Canberra class competition

Remko

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 21, 2008
Messages
34
Reaction score
4
Before the Navantia-Tenix design won the Australian competition for their new Canberra class LHD/LHA there were several other designs. I'm looking for more information about one of the designs that lost (but which looed much better in my opinion, as it didin't have that huge ugly ski-jump...). I've already found a few images on the web, but if anyone has more (especially of the model) or even top view drawings, post them in this topic.
 

Attachments

  • 2boataug26.jpg
    2boataug26.jpg
    206 KB · Views: 735
  • 2boatsmallaug26.jpg
    2boatsmallaug26.jpg
    176 KB · Views: 666
  • infodefensa_01.jpg
    infodefensa_01.jpg
    288.8 KB · Views: 660

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
280
The only other ship design considered for the RAN's Canberra class LHD competition was the French Mistral class. DCN partnered with ADI (now Thales Australia) to offer an Australian built Mistral. The Mistral may not have had an "ugly" ski jump but its vehicle decks are in a very ugly arrangement wrapped around the well dock. Truth that beauty is only skin deep.

EDIT: The pictures posted above is a Navantia design for an LHD. They developed two similar designs; one for a conventional flight deck landing ship (the LHD) and the other, larger design for a strategic projection ship that included STOVL capability.

The Australian Canberra class competition was by invitation only with both Navantia and DCN given contracts to develop LHD offers (they were identified as the only companies with a ship to meet the Australian requirement). Since Australia wanted to avoid risk they were to be based on off the shelf designs already in production.

The following link takes you to a Navantia popup about this ship:

http://www.navantia.es/irj/go/km/docs/documents/Portal%20Navantia/en/Productos/Buques%20Militares/Buques%20anfibios%20multiproposito/Buque%20de%20proyeccion%20estrategica/60524cdd-c10a-2a10-25b4-9b75171aea65.xml
 

Rickshaw

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
182
If this played a significant part in the decision against adopting a French design for the COLLINS class, after the debacle of the SUCCESS:
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2001-02/02rp04.htm said:
DTCN were probably handicapped because of the history of HMAS Success. When the South Australians commented that transfer of technology to Australia from Germany or Sweden should be successful because of the strong use of English in those countries, they were indicating a weakness of the French bid. Inadequate documentation, resulting from problems in translation, had been held to be a cause of the difficulties in building Success.

I wonder what effect it had in the case of the CANBERRA decision?
 

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
280
rickshaw said:
I wonder what effect it had in the case of the CANBERRA decision?

Had nothing to do with it. The Success build was over 20 years ago by a yard that had a range of systematic problems, translation being one of them. The reason the Mistral lost was because it was an inferior ship and had a riskier build strategy.
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,882
Reaction score
829
LHD arrival in Port Phillip Bay
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUsLDPWSY1Q&feature=related
 

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
382
Reaction score
409
My understanding is that very early on Cavour was also in the mix. It was probably dropped once requirements solidified on a design with a well dock, noting however that this had not previously been a priority for the ADF with aviation capability, command and control, plus the ability to transport heavy equipment from port to port being what they desired rather than an over the beach capability. Even today with the well dock and landing craft the ADF makes it very clear the role of the LHDs is not opposed landings but the previous mentioned capabilities plus HADR.
 

Similar threads

Top