Alternate Australian Defence Force 1970s Procurements?

GK. Dundas said:
My God, you could replace Australia with Canada . It's just unreal.
Click to expand...

I think the main difference is that Australia was involved in shooting wars in the region for about a decade in the 60s, so we had motivation to do some things for a while.
 
The delaying contract talks until the manufacturer stops building what ever you want to buy how ever is something we've done more then a couple of times..
And the fear of bad headlines has done some interesting things to Canadian defence policy and spending.
 
https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_30_Part2-1968-May-Jun-Jul-1968.pdf

There are a few articles in the navy league proposing converting the the type 15s and the Battle class into helicopter destroyers. One of the links above on page 25. There are several other Articles and proposals some including Ikara.

The hull life of the type 15s makes them not really viable for conversion. HMAS Tobruk was never properly repaired so that only leaves HMAS Anzac unless Tobruk is repaired

The Darings were pretty much obsolete. If they were converted to DDH’s with 1or 2 Wessex or a Seaking, Ikara, SeaCat, Mk32 Torpedo Tubes along the lines of the Battle Class and Type 15 conversions proposed they would have been far more useful to the RAN. We even had the Wessex helicopters available.

If these conversions had proven successful and a decision was made to expand the RAN we could have purchased more second hand from the UK. Or possibly built a super Daring as I think someone has previously proposed.

The conversion of 2 Battles and 3 Darings along these lines could put 5 Seakings or possibly 10 Wessex at Sea.

Another advantage of this proposal could be the replacement of some or all ASW helicopters on HMAS Melbourne with additional Trackers or Skyhawks.

There were plans to equip the Darings with Tarter missiles but with the introduction of the Charles F Adams this may have been a better option particularly if the 4th CFA had been ordered

There are several other links I can post if anyone is interested
 
Aussie Alfred said:
https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_30_Part2-1968-May-Jun-Jul-1968.pdf

There are a few articles in the navy league proposing converting the the type 15s and the Battle class into helicopter destroyers. One of the links above on page 25. There are several other Articles and proposals some including Ikara.

The hull life of the type 15s makes them not really viable for conversion. HMAS Tobruk was never properly repaired so that only leaves HMAS Anzac unless Tobruk is repaired

The Darings were pretty much obsolete. If they were converted to DDH’s with 1or 2 Wessex or a Seaking, Ikara, SeaCat, Mk32 Torpedo Tubes along the lines of the Battle Class and Type 15 conversions proposed they would have been far more useful to the RAN. We even had the Wessex helicopters available.

If these conversions had proven successful and a decision was made to expand the RAN we could have purchased more second hand from the UK. Or possibly built a super Daring as I think someone has previously proposed.

The conversion of 2 Battles and 3 Darings along these lines could put 5 Seakings or possibly 10 Wessex at Sea.

Another advantage of this proposal could be the replacement of some or all ASW helicopters on HMAS Melbourne with additional Trackers or Skyhawks.

There were plans to equip the Darings with Tarter missiles but with the introduction of the Charles F Adams this may have been a better option particularly if the 4th CFA had been ordered

There are several other links I can post if anyone is interested
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link Aussie Alfred.
Those artist impressions would look great as profiles, by someone who does Shipbucket!
Wow, The Navy magazine for 15c. :oops:

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
Disagree, the OHP hull extension was only a couple million (if that) per hull.
Click to expand...
I can't put my hands on the reference, I can't even recall exactly where or when I read it, but the cost of modifying the first three FFGs (Darwin was built with the extended heli deck) and acquiring the 16 SH-60B Seahawks, was more expensive than buying Hermes and 16 Lynx, or buying something like Ocean and Lynx.

The RAN SH-60B was the second most expensive (A$32m each in 1990) aviation platform the ADF had operated up to that point, the P-3C (A$40m each) being the most Expensive. It was a bespoke version that had to fill, not just the shipboard ASW helo role, it had to replace Sea King, Tracker and Ikara.

The carrier would have operated the in-service Sea Kings for ASW and potentially the Wessex in the SAR and utility roles, combined with the Lynx and its Skua missiles, would have provided the RAN with vastly greater capability. In fact, acquiring Hermes would have given Australia breathing space to develop requirements for a carrier replacement during the late 90s that could have also covered the amphibious role, i.e. a pair of Oceans, San Giorgios, Osumis, or even Chakri Naruebets instead of the Newports and then LHDs.
 
