SinoDefence Forum

FreeAsia2000 · 09-15-2006

Fantastic post guys.

I know the Russian decision to put more missiles rather than aircraft seemed
silly to me as well. Since aircraft can be used in both offensive and defensive roles BUT how would the advent of UCAV's affect that in the future ?

Obi Wan Russell · 09-15-2006

UCAVs will in the future (20 years+ from now) form significant parts of CV air groups as the technology matures, at first supplementing manned aircraft (each manned fighter will have it's own 'squadron' of drones under it's control) and eventually replacing the manned combat types whose pilots will remain abooard ship during ops contolling their drones by satlink. The smaller general size of UCAVs will allow cariers to carry a larger number than their manned counterparts so a CVN currently with @86 aircraft at present may be able to hold 120 UCAVs or more depending on their size. A smaller CV would similarly increase it's capacity so a CV now with 50 aircraft would be able to operate 70-80 UCAVs, and a light carrier now with @20-25 aircraft would be able to ship 35+ UCAVs. A rough guide, certainly, but a glimpse of the future nonetheless.

IDonT · 09-15-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeAsia2000

Fantastic post guys.

I know the Russian decision to put more missiles rather than aircraft seemed
silly to me as well. Since aircraft can be used in both offensive and defensive roles BUT how would the advent of UCAV's affect that in the future ?

That is more towards doctrine. The Soviets considered carriers as "relics" of the past, until Gorshkov came. But by that time, the main Soviet naval strategy was the protection of SSBN bastions not power projection.

The Kuznetsov's main punch was always her shipwreck missiles, the airwing was there to protect it from air strikes. The Kuznetsov's main job was to clear the SSBN bastions of hostile ships and aircraft so that the Red Navy's ASW aircraft and Submarines can operate with impunity.

As for UCAV equipped carriers, you need to have a very large satellite infastructure to relay your signals to the UAV, line of sight problems you know. Also, this must be secure because you might be in an embarrassing position if your enemy hacked on to your signals and use top of the line and expensive UCAVs against you.

Jeff Head · 09-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Thanks to all for the intresting post.

I think a CV needs to be 30,000 tons as a minium. With the proper stablizers and blisters the ship will be very stable. How the ship rides is very important when conducting flight operations. You want that deck steady as can be. Makes for safer and smoother operations.

I agree Popeye, and my own feeling is that, for today's threat/projection requirements, an optimal sea control vessel would carry 20 strike/defense aircraft, 3 AEW aircraft, 3 EW aircraft and 6 helos to split between ASW and SAR duties. Could probably get away with 30-35,000 tons to accomplish this.

Of course the new QE class will be larger than this as are the French designs and what the Russians, and I believe ultimately, what the PLAN will use. It goes without saying that the US CVNs are well beyond this, but the Tarwa, Wasp and new US LHX class are all quite capable of filling this role as I just defined it.

Be that as it may, as regards the 30-35,000 ton vessels, most countries will find that difficult to afford so you are going to see a lot of the smaller deck carriers out there, with smaller airwigs, fulfilling a sea control role...in fact, there already are. There are already nine such vessels, below 30,000 tons, world-wide all listed as and considered Aircraft Carriers, either already serving, or under constructions.

INDIA CVL VIRAAT 1 ea 28,700 tons
UK CVL INVINCIBLE 3 ea 20,300 tons
SPAIN CVL STRATEGIC PROJ 1ea 27,000
SPAIN CVL ASTURIAS 1 ea 17,000 tons
ITALY CVL CAVOUR 1 ea 26,000 tons
ITALY CVL GARIBALDI 1 ea 13,000 tons
THAI CVH NARUEBET 1 ea 12,000 tons

bd popeye · 09-16-2006

Jeff sez;

Quote:

Be that as it may, as regards the 30-35,000 ton vessels, most countries will find that difficult to afford so you are going to see a lot of the smaller deck carriers out there, with smaller airwigs, fulfilling a sea control role...in fact, there already are. There are already nine such vessels, below 30,000 tons, world-wide all listed as and considered Aircraft Carriers, either already serving, or under constructions.

Well Jeff by that reckoning the USN has 23 aircraft carriers all larger that those listed. And the USN actually operates them. It is expensive. I read on

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...n-68-specs.htm

that it cost $298 million USD a year to operate a Nimitz class. No wonder what the others countries usally have only one or two large deck.."Aircraft Carriers"

All of the ships serve their countries well. And are well suited for the role they are assigned. One exception. I do not know if the Thai CV has ever actually operated aircraft. I did see some "PS" pictures of it....

Jeff Head · 09-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Well Jeff by that reckoning the USN has 23 aircraft carriers all larger that those listed

I would count all of the Tarawa and Wasp class ships in that category. By todays standards, they are as capable an aircraft carrier as almost any other nation's "real" carriers, outside of The French and Russians.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

it cost $298 million USD a year to operate a Nimitz class. No wonder what the others countries usally have only one or two large deck.."Aircraft Carriers"

Exactly...though, with the PRC's growing economic might, she may well get there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Allof the ships serve their countries well. And are well suited for the role they are assigned. One exception. I do not know if the Thai CV has ever actually operated aircraft. I did see some "PS" pictures of it....

I have seen actual pics of her operating with Harriers on board. Here are three:

bd popeye · 09-16-2006

Jeff, no insult intended but last year I pointed out that the first pic wwas "PS"..Look at the ships bow at the water line. No wake. There should be a wake because they are launching Harriers. The rest of the pic are probally real. Hey where was the Thai CVH during the Tsunami if it is operational??? Maybe I missed it? Was it in re-fit?

I found this incrediably nationalistic Thai forum about the Thai Navy. Intresting post about the Thai CV;

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/lofi...hp/t50697.html

I think the PLAN should by this ship from the Thai's if they cannot operate it.

Obi Wan Russell · 09-16-2006

The Thai Navy certainly operated the Harriers (ex Spanish Navy EAV-8A Matadors which rely on the mk1 eyeball as their primary attack system) when their carrier was first delivered and most photos of her with these aircraft on deck date from this time. Maintenance has probably been a headache for the Harriers as they were over 20 years old when delivered and I recall only a limited quantity of spares including engines were part of