lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964 
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 23, 2020 7:30:15 GMT
Also i would presume that that only a Harrier jet like this could operate from a Iwo Jima class in service with the RAN.  Except you lose so much other capability, that going from a full up angled deck fleet carrier to a glorified assault ship, that it just doesn't make sense. Look at the history of the Harrier. With the exception of the United States, the only countries to operate Harriers at sea did so as a means of getting BACK into naval aviation. No one went from CATOBAR to STOVL in one shot. Even the UK was without fixed wing naval aviation for a few years between decommissioning Ark Royal and commissioning Invincible. The one exception, the USN, never got out of CATOBAR, just added STOVL to it's amphibs so the Marines had some organic air support. And again, you lose 2/3s of your air wing going from an Essex to an Iwo Jima. You literally need three of them to even get close to the striking power of the one carrier you lost. And in practical terms, you probably need 5 or 6, since the Essex air wing is vastly more capable than one built on Harrier. And it's not even the aircraft. It's the ship itself. She simply does not have the space to do what you want. The Iwo Jima class are under 600' in length and only 18,000 tons at full load. An Essex is almost 900' in length (888') and some 47,000 tons full load. That's more than twice the size of an Iwo Jima. So no, an Iwo Jima is not a good replacement for an Essex Class. In fact, it's downright terrible as one. Then Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi-class carrier, Spanish Navy's Principe de Asturias and HMS Invincible are also out of the question i think. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 23, 2020 10:12:54 GMT
So googling about the Essex i found out that an unmodernised Essex was offered to the Royal Australian Navy in 1960 as a replacement for HMAS Melbourne but the offer was declined due to the expense of modifications required to make it operationally compatible with the RAN's primarily British-designed fleet.
Should have asked this before but given the size of an Essex compared to the Melbourne could Australia have operated and maintained it without a lot of spending on enlarging port and other facilities? Would that have been a significant factor?
|
|
ssgtc
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 496
Likes: 740
|
Post by ssgtc on Aug 23, 2020 11:48:35 GMT
[/quote]Then Italian Giuseppe Garibaldi-class carrier, Spanish Navy's Principe de Asturias and HMS Invincible are also out of the question i think.
[/quote]
Probably, but they were at least built from the keel up as carriers so would be more capable. An Iwo Jima was not. Plus, the Iwo Jima class were built in the 60s. By the time a theoretical RAN Essex decommissions, the will have been out of production for at least 13 years.
|
|
ssgtc
Sub-lieutenant
Posts: 496
Likes: 740
|
Post by ssgtc on Aug 23, 2020 11:54:47 GMT
So googling about the Essex i found out that an unmodernised Essex was offered to the Royal Australian Navy in 1960 as a replacement for HMAS Melbourne but the offer was declined due to the expense of modifications required to make it operationally compatible with the RAN's primarily British-designed fleet.
Should have asked this before but given the size of an Essex compared to the Melbourne could Australia have operated and maintained it without a lot of spending on enlarging port and other facilities? Would that have been a significant factor?
Port facilities, I think they were good. They have the Captain Cook Graving Dock on Garden Island. It measures over 1,100' long by 147' wide. An SCB-27C Essex was 888' long by 103' beam. So it can take the ship no problem. It MIGHT even be able to take a Nimitz in a pinch (1,040'x134' at the waterline). |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Aug 23, 2020 12:05:22 GMT
Should have asked this before but given the size of an Essex compared to the Melbourne could Australia have operated and maintained it without a lot of spending on enlarging port and other facilities? Would that have been a significant factor?
Port facilities, I think they were good. They have the Captain Cook Graving Dock on Garden Island. It measures over 1,100' long by 147' wide. An SCB-27C Essex was 888' long by 103' beam. So it can take the ship no problem. It MIGHT even be able to take a Nimitz in a pinch (1,040'x134' at the waterline). Could only find 2 pics of HMS Illustrious, in Captain Cook Dry Dock, Sydney, 1945.   And one of |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,832
Likes: 13,222
|
Post by stevep on Aug 24, 2020 14:52:05 GMT
Should have asked this before but given the size of an Essex compared to the Melbourne could Australia have operated and maintained it without a lot of spending on enlarging port and other facilities? Would that have been a significant factor?
Port facilities, I think they were good. They have the Captain Cook Graving Dock on Garden Island. It measures over 1,100' long by 147' wide. An SCB-27C Essex was 888' long by 103' beam. So it can take the ship no problem. It MIGHT even be able to take a Nimitz in a pinch (1,040'x134' at the waterline).
OK thanks. Didn't know about that but it was built in 1942-44 so presumably in response to the loss of Singapore and if the allies needed a facility for a large capital ship in the SW Pacific region.
|
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Nov 19, 2020 22:08:21 GMT
Our facilities could have handled a ship the size of the Essex class, our issue would have focused upon manning and ensuring that the single ship does not consume the majority of the Navy's budget. In this scenario the Army would have far fewer regular members acting as a 'skeleton' for the war time only volunteers to fill out the shadow formations of the 3rd AIF. Which involves the CMF winning the battle viz a vis the Regular Army in the 50s. This should stretch the overall budget enough, along with a greater threat to our Near North, to justify high defence spending during the Cold War.
The graving dock at Garden Island pre - dates the fall of Singapore and there are also huge fuel bunkers there as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Nov 19, 2020 22:14:16 GMT
As others have said replacing the ESSEX carrier in Australian service would be quite tricky, one option that I cheekily considered for a TL was that they buy & modify the stand alone Baku class (like the Indians did) or acquire the Varyag. Either option could provide Australian jobs in the post Cold War environment and might be enough to allow fast jet fixed wing operations to continue, although either option would be a money sink.
The other alternative is the CVV program eventuates ITTL, which would be at the upper limit of what we could operate. Otherwise, buying the second CdG would be neat too.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 20, 2020 2:57:09 GMT
As others have said replacing the ESSEX carrier in Australian service would be quite tricky, one option that I cheekily considered for a TL was that they buy & modify the stand alone Baku class (like the Indians did) or acquire the Varyag. Either option could provide Australian jobs in the post Cold War environment and might be enough to allow fast jet fixed wing operations to continue, although either option would be a money sink. The other alternative is the CVV program eventuates ITTL, which would be at the upper limit of what we could operate. Otherwise, buying the second CdG would be neat too. That would mean operating Harriers.  |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Nov 20, 2020 3:08:53 GMT
Not necessarily. Here is the INS Vikramaditya (modified BAKU class) recovering a Mig 29K Fulcrum, with a number of other Fulcrums deck parked.  While these are J 15 Flying Sharks about to be launched from the Chinese Aircraft Carrier Liaoning.  Either way the RAN can continue to operate fixed wing fast jet capability without the range and performance limitations imposed by V/STOL. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 20, 2020 3:15:21 GMT
Not necessarily. Here is the INS Vikramaditya (modified BAKU class) recovering a Mig 29K Fulcrum, with a number of other Fulcrums deck parked. While these are J 15 Flying Sharks about to be launched from the Chinese Aircraft Carrier Liaoning. Either way the RAN can continue to operate fixed wing fast jet capability without the range and performance limitations imposed by V/STOL. Doubt they will keep using the A-4s, could the carrier you mentioned handle F-18s, doubt Australia will buy Mig-29s. |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Nov 20, 2020 3:22:28 GMT
My gut instinct is that yes either of them could, given the size of the air frames that they are launching & recovering, but there would be other more knowledgeable posters that could provide a definite confirmation backed up equations! I might bounce across to the other board and ask a few of the more knowledgable posters there for their opinion, since my opinion as a former deck officer is more limited.
Otherwise, you are looking at the Rafale or in time the Sea Gripen or F - 35C.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 20, 2020 3:45:50 GMT
My gut instinct is that yes either of them could, given the size of the air frames that they are launching & recovering, but there would be other more knowledgeable posters that could provide a definite confirmation backed up equations! I might bounce across to the other board and ask a few of the more knowledgable posters there for their opinion, since my opinion as a former deck officer is more limited. Otherwise, you are looking at the Rafale or in time the Sea Gripen or F - 35C. Both a Sea Gripen (sorry this is the only model of a Gripen in RAAf colors i could find).  And a Rafale looks nice (again sorry this is the only model of a Rafale in RAAf colors i could find).  |
|
|
|
Post by La Rouge Beret on Nov 20, 2020 3:53:04 GMT
They are nice looking model kit pics.
Okay so here is the official opinion on the two out of box scenarios.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,964
Likes: 49,365
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 20, 2020 3:58:46 GMT
They are nice looking model kit pics. Okay so here is the official opinion on the two out of box scenarios. So only the older Hornets then, if the Hornets work, then the Sea Gripens and Rafale can also operate from the Vikramaditya. |
|
