dark light

Jinan

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 544 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034309
    Jinan
    Participant

    No, I am simply stating if India is to acquire 4 Amphibious Ships. Why not select the more capable and flexible LHD over a LPD Class Ship. (i.e. nothing more)

    Probably because a larger LHD is needed to move the same number of troops/cargo. For a given tonnage, LPDs deliver more troops and cargo?

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034312
    Jinan
    Participant

    What about the rest of NATO and the US???:rolleyes:

    The rest of NATO addressed, with exception of US. But e.g. NL doesn’t necessarily work much with US Amphib units in the context of NATO, it works mostly with UK/RN.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034315
    Jinan
    Participant

    But he added two non-existent Bay class to the RN.

    And forgot the listing for Australia (2xJCI, 1xBay, & 1xLSH [Tobruk]).

    See post #390 previous page. I’m not counting LST/LSL (or LSH for that matter).

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034318
    Jinan
    Participant

    Couple of mistakes, I’m afraid, though I agree with your main point.

    Cavour does not have & never has had a dock.

    The RN has two Albion class LPDs, with no hangar. The UK built four Bay class LSDs for the RFA, with no hangar but provision for a temporary one, but has sold one to Australia.

    The Foudre class has a hangar.

    Cavour addressed in different post. Agree on Foudre hangar (confused it with Ouragan). Albion entered a state of “extended readiness” in 2011, leaving 1 active unit. Agree on the Bay number. As I believe I indicated, these don’t have a fixed hangar like on Rotterdam or Galicia, but can be fitted with a shelter on deck. See

    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/HMAS_Choules_starboard.jpg

    http://home.mebtel.net/~kf4vtt/vp9/photos/rfalargsbayl3006isabayclasslandingshipdockoftheroyalfleetauxiliary.jpg

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034319
    Jinan
    Participant

    More on the incident:

    “China paper says US ship harassed China fleet”

    Source:
    http://news.yahoo.com/china-paper-says-us-ship-harassed-china-fleet-092432088.html

    Quote
    BEIJING (AP) — An official Chinese newspaper on Monday accused the U.S. Navy of harassing a Chinese squadron earlier this month, shortly before a near collision that marked the two nations’ most serious sea confrontation in years.
    There has been no direct comment from China’s Foreign Ministry or defense officials on the Dec. 5 incident in the South China Sea, where the USS Cowpens was operating in international waters. The U.S. ship, a 10,000-ton Ticonderoga-class cruiser, maneuvered to avoid the collision, the U.S. Pacific Fleet has said.

    Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying referred questions to the Defense Ministry, but insisted China “always respects and observes international laws and the freedoms of normal navigation and overflight.”

    The Global Times newspaper said the USS Cowpens had been getting too close to a Chinese naval drill involving the country’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, and its support ships.

    The paper said the Cowpens came within 45 kilometers (30 miles) of the Chinese squadron, inside what it called its “inner defense layer.”

    “The USS Cowpens was tailing after and harassing the Liaoning formation,” the newspaper said, citing an unnamed source it described as being familiar with the confrontation. “It took offensive actions at first toward the Liaoning formation on the day of the confrontation.”

    China’s Defense Ministry did not immediately respond to a faxed query and calls to its office rang unanswered. The U.S. State Department said it has raised the matter at a high level with the Chinese government.

    The incident comes amid heightened tension over China’s growing assertiveness in the region. Despite strenuous objections from Washington, Beijing recently declared a new air defense zone over parts of the East China Sea requiring foreign aircraft submit flight plans, identify themselves and accept instructions from the Chinese military. The move was widely criticized and the U.S., Japan and others have refused to comply.

    The Dec. 5 confrontation was the most serious incident between the two navies since 2009, when Chinese ships and planes repeatedly harassed the U.S. ocean surveillance vessel USNS Impeccable in the South China Sea. China considers such surveillance a violation of its exclusive economic zone, a position not widely supported among experts on international law.

    The U.S. Pacific Fleet says it’s not uncommon for navies to operate in close proximity and that’s why it is paramount they all follow international standards for maritime “rules of the road.”

    The Chinese navy is operating with increasing frequency in the South China Sea and around Japan. China’s strategy is to boost its navy’s ability to operate far from home ports while denying access to its coastal waters to ships from the U.S. and other potential rivals.

