Which airforces currently operate tanker aircraft for air-to-air refueling? What kind of planes do the use? I know that the US, Britain, and Russia have this capability, but I don’t know which other countries also have it.
Also, if a country is part of NATO but does not have a tanker fleet, do the pilots of the airforce practice air-to-air refuleing? If so where?
By: Ja Worsley - 3rd September 2005 at 01:49
The only problem with HTMS Chakri Naruebet is that she never leaves port nowadays, in the last six years I have not seen her move once, that’s why I’m trying to find out if the Matadores are still active!
By: Wanshan - 2nd September 2005 at 23:26
I wonder if a common hull and propulsion design could be used for both fleet replenishment ships and aircraft carriers?
When you consider that the Fort Victoria class is larger than the Invincible class I think there would be lots of benefits. The ships could be identical up to the hangar deck and then completed as a carrier or tanker.
I guess compromises would have to be made but I think it could save a lot of money.
The Spanish Principe d’Asturias the capability to refuel its escorts (RAS station on the starboard side, just behind the funnel)
Same on the Royal Thai Navy’s HTMS Chakri Naruebet (starboard side, just behind the bridge)
By: Ja Worsley - 1st September 2005 at 09:43
Mate they were positioned on the forward part just behind the raised fordeck.
By: Mpacha - 31st August 2005 at 15:32
MPACHA: Firstly thank you for the compliment, I’ve been working really hard on getting my board up to a standard of quality service.
Anyway back on topic, I remember seeing in a book back in the mid 80’s a pic of Taffy fitted with four Gabriel launchers and what looked like two Bofors 40/60 guns (I could be wrong but back then most guns looked like the same things we had on our patrol boats). and I remember hearing that she was deploying to Mozambique or Namibia (again age is getting in the way here- I was in High school back then).
Yes she was fitted with two 40/60 Bofors forward, two 20mm above the hangars and six 12.7mm MG’s. The missiles must have been after my time, but the “four” launchers fits with the number removed from the Strike Craft. The press reports would have been of her deployment to Namibia at the time when the Angolan War was getting ugly.
Ja, where were these missiles placed on the Tafelberg?
By: Ja Worsley - 31st August 2005 at 14:58
MPACHA: Firstly thank you for the compliment, I’ve been working really hard on getting my board up to a standard of quality service.
Anyway back on topic, I remember seeing in a book back in the mid 80’s a pic of Taffy fitted with four Gabriel launchers and what looked like two Bofors 40/60 guns (I could be wrong but back then most guns looked like the same things we had on our patrol boats). and I remember hearing that she was deploying to Mozambique or Namibia (again age is getting in the way here- I was in High school back then).
By: Mpacha - 31st August 2005 at 08:52
Mpacha: Thanks for your contribution mate, interesting stuff there, we’ve been talking over on my baord about upping the roles of these ships and using alternate propulsion to gain more speed and Arming them. feel free to have a look (just click the link in my signature down the bottom here.
VERY nice forum Ja, one is getting spoilt for choice 😀
Just to add to my previous, some reports say that the SAS Tafelberg could carry anti-ship missiles but I’ve never seen anything to support this claim. Although I suppose it is possible since some Strike Craft had two launchers removed in order to support Special Forces operations.
By: Ja Worsley - 30th August 2005 at 16:49
Mpacha: Thanks for your contribution mate, interesting stuff there, we’ve been talking over on my baord about upping the roles of these ships and using alternate propulsion to gain more speed and Arming them. feel free to have a look (just click the link in my signature down the bottom here.
By: Mpacha - 30th August 2005 at 16:35
Ja,
Good thread! On the point of multi-refuelling, I would say that would depend on the navy!? My all time favourite was the South African Navy replenishment vessel SAS Tafelberg(A243) which began life as the commercial tanker, Annan. Displacement 25 300tons with 9 officers and 118 ratings. She was the first replenshment vessel in the SA Navy and during her service she under went many changes. She started life with two refuelling points and one solid stores transfer station on each side, together with astern fuelling arrangements and later a flight deck for light helicopters was fitted aft. In 1983 the rearward refuelling points were removed and an additional landing deck with two Super Frelon size hangars was fitted together with accomodation for 300 troops, a fully equipped hospital and davits for six Delta fast assault craft. This “tanker” had teeth! She even sank a frigate :diablo: This was during an unfortunate accident when she rammed the SA Navy “flagship”. Apart from replenishing ships, she was used as a guardship during yacht races, long range reconnaissance, search and rescue missions and amphibious assaults. Whilst many of her operations remain “classified”, one such operation was carried out to rescue the Muller family who had been held captive in Mozambique.