Volkodav said:
I can't put my hands on the reference, I can't even recall exactly where or when I read it, but the cost of modifying the first three FFGs (Darwin was built with the extended heli deck) and acquiring the 16 SH-60B Seahawks, was more expensive than buying Hermes and 16 Lynx, or buying something like Ocean and Lynx.

The RAN SH-60B was the second most expensive (A$32m each in 1990) aviation platform the ADF had operated up to that point, the P-3C (A$40m each) being the most Expensive. It was a bespoke version that had to fill, not just the shipboard ASW helo role, it had to replace Sea King, Tracker and Ikara.

The carrier would have operated the in-service Sea Kings for ASW and potentially the Wessex in the SAR and utility roles, combined with the Lynx and its Skua missiles, would have provided the RAN with vastly greater capability. In fact, acquiring Hermes would have given Australia breathing space to develop requirements for a carrier replacement during the late 90s that could have also covered the amphibious role, i.e. a pair of Oceans, San Giorgios, Osumis, or even Chakri Naruebets instead of the Newports and then LHDs.
Click to expand...

Even a decade ago the MH60R was about the same price as the F/A18F.
 
Rule of cool said:
I think the main difference is that Australia was involved in shooting wars in the region for about a decade in the 60s, so we had motivation to do some things for a while.
Click to expand...
The reason I say this is because the reason why we flew Boeing 707s for roughly 20 years as a transport and later as a tanker.
Is we dithered while negotiating for C141s .
Until they stopped building them .
 
Aussie Alfred said:
https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_30_Part2-1968-May-Jun-Jul-1968.pdf

There are a few articles in the navy league proposing converting the the type 15s and the Battle class into helicopter destroyers. One of the links above on page 25. There are several other Articles and proposals some including Ikara.

The hull life of the type 15s makes them not really viable for conversion. HMAS Tobruk was never properly repaired so that only leaves HMAS Anzac unless Tobruk is repaired

The Darings were pretty much obsolete. If they were converted to DDH’s with 1or 2 Wessex or a Seaking, Ikara, SeaCat, Mk32 Torpedo Tubes along the lines of the Battle Class and Type 15 conversions proposed they would have been far more useful to the RAN. We even had the Wessex helicopters available.

If these conversions had proven successful and a decision was made to expand the RAN we could have purchased more second hand from the UK. Or possibly built a super Daring as I think someone has previously proposed.

The conversion of 2 Battles and 3 Darings along these lines could put 5 Seakings or possibly 10 Wessex at Sea.

Another advantage of this proposal could be the replacement of some or all ASW helicopters on HMAS Melbourne with additional Trackers or Skyhawks.

There were plans to equip the Darings with Tarter missiles but with the introduction of the Charles F Adams this may have been a better option particularly if the 4th CFA had been ordered

There are several other links I can post if anyone is interested
Click to expand...
Please do post the links. I am very interested in the thinking of the past.

The UK developed an upgrade proposal for the Daring that basically made them flush-decked, removed the aft gun turret, and turned them into fast ASW destroyers. They were nice, but the RN rightly determined they would be better off building additional Leanders.

There were other proposals for Tartar conversions for both the Battles and the Darings in RN service, with Australia showing interest (Brown even suggested the investigations were at Australia's instigation).

The older I become, the less enamoured I am with upgrades, especially radical rebuilds of existing platforms. The exception is regarding platforms explicitly designed for, but not with, particular systems, or with modular systems intended to be removed, replaced and swapped out with upgraded or alternate systems.

Options such as replacing Twin Bofors with Seacat, and Limbo with Ikara, for instance, are very sensible. As are helicopter conversions of even older frigates etc. as they not only increase capability at lower initial cost, in a shorter time frame, they provide pipelines for training and upskilling service personnel, and developing operational concepts, prior to the introduction of new platforms.

That said, a Helo conversion of the Qs could have merit; Sea King would be too great a stretch, but Wessex may be doable, and Wasp would be fairly straightforward.

