sails.
It would be wonderful if these ships did nothing but HADR for the rest of their service lives but I am not confident of such a prospect. Therefore the hard end capacity's need to be rounded out and I suggest at a rate quicker than is currently happening.
This may sound alarmist or naive but I feel things are changing in the region quicker than we can respond to them.
The full scope of the LHD's potential needs to be a priority investment.
After all it may not just be Chinese shadows that present a problem.
Regards S
A question
What is the pay situation for Army and Air force personal deployed at sea.
If army deploy an Infantry company aboard a LHD for any length of time is their an allowance paid in addition to their regular salary.
As the Canberra Class can carry up to 1000 troops I would guess this may be quite an additional expense.
Interested
Regards S
What is the pay situation for Army and Air force personal deployed at sea.
If army deploy an Infantry company aboard a LHD for any length of time is their an allowance paid in addition to their regular salary.
As the Canberra Class can carry up to 1000 troops I would guess this may be quite an additional expense.
Interested
Regards S
- Status