Sadly this does mean that Ocean will no longer be replaced 🙁
Was there room in the shipyards in the ~2018 time frame in the first place? 😉
Actually, that could be an interesting question, because Argus is supposed to be replaced at about the same time.
So with the current CVF build schedule which yards will have spare capacity to build C1 and when. Am I right in thinking there will be little capacity untill2015-16. With 3+ years to build a ship the another 18 months to comission that means no new ships till 2020-21. So what happens about type 22 all out of service before 2020.
The first T22B3 is to leave service in 2018 or 2019, by then the first C1 should be ready for sea trials, meaning the crew of the T22B3 can be transferred directly to the new ship.
FYI, the JMSDF Kongo and Atago classes are built to mercantile/commercial rather than military standards.
Really? I thought they were Flight 1 and Flight 2 burkes, just built in Japan rather then the US. 😉
So if you were going to war would you rather have 1 Cavour or 2 BPE’s? I don’t like these ships not built to full war standards it’s risky if you ask me. Front line ships have to be built safely. When building navies now nobody thinks of what will happen if some of our ships get sunk. There is no spare capacity.
Look at the RN. Take a Falklands take 2, could the royal navy lose that many ships and still fight i doubt it. We need some spare capacity. this is something that seems to have been forgotten.
They wouldn’t lose that many ships now though. Argentina Airforce and Navy are gutted, Remaining T42’s have the 1022 radar, Many more sea wolf ships available, phalanx for close in defense.
Country your carrier is for: Australia
Type of carrier: CATOBAR
Weight: 40,000 tonnes
Length: 270m
Width: 65m
Power supply: Integrated Full Electric Propulsion (IFEP)
Number of Aircraft: 24 F/A-18Fs 2 Hawkeye AWACS 2 Seakings
Type of Aircraft : As above – using the 24 F/A-18Fs bought recently
Defencive weapons : 2 RAM launchers
Except with a 24 aircraft purchase you’d only be able to deploy circa 12 at a time. Not worth the cost of a carrier. Better to spend the money spent on the carrier on tankers, further amphibs or additional MRH/NFH-90’s.
To put it bluntly.
Carrier = Cheap
Airgroup = Expensive
For example 24 F-18F’s plus 13 years in service support (including weapons, fuel etc) is estimated at $6 Billion AUD. Thats twice as much as a single QE class carrier end its only enough for a single squadron plus a small OCU (1/3 of an airgroup).
So the important questions are CATOBAR or STOVL and the aircraft chosen.
The only way we will ever se Mistrals in the RN is if we do a reciprocal deal with the French along the lines of you build us two Mistrals and we’ll build PA2; it makes sense in asmuchas we have a ‘production line’ set up for the CVFs and the French have a ‘production line’ set up for Mistrals. They would have to be modified to British requirements though, primarily meaning deleting the Dock and vehicle deck in favour of more troop accomodation. RN amphibious philosophy has no need for an LHD, the first wave of troops are landed by Helicopter from a LPH which has to stay mobile for it’s own protection. Once the beach head is secure the LPDs and LSDs can come in and land the heavy equipment and the second wave of troops. Even the USN is moving away from LHDs with the new America class, which although classed as LHAs are really closer to LPH in concept. LHDs are better suited to Navies that cannot afford specialised amphibious classes like LPD/LSD/LPH. A reciprocal deal of say three Mistral LPH for one CVF/PA2 might prove beneficial for both countries, though the french shipbuilding industry might kick up about it.
To fit a third CVF you’d have to delay FSC another few years, can the T22B3’s and T23’s be run on that much longer?
IIRC that’s the estimated total cost to the Australian budget (not what is paid to the USA) of buying & operating them. As well as support costs paid to Boeing, it includes infrastructure, fuel, all maintenance costs incurred, etc. Hats off to the Ozzies for being upfront about the total cost, but it does lead to great misunderstandings, with that figure being compared with the marginal cost of adding one more aircraft to a production run, i.e. the “flyaway” cost often quoted.
Try comparing the price of buying a Toyota at the factory gate, before any taxes, etc., with what it costs to buy it, have it shipped from Aichi to your house in Slovakia, registered, taxes paid, insured, then drive it for ten years, paying for fuel, servicing, having your garage repaired, etc. The former is the “flyaway” price, the latter is the Australian cost.
Definately better then the way you guys over in the UK do it, say with your PFI programmes for instance, or delaying CVF to reduce the yearly strain on the budget.
We would have difficulty nicking – or more properly – requisitioning any cruise ships, the only two cruise ship I am relatively certain could be requisitioned are the QM2 and Queen Victoria as they are the only cruise ship registered in the UK, all of the P&O ships are registered in Bermuda, so I am unsure what the position of those would be, the rest who knows. Many of the ferries are also flying flags of convenience – the last time I saw an Isle of Man ferry is was registered in Nassau?!?!
As Bermuda is a British overseas territory, I don’t think there would be any problems requisitioning them, if worst comes to worst you ring up government house in bermuda and give them the money to pay for it, doubt it would come to that though.
Nassau is the capital of the Bahama’s which is a commonwealth country, doubt they’d cause problems.
It would be interesting to see where the British owned, overseas registered ships are actually registered, as in, are the majority registered in commonwealth countries of which Elizabeth II is still Queen?
We all know what the Hawk is!
But what improvements does T2 include?
Should Britian get a carrier version for CVF?
Should we have a ground attck version for Afgan?All good replies are greatly welcomed
Regards Nick
Glass Cockpit I believe.
No.
They are already rated for ground attack, they arent integrated with precision munitions though. Plus the Tornadoes can do the job just as well if not better, and its what they are actually designed to do.
I honestly think everyone is honestly being a bit too pessimistic.
– CVF will Happen.
– C1 and C2 will happen, though the form and numbers might change.
– Astute is going full speed ahead
The programs that are at the most risk are:
– MARS
– LPH(R)
– Argus Replacement
– Diligence Replacement
I’m guessing MARS may suffer a reduction in numbers, and the Argus replacement may be merged with the LPH(R) program. Anything could happen with Diligence.
T45 will get Phalanx as and when it needs it but only if it actually needs it, i.e gets sent somewhere ‘hot’
As in, keep the things in storage so they don’t get wear and tear unless the ship is actually heading towards somewhere it may be needed.
If the ship is deployed and its decided one is needed, you send the ship to a nearby port or naval base, fly the phalanx in on a C-130 or C-17 and mount it on deck with a crane.
I’m surprised they didn’t just find an old airbase, build a ski-jump at one end of the runway and build a mockup of the island next door.
F-111, especially when doing a dump and burn.
Check youtube for Sydney Olympics closing ceremony for a nice video.
I won’t be surprised if the whole thing is photoshopped/
Why? Its no different from the dummy Invincible class deck at one of the RNAS stations in the UK, or the mockup of HMS Queen Elizabeth’s Islands being constructed at the moment.
The dummy deck is for training deck crews, the mockup islands are to test the electronics to make sure there is not interference, there was/is a similar mockup built to test the electronic systems of the T45 destroyer.