A common Tartar conversion of the Battles and Darings could be made viable by adopting the smaller, lighter Mk-22 GMLS (16 rounds), inserting it in place of B turret and designing a new bridge / CIC etc structure and supressing the torpedoes in favour of additional superstructure for new and displaced systems as well as additional diesel generators. Additional work could include replacing Limbo with Ikara and fitting Mk-32 triple ASW torpedo launchers.
 
Volkodav said:
Please do post the links. I am very interested in the thinking of the past.

The UK developed an upgrade proposal for the Daring that basically made them flush-decked, removed the aft gun turret, and turned them into fast ASW destroyers. They were nice, but the RN rightly determined they would be better off building additional Leanders.

There were other proposals for Tartar conversions for both the Battles and the Darings in RN service, with Australia showing interest (Brown even suggested the investigations were at Australia's instigation).

The older I become, the less enamoured I am with upgrades, especially radical rebuilds of existing platforms. The exception is regarding platforms explicitly designed for, but not with, particular systems, or with modular systems intended to be removed, replaced and swapped out with upgraded or alternate systems.

Options such as replacing Twin Bofors with Seacat, and Limbo with Ikara, for instance, are very sensible. As are helicopter conversions of even older frigates etc. as they not only increase capability at lower initial cost, in a shorter time frame, they provide pipelines for training and upskilling service personnel, and developing operational concepts, prior to the introduction of new platforms.

That said, a Helo conversion of the Qs could have merit; Sea King would be too great a stretch, but Wessex may be doable, and Wasp would be fairly straightforward.

A common Tartar conversion of the Battles and Darings could be made viable by adopting the smaller, lighter Mk-22 GMLS (16 rounds), inserting it in place of B turret and designing a new bridge / CIC etc structure and supressing the torpedoes in favour of additional superstructure for new and displaced systems as well as additional diesel generators. Additional work could include replacing Limbo with Ikara and fitting Mk-32 triple ASW torpedo launchers.
Click to expand...
I too have come to a similar conclusion, as I get older Volkodav.
Regarding your analogy about Helo conversion of existing frigates/destroyers, I think this only became operationally and cost efficient with the advent of the Kaman SH-2D Seasprite, and of course, the Westland Lynx HAS.2.

With my previous notion of more joint-programs by the Australian government/ADF, perhaps Australia might have been wised to have worked in with the Royal Canadian Navy to develop the 1960 Kaman HU2K-1 ASW helicopter program......?

(I fully appreciate that the fundamental issue with the HU2K-1 ASW helicopter program was that of weight and the single-engine configuration of the then HU2K-1. But the fact was, Australia was no slouch at the time when it came to ASW sensor R&D, and as such, might have brought new perspectives and answers to the program.......)
This way, the RAN (and RCN) get a smaller, lighter and cheaper ASW helicopter than that of the larger, heavier and more expensive Wessex and Sea King. Which would make such conversions of existing frigates/destroyers more achievable.....

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:
Volkodav said:
The older I become, the less enamoured I am with upgrades, especially radical rebuilds of existing platforms.
Click to expand...
Pioneer said:
I too have come to a similar conclusion, as I get older Volkodav.
Click to expand...

Me 3.

It costs a fortune, takes forever, often fails. It rarely is worth the money and effort for run of the mill stuff, although something like the HMAS Melbourne is special.

These days my preference is most the most vanilla stuff possible.
 
@ Volkodav 3 articles on destroyer conversions and an article on never were’s.
Also an article on the Surveillance and Army Support Ship proposal from Caringtons based on Tobruk. If we couldn’t have a Melbourne replacement they proposed up to 5. I remember seeing other articles at the time equipping them with 6-10 Seakings and a couple with Harriers. They could have been quite handy and stopped the disaster that came with Kanimbla and Manoora.


The first 3 are articles about converting type 15s and Battle class destroyers to carry helicopters

https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_30_Part3-1968-Aug-Sep-Oct-1968.pdf

Page 73

https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/1969-70-Vol_31_Part1_Part1.pdf

Page 75

https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_31_Part2-1969-May-Jun-Jul-1969.pdf

Page 15


https://navyleague.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Navy-Vol_45_Part2-1983-Jul-and-Oct-1983.pdf

RAN never weres page 4
LPH Carrier
DDL
LSM
Fast combat support ship

Surveillance and Army support ship page 41
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom