Navy's new Amphibious Helicopter Assault Ships ( Canberra Class).

[Campfire]

Having an interest in Navy Ships I did some searching on the web at the new Canberra Class Amphibious Assault Ships and have to say I am suitably impressed. The picture of the Canberra Class Ship looked like some pretty serious hardware. I noticed it had a ski ramp so I guess the potential for fixed wing aircraft could be a potential but knowing our government ( probably not). While I haven't agreed with some of the Defence decision in the past, I think going down the amphibious operations path ( Army will also have a unit trained like US Marines), I can see where examples of past operations could have benefits from this line of thinking especially where support for natural disaster Intervention is required.

Interesting days ahead from the old ships like Trobuk , Manoora etc.

Campfire....

[Teabag]

Has a serving member, I think it was/is another poor decision of our inept Government. Same with the AWD (Air Warefare Destroyers). We will end up with the same issues as the Collins Class subs. Our Navy in not big enough to trial new classes of ships. IMO we should buy off the shelf American ships, their logistic support is very good. Hence the FFGs still rolling on at nearly 30 years old........but the LHDs and AWDs do look good on paper....

[Campfire]

Cant speak for the new air warfare destroyers, I don't know much about them.

  I like the idea of Amphibious support ships especially for humanitarian reasons throughout the Pacific Region.

Campfire

[CRW]

Has a serving member, I think it was/is another poor decision of our inept Government. Same with the AWD (Air Warefare Destroyers). We will end up with the same issues as the Collins Class subs. Our Navy in not big enough to trial new classes of ships. IMO we should buy off the shelf American ships, their logistic support is very good. Hence the FFGs still rolling on at nearly 30 years old........but the LHDs and AWDs do look good on paper....

As a ex serving member, x2

[Campfire]

Question:

I noticed the topic moved, did I put it in wrong thread, I thought Misc thread was the right place since it didn't relate to campers, if so I do apoligies, I don't post on a regular basis.

I thought General discussion was more a main stream thread and Misc more a quiet backwater.

Will remember for next time.

All is good

Campfire

[Campfire]

Has a serving member, I think it was/is another poor decision of our inept Government. Same with the AWD (Air Warefare Destroyers). We will end up with the same issues as the Collins Class subs. Our Navy in not big enough to trial new classes of ships. IMO we should buy off the shelf American ships, their logistic support is very good. Hence the FFGs still rolling on at nearly 30 years old........but the LHDs and AWDs do look good on paper....

Your right with what your saying, Collins were a flop, and I guess the AWD & LHD could look good on paper but turn out in reality to be a not so good decision.

Campfire

[Snow]

General discussion is for anything and everything such as ships of our Navy and other such stuff.....within reason. The Tech section is for all the tech threads concerned with Campers, Tow vehicles, associated bits n bobs and anything else of appropriate context, even miscellaneous stuff.

All is good. 

[Campfire]

[quote author=Campfire link=topic=20015.msg308767#msg308767 date=1329647767

I thought General discussion was more a main stream thread and Misc more a quiet backwater.



General discussion is for anything and everything such as ships of our Navy and other such stuff.....within reason. The Tech section is for all the tech threads concerned with Campers, Tow vehicles, associated bits n bobs and anything else of appropriate context, even miscellaneous stuff.

All is good.  :cheers

Thanks for that Snow,

Now I know what Misc is for.

Time for a brew

Campfire

[two+four]

Has a serving member, I think it was/is another poor decision of our inept Government. Same with the AWD (Air Warefare Destroyers). We will end up with the same issues as the Collins Class subs. Our Navy in not big enough to trial new classes of ships. IMO we should buy off the shelf American ships, their logistic support is very good. Hence the FFGs still rolling on at nearly 30 years old........but the LHDs and AWDs do look good on paper....

And off the shelf German for the subs including combat system and torps. Why go for a bloody mis-mash of technologies and have to pay obscene amount of money to integrate systems so a French system does not talk directly to a US system because that would breach ITAR.

Neil

[Sharky]

I'm serving as well and share Teabag's view up to a point. Buying off the shelf is the way to go - when we can afford it. Navy has finally learnt from Air Force and gone off the shelf for the new Combat Helicopter (MH-60R). These are exactly the same as the USN versions meaning we are not spending millions on R&D to create our own little fleet of unique helicopters - Air Force learnt this years ago with the C-17 and Super Hornet. This is also a great decision as it gives us total interoperability with our closest ally and that means a lot less pain for the guys and gals who regularly operate from USN ships.

