Register here

Author Topic: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan  (Read 20556 times)

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 830
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #30 on: December 05, 2009, 07:03:46 am »
Quote
Zen

You kinda missed out that AW406  and the 583 were cancelled by the Govt for the P1154 joint development farce. When that was cancelled the Phantom was seen a cheap quick fix whilst a new more suitable airframe was developed (AFVG) for service in the mid 70's.
I get the feeling that F-4 hype had masked the fact it only suitable for very large carriers, couple that with the USN going for the TFX at the time, and they knew a new more suitable design was needed for the smaller carrier ops.


Well to be honest what I said was a very short and simple post in haste, to put the point that Sea Vixen as was, was not considered adequet, once the RN had intelligence on the new Soviet anti-ship weapons. There where various proposals to upgrade the machine, which really needed new radar, and new missiles, to remain valid. The costs of that are such you might as well have a new machine, which will remain valid for far longer.
Your quite right that the RN was still more focused on the OR.346, AW406 was set for operating off the existing fleet until the new carriers came onstream, pushing back the ISD of the new wonderplane....

I certainly did not want to get thsi bogged down inthe whole P1154 saga, which woudl detract too much from the topic of this thread.

Presumably that intelligence must have been passed to the RAN, or they had their own source. Thus the need for better aircraft like the F4 and a carrier to operate it from, regardless of the projected lifespan of Melbourne.

Quote
Does make you wonder how events would have faired if the UK had stayed in the carrier game even if CVA-01 was cancelled, could a new smaller carrier capable fighter be produced, and how would that effect the other small carrier users, perhaps Oriskany style modified Essex's might have appealed as Light Fleet replacements if a suitable modern airgroup was available to them ?. The French just couldn't afford to do it on their own, although they did try with the Mirage G8 following AFVG, Mirage F1M, Jaguar M....

Yes it does pose such questiuons.
However from an RAN perspective what the UK needed to produce was either something like the Trade protection carrier studies, Medium Fleet studies, (both of roughly the same era) or Lord Carringtons 40,000ton CV.

Type 583 or Type 585 (early) solve the RN's problems, they would've met AW406 in full. We can say this with some degree of reliability thanks to Dassaults actualy building and flying of the Mirage G.
But they are too longterm to be in service on the then projected schedule and too lightweight for the heavy strike requirements of OR.346. Certainly the RAN is'nt interested in such a monster, or if they are, its only in their dreams not be revealed to their political masters.

Oriskany does seem to fit their bill, the most obvioius querry is whether its worth it to go down the F4 Phantom II route, or opt to follow the French with the F8 Crusader who, if I reccal correctly, bought refurbished or new Crusaders in 1965?
A cheaper proven solution potentialy than the risks associated with trying to operate the F4 from Oriskany.

Offline JohnR

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 353
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #31 on: December 07, 2009, 11:53:03 am »
I just happened to  come across an entry in Wiki (I know), which states that the RAN started to look for a replacement for Melbourne back in 1956, when they were offered Albion; however, this was declined and the plan aborted.  Then again in 1966 they were offered Hermes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Melbourne_(R21)

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 830
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #32 on: December 07, 2009, 04:22:22 pm »
Surely not ruled out for cost reasons?

Surely it was their inferior range, and modest improvements over the Majestic class that precludes them?

However that said the option of Albion might relate to the desire to acquire SeaVixens, certainly it was felt by the RN that they where too big and heavy for a Majestic CV and they seem to have some concerns over how to give the RAN something better than Sea Venom.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2046
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #33 on: December 09, 2009, 12:50:18 am »
Hello to whatifmodelers fellows !  :)

The french navy Crusader were new (fortunately, since we keep them until 1999  ::) )
They were the last to roll out of Vought production line.
Conservatoire de l'Air et de l'Espace d'Aquitaine
http://www.caea.info/en/plan.php

Profanity: weaker mind trying to speak forcefully

Political correctness: just bury your head in the sand for the sake of appeasement and "peace for our time"
- https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_Dassault#Affaires_

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 563
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #34 on: September 16, 2018, 12:17:58 pm »
About the USS / HMAS Oriskany project, what kind of Refit / Modernisation would had been applied if Australia did decide to buy it?

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #35 on: September 16, 2018, 02:08:55 pm »
The plan was to modify another ship to the same standard as Oriskany, not  to transfer Oriskany herself.  Oriskany was the last Essex class ship to get SCB-125, the angled deck modernization of the Essex class.  Her version was known as SCB-125A and included features like an aluminum plank flight deck and more powerful catapults that were not included in the original SCB-125.  So presumably they'd have applied all of those mods to one of the older ships (Antietam went out of service in 1963, Lake Champlain in 1965/66).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCB-125

Note that "British catapults" isn't much of a change, the C-11 was a British design anyway.

Edit: in the RAN Invincible thread there's a quick mention that the RAN was looking at a more modern radar for their proposed Essex modification.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2018, 02:12:40 pm by TomS »

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 563
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #36 on: September 17, 2018, 12:23:21 am »
Ahh I see, so an Oriskany look Essex Modernisation but a probable sensor suit of the CVA-01 (1962/63) HMS Queen Elizabeth or a sensor suite HMS Ark Royal / HMS Eagle after their mid 1960's modernisation?

Offline TomS

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2798
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #37 on: September 17, 2018, 03:06:50 am »
Ahh I see, so an Oriskany look Essex Modernisation but a probable sensor suit of the CVA-01 (1962/63) HMS Queen Elizabeth or a sensor suite HMS Ark Royal / HMS Eagle after their mid 1960's modernisation?

I was referring to this post: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,23148.msg285865.html#msg285865

1960s US sensor suite including the SPS-48 3-d air search radar. That would likely have been paired with SPS-49 2-d air search radar, SPS-10 surface search and the SPN-41 and SPN-43 air traffic control and approach radars.

Offline Tzoli

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 563
Re: Australia’s 1964 Replacement Carrier Plan
« Reply #38 on: October 15, 2018, 06:01:55 am »
Ahh I see, so an Oriskany look Essex Modernisation but a probable sensor suit of the CVA-01 (1962/63) HMS Queen Elizabeth or a sensor suite HMS Ark Royal / HMS Eagle after their mid 1960's modernisation?

I was referring to this post: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,23148.msg285865.html#msg285865

1960s US sensor suite including the SPS-48 3-d air search radar. That would likely have been paired with SPS-49 2-d air search radar, SPS-10 surface search and the SPN-41 and SPN-43 air traffic control and approach radars.

Thanks, maybe I will draw it, but I'm not sure as it would only look like a modernised Essex with Australian Flags, not much of a never were design.