Australian Invincible

[Scott Kenny]

IRL I don't know, but since we're already in alternative-history territory it can't be that hard to do.

I would NOT give up the guns in a ground-attack context. Ever.

If you could pack both a jammer pod and a laser target designator like LITENING (or whatever was rattling around in inventory in the 1980s) it'd be worth it.

It'd keep 1 gun in this case. If you did have to use a full pod for LMRTS/equivalent I'd grumpily accept a jammer pod on the wing.

No, the radar replaced the Angle-Rate Bombing System.

Angle-Rate Bombing? Dive bombing computer?

The FLIR sat on top of the nose in the night attack version and was retained in the radar version.

Okay, that would make the best Harrier option the radar AV-8B+.

 

[Volkodav]

I wonder, how much a new Invincible-class carrier would cost in 1980s, assuming that RAN would munster political support to fund it? They would likely order one without Sea Dart system, so it wouls be a bit cheaper than RN ones.

About as much as two Round Table Class landing ships. Apparently, the UK offered Australia a barter deal post Falklands, Carringtons would build the RN two modified Tobruks (based on the Sirs) and the UK would build Australia an Invincible. The thinking was using hot yards to build designs they had recently completed would be a win win.

 

[Volkodav]

Far too much, the option was rejected outright in 1979. The selected options where:
A modified Garibaldi
A modified Sea Control Ship
A modified Iwo Jima with a ski jump

Garibaldi was eliminated first as I understand it, leaving the SCS and the modified Iwo Jima. The SCS was the most attractive option due to the little design work required (PdA had been designed for Spain) but there were problems establishing an agreement to construct the vessel. Ultimately it seems that the Iwo Jima derived design was most likely.

Invincible only became preferred after the 1981 British announcement that Invincible would be divested. Australia was offered the vessel at a lower cost than any new built alternative.

It is prominent in my mind however that an offer for a new built Invincible was made post Falklands war but I can’t for the life of me remember the details, or indeed if it was a real proposal.


I believe there was a Mk 13 armed Invincible discussed although this may have been for the Shah of Iran’s program and not the RAN

Post Falklands, the UK offered to build a new Invincible for Australia with Hermes provided as an interim replacement for Melbourne. This was rejected and a decision on the replacement program as a whole was put on hold due to the approaching election. With the change of government, the replacement project was cancelled.

Cabinet papers released in recent years show the decision not to replace the carrier had been made before the election, so neither side of politics was in favour of the capability. This is hardly surprising considering Australia's poor economic state at the time and the surprisingly, almost Sandys level, of animosity to a carrier capability and VSTOL, from the Deputy Chief Scientist and PM&C.

 

[Felocie]

Cabinet papers released in recent years show the decision not to replace the carrier had been made before the election,

Correct

neither side of politics was in favour of the capability.

Correct but the party line doesn’t represent the opinions of the defence ministers and the RAN

 

[Volkodav]

Correct

Correct but the party line doesn’t represent the opinions of the defence ministers and the RAN

What was interesting was the RAAF line was carriers are useful, but the RAN need a CTOL type, which is unaffordable.
The irony is, these discussions carried on after the Falklands and even though the AV-8B+ and Sea Harrier FRS2 with AMRAAM were already underway.

 

[Felocie]

What was interesting was the RAAF line was carriers are useful, but the RAN need a CTOL type, which is unaffordable.

Something tells me this position might have been slightly disingenuous so as to further RAAF ambitions

 

[Volkodav]

Something tells me this position might have been slightly disingenuous so as to further RAAF ambitions

If you are interested its all in the National Archives online. I don't have the link at hand, but you should be able to search it.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Something tells me this position might have been slightly disingenuous so as to further RAAF ambitions

Just a little bit.

 

[GTX]

If you are interested its all in the National Archives online. I don't have the link at hand, but you should be able to search it.

Refer to "Submission No 5322 - Purchase of an aircraft carrier and aircraft - related to Decision Nos 17503, 17590, 17600 and 17540"

Note that the proposal was to buy the Invincible primarily for ASW capability with helicopters. Whilst having an ability to accommodate STOVL fixed wing platforms (i.e Harriers) was desired, the purchase of such was not, as far as I am aware, actually planned.

 

[Felocie]

Whilst having an ability to accommodate STOVL fixed wing platforms (i.e Harriers) was desired, the purchase of such was not, as far as I am aware, actually planned.

According to Flying Stations, in the late 70s the RAN began a program to acquire 12 V/STOL aircraft for introduction in 1987 on HMAS Melbourne

 

[MadRat]

They almost always carried guns, just rarely loaded them.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Wasn't there a discussion about which Harriers the Aussies were looking at? Did that get spun out into a new thread, or just deleted?

 

[Hood]

Wasn't there a discussion about which Harriers the Aussies were looking at? Did that get spun out into a new thread, or just deleted?

I thought about spinning it out but I left it alone, so everything Harrier/AV-8 related posted so far is still here.
Saying that it is straying off topic and might warrant its own thread in the speculative sections of the forum.

 

[Mike Pryce]

The paper that the original images in this thread came from.

I think the hull form and hangar of the final design were the basis for HMS Ocean.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I thought about spinning it out but I left it alone, so everything Harrier/AV-8 related posted so far is still here.
Saying that it is straying off topic and might warrant its own thread in the speculative sections of the forum.

Disagree, since the air wing for a carrier is equally important to the hull.

 

[Rattlesnek]

The paper that the original images in this thread came from.

I think the hull form and hangar of the final design were the basis for HMS Ocean.

Wow, there's even stuff about the - even for this forum - somewhat elusive Vickers Macship in there!

As well as the Vickers Versatile Aircraft Carrier.