The problem comes when we look at bigger purchases as cost becomes prohibitive. I think we should have gone for a US Destroyer e.g. Arleigh Burke for the same reasons as we went for the helicopter - I also don't think the AWD will work for us as we have created a hybrid ship rather than buy off the shelf. However, the LHD is a whole new scale - we simply could not afford to buy US Ships of the same capacity. Here's where the Spanish ships offer a reasonable alternative. They are not Mil Spec, but are built to Lloyds Register standards making them much cheaper. Yes less militarily durable but that's a trade off in risk to gain capability.

The LHD's bring the RAN a spectacular jump in capability and require the ADF to completely adjust its operating paradigm. It will not even be close to operating like Tobruk or the LPAs.

So while I think we have got some decision very wrong, I also think we have made some pretty smart choices. Which ever way you think, the next decade is going to be a very interesting time to be in the Navy!!

 
 

[Mandrake]

For some further info check this out --
http://www.navy.gov.au/Canberra_Class

Cheers

Steve

[Nick74]

I have a mate on Toobroke right now and he is keen for it to de commissioned and get his but into a Canberra class

They look to be a very impressive ship

Cheers
Nick

[Northy]

Far too many Navy blokes with a lot of time to be forum surfing on here...

Just in regards the FFG's,  I thought were ok but not a raging success - ANZAC class better by far I understood because they can handle rougher weather.  I have heard of the FFG's getting stress cracks in the superstructure when taken too far off shore so they were then restricted to near shore use only.

Brother in Law recently retired Navy, his first tub was the Melbourne so the AWD is almost full circle.

[rescue1]

Did a codification course a couple of years ago with a couple of guys who were on the Canberra Class project. Defence's obsession with not buying anything off the shelf will bight them again with this one. Rather than buying fully built ships from Spain we are adding just the superstructure and that will take 3 years or 3 times as long as the Spanish would take to build the whole ship. The biggest roblem will be the lack of helicopters and pilots to fly them....

[Teabag]

Correct, I was working at LDA in Canberra on the codification of spares for HMAS Sirius. Now that dead set did my head in with the amount of gear from different countries. Stores support was near on nil existent. As a technical sailor, when you mix and match systems you are asking for trouble.....buying cheap generally spells disaster.

Did a codification course a couple of years ago with a couple of guys who were on the Canberra Class project. Defence's obsession with not buying anything off the shelf will bight them again with this one. Rather than buying fully built ships from Spain we are adding just the superstructure and that will take 3 years or 3 times as long as the Spanish would take to build the whole ship. The biggest roblem will be the lack of helicopters and pilots to fly them....

[tigga27]

Hi guys,
just finished ten years as a stoker and 8 of them in darwin on a patrol boat doing illegals. I've heard a fair bit of info being passed around the navy and from what I see, this is being pushed a lot harder than anything I have seen. They are poaching people from all over from ships they can't properly man at the moment. Its been snowballing for years. They won't find the people for them and they will greatly affect the operation of border protection while they are doing it. I commisioned the first Armidale class patrol boat and I have seen cracks in boats you wouldn't believe. Support for the ships would want to improve also if it is outsourced cos at the moment the fight isn't on the water, its in the office trying to work out who will pay for it. I don't know too much about the big boats but I hope it works out better, for the country, and especially for the guys working around the clock to keep them afloat and doing their job.

just my thoughts in good humour

cheers
tigga

[achjimmy]

I'm serving as well and share Teabag's view up to a point. Buying off the shelf is the way to go - when we can afford it. Navy has finally learnt from Air Force and gone off the shelf for the new Combat Helicopter (MH-60R). These are exactly the same as the USN versions meaning we are not spending millions on R&D to create our own little fleet of unique helicopters - Air Force learnt this years ago with the C-17 and Super Hornet. This is also a great decision as it gives us total interoperability with our closest ally and that means a lot less pain for the guys and gals who regularly operate from USN ships.

The problem comes when we look at bigger purchases as cost becomes prohibitive. I think we should have gone for a US Destroyer e.g. Arleigh Burke for the same reasons as we went for the helicopter - I also don't think the AWD will work for us as we have created a hybrid ship rather than buy off the shelf. However, the LHD is a whole new scale - we simply could not afford to buy US Ships of the same capacity. Here's where the Spanish ships offer a reasonable alternative. They are not Mil Spec, but are built to Lloyds Register standards making them much cheaper. Yes less militarily durable but that's a trade off in risk to gain capability.

Sadly the RAAF didn't keep doing this, buying the airbus refuel tankers! Delayed and too large for some of our airfields, they should have gone with the Boeing alternative?


I didn't know the ships were not mil spec I hope going it like this doesnt lead to a failed experiment years down the track like the alloy destroyers the poms used in the falklands did!