    China regards the entire South China Sea and island groups within it as its own and interprets international law as giving it the right to police foreign naval activity there.

    The U.S. doesn’t take a position on sovereignty claims but insists on the Navy’s right to transit the area and collect surveillance data.

    Cowpens came within 45 kilometers (30 miles) of the Chinese squadron….. that is not harassment.
    This is…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Yorktown_collision.jpg or this:
    http://www.99tarbox.com/Military/Ships/images/900430%20Soviet%20Krivak%20II%2001.jpg

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034324
    Jinan
    Participant

    Sorry, what kind of “docking facility” has the Cavour?

    Ah, you’re right. Confused ramp with dock. Might load landing craft there though (like Dutch JSS) or take small ACVs.

    The hangar space can double as a vehicle hold capable of holding up to 24 main battle tanks (typically Ariete) or many more lighter vehicles (50 Dardo IFV, 100+ Iveco LMV), and is fitted aft with access ramps rated to 70 tons, as well as two elevators rated up to 30 tons for aircraft. Cavour can also operate as Landing Platform Helicopter, accommodating heavy transport helicopters (EH 101 ASH) and 325 marines.

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034408
    Jinan
    Participant

    As said, the Dutch LPDs don’t generally operate within a ‘vast mix’. There are no plans for huge amphibious invasions by NATO, in which Dutch LPDs would operate alongside French or US LHDs.

    The important thing is how these ships are planned to be used. That determines whether LHDs or LPDs are best. Singapore, for example has built small LPDs. Indonesia has LPDs. Peru has ordered the same type as Indonesia. None of these countries is a NATO member, or expecting to operate as part of any ‘vast mix’. None of them even has the aircraft carriers that India has & is building.

    You seem to think that the majority of navies with amphibious ships have got it wrong.

    Main landing units upwards of any LST and LSL:

    Hangarless 3 ship San Giorgio class amphibious transport dock (LPD) is used by Italy, with a variant adopted by Algeria. It is backed by the carriers Cavour and Garibaldi, of which only the former was designed to have a docking facility.

    Netherlands has a pair of Enforcer LPDs (Rotterdam + de Witt), backed by a JSS (roro cargo ship + aor), all with heli’s and hangar

    Spain has a single LHD backed by a pair of Rotterdam-like Galicia LPDs (with heli’s and hangar).

    UK has Ocean LPH plus a single Albion LPD and 5 Bay LPD (hangerless Enforcer variants, can be equipped with deckmounted heli shelter, see RAN),

    France has 3 Mistral LHD backed by a single Foudre LPD (no hangar).

    Japan has 2 Osumi LST (actually a hangerless ‘throughdeck’ LPD).

    South Korea has an LHD.

    China has 3 LPD (with heli’s and hangar)

    Turkey is planning a single LHD

    Indonesian Makassar comes with heli/hangar, as does SIngapore’s Endurance class

    Which on the whole indicates that throughdeck helicopter equipped ships with a hangar and a dock are a distinct minority…. certainly when compared to hangar fitter, heli-equipped LPDs.

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya: Steaming towards Induction #2034419
    Jinan
    Participant

    WARSHIP R33
    Position Recorded on:
    2013-12-16 06:36:00 (UTC)

    Lat/Lon: 38.58001 / -10.21035
    Speed/Course: 8 kn / 273°
    Show Track

    No movement update since yesterday evening ….

    PLus, track showed a sharp 90 degree turn from due south to due west (why would she steam west into the Atlantic, just as she was near Lisbon and her tanker went into port?)

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034434
    Jinan
    Participant

    Apples and Oranges……The Dutch will operate within a large and strong Western and/or NATO Alliance. Which, will operate a vast mix of Amphibious Ships. While India operates pretty much on its own. (i.e. Non-Aligned)

    In short I am not saying LPD’s or LSD’s don’t have value. Just that if India is going a have a limited number of Amphibious Ships. Then LHD’s or LHA’s would be more versatile than the former.

    What vast mix? NL operates with UK marines. Maybe French, Spain, Italy : hardly vast mix.

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya: Steaming towards Induction #2034442
    Jinan
    Participant

    INS Deepak in harbour of Lisbon right now for replenishment (takin’ in oil I’d guess). INS Trikand and INS Vikramaditya still in the Atlantic and probably not coming in.

    Haven’t seen any pictures of the ships since they left Murmansk, anyone…?

    WARSHIP R33
    Position Recorded on:
    2013-12-16 06:36:00 (UTC)
    Lat/Lon: 38.58001 / -10.21035
    Speed/Course: 8 kn / 273°
    WARSHIP R33

    (anchored of the Portugese coast, near Lisbon)

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034446
    Jinan
    Participant

    The requirement isn’t for both LHA/D’s and LPD’s. So, if your going to have a limited number of ships. You would of course want the more capable and flexible design. (IMO)

    As in the example of Australia (2x BPE/JC1 + 1x Bay)?

    in reply to: Navies news from around the world -V #2034466
    Jinan
    Participant

    ^ Its going to be LHD, more in IN thread

    @ Jinan, thanks for the headup on U218SG. I was thinking about a larger variant based on U216 due to the number 218, but it looks like a smaller u-boat than the 214.

    Not so sure about the LHD bit: could still be large LPD along lines of Enforcer/Bay/Rotterdam or Albion class. Heli-capable hangar equjipped LPD’s like these would represent an improvement over the Austin class LPD, while less sophisticated, complex and expensive relative to LHA/D

    in reply to: Indian Navy : News & Discussion – V #2034470
    Jinan
    Participant

    Nice Video:cool:

    Indeed. Best shot: 5m28s Really gives you an idea of the kinship between Talwar/11356 and Shivalik/p17.

    in reply to: Indian Navy : News & Discussion – V #2034487
    Jinan
    Participant

    The LPD tender states the ship should be no more than 215 meters long and have a draft not to exceed 8 meters, in full load conditions. Also, the article states “This will be India’s first attempt to build the 20,000-ton vessels.”
    http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131212/DEFREG03/312120012/India-Construct-4-LPDs

    Buque de Proyección Estratégica / Juan Carlos I length overall is 230.82 m. So, if the specification refers to length overall rather than length at waterline, it cannot be BPE. Also, BPE is 27,500 rather than 20,000 tons fld

    STRATEGIC PROJECTION SHIP
    Length overall 230.82 m
    Length between perpendiculars 205.70 m

    Moulded beam 32.0 m
    Beam waterline 29.50 m
    Depth to flight deck 27.50 m
    Depth to security deck 17.00 m
    Full load draft 7.07 m
    Full load displacement 27,082 tn
    Speed in full load condition 21.0 Kn
    Garage 2,000 m2
    Crew 243 members + 1200 embarked forces
    Hangar 1.000 m2
    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HTigc-uI3D4J:https://forums.army.ca/forums/index.php%3Ftopic%3D63551.0+&cd=4&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=nl

    Something along the lines of an enlarged Galicia/Rotterdam/Bay class LPD might well with the limitation on length and tonnage..

    Mistral (France):
    Displacement: 16,500 tonnes (empty) / 21,300 tonnes (full load)
    Length: 199 m (653 ft)
    Capacity: 59 vehicles (including 13 AMX-56 Leclerc tanks) or a 40-strong Leclerc tank battalion
    Troops: 900 (short duration) , 450 (long durations), 150 (serving as operational headquarters)
    Complement: 20 officers, 80 petty officers, 60 quarter-masters

    [edit:
    700 according BEA http://www.bea.aero/en/enquetes/flight.af.447/mistral.en.pdf
    900 according http://www.public.navy.mil/usff/ba/Documents/french_ship_mistral.pdf%5D

    DokDo (South Korea)
    Displacement: 14,300 tons (empty) / 18,800 tons (full)
    Length: 199 m (653 ft)
    Capacity: Up to 200 vehicles, includes 6 tanks, 7 AAVs
    Troops: 720 marines
    Crew: 300

    There could be some info from the program of Turkey that may be relevant
    http://www.rmkmarine.com/landing-platform-dock-project.html

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya: Steaming towards Induction #2034489
    Jinan
    Participant

    She’s currently in the Atlantic, of the north-westernmost coast of SPain, near Santiago de Compostela (cool link, Teej 😉

    WARSHIP R33
    Status: Underway
    Speed/Course: 14.6kn / 163°
    Off the coast of Portugal, halfway between Porto and Lisbon

Viewing 15 posts - 406 through 420 (of 544 total)