By: Ja Worsley - 30th August 2005 at 04:28
Steve: Mate that’s the idea that the RAN are running with for their LHD’s and the replacment for HMAS Success, they are all to be of a common design but the upper parts are going to be reflective of their roles. Having said that, the replacement for Success is going to be a very large ship in deed.
Can: thanks for the update mate, it’s a really interesting problem and one that would never have happened if oil wasn’t discovered there in the first place. As for the Airport, that’s a good idea, bring tourists back to this really beautiful place stuck in the middle of nowhere.
By: Canpark - 30th August 2005 at 02:14
Can: what’s the latest mate on the Spratlys? Has there been any deals made yet by all the factions involved?
All the factions include China is trying to settle the dispute, but the last time I heard it Vietnam is rebuilding an airport for tourism in the Spratlys. China dosen’t seem to be very happy.
By: SteveO - 29th August 2005 at 23:27
I wonder if a common hull and propulsion design could be used for both fleet replenishment ships and aircraft carriers?
When you consider that the Fort Victoria class is larger than the Invincible class I think there would be lots of benefits. The ships could be identical up to the hangar deck and then completed as a carrier or tanker.
I guess compromises would have to be made but I think it could save a lot of money.
The Royal Schelde Enforcer Series show how it could be done http://www.scheldeshipbuilding.com/enforcer/
By: Ja Worsley - 29th August 2005 at 13:50
Can: what’s the latest mate on the Spratlys? Has there been any deals made yet by all the factions involved?
By: Canpark - 29th August 2005 at 12:51
Can: mate those two together, they are new aren’t they? Can you give me some details on them? The other one I recognise from having been up there, she’s really old now (IIRC she’s a Steam driven one isn’t she?).
Sorry Ja I don’t have many information on those ships but yes, those two together is new. I think it was built in 2003 for the purpose of supporting the Vietnamese garrisons in the Spratlys.
By: Ja Worsley - 29th August 2005 at 02:34
Interesting stuff here guys, Dan, yeah the distance covered by the RN during the conflict was made even faster since they didn’t have to slow down to wait for a certain ship to take on fuel.
Wan: good point mate, I don’t know of any that are able to reach above 30kts, our two struggle to get above 27Kts and that’s on a clam sea 🙁
Can: mate those two together, they are new aren’t they? Can you give me some details on them? The other one I recognise from having been up there, she’s really old now (IIRC she’s a Steam driven one isn’t she?).
Steve: The Fort class of the RFA are superior to many ships in this role, they took a page out of the dutch books. We’ve been talking on my board about increasing the roles of these ships to make them in to a sustainable fleet unit includine the speed issue.
By: SteveO - 28th August 2005 at 19:47
A useful feature of the RFA Fort Victoria class is that they can operate up to 5 Sea King/Merlin class helicopters. This allows the RN to move it’s ASW/ASuW helicopters off the Invincible class carriers to make way for more Harriers or Commando helicopters. http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/victoria/
By: Canpark - 27th August 2005 at 15:05
Vietnam’s very own vessel built in Gia Lam Shipyard.
By: danrh - 27th August 2005 at 05:55
Dan: Mate tanking more than one ship at a time is very usfull in a deployment sence, transits can be done faster when you tank the ships up along the way, no need to slow down to conserve fuel because one ship needs to tank.
Yeah cheers Ja. I did some more thinking on this after I posted and figured this to be the point. The example of the UK task force deploying to the South Atlantic in 1982 would be an excellent example. Being able to refuel multiple vessels in this situation would have definite benefits and hold little risk given the extreme distance from the AO.
Daniel
By: Arabella-Cox - 27th August 2005 at 04:45
Norway is planning an AOR in the 15-20,000t region.
By: Wanshan - 26th August 2005 at 22:08
What are the primary tankers with USN??
Fast Combat Support Ship – AOE
Sacramento AOE 1 – class (only 1 of 4 remaining: CAMDEN AOE 2)
Supply T-AOE 6 – class (with Military Sealift Command: 4 ships)
Fleet Oilers – AO
Henry J. Kaiser T-AO 187 – class (with Military Sealift Command: 16 ships)
By: Himanshu - 26th August 2005 at 15:53
What are the primary tankers with USN??
Sign In
September 11, 2003 at 2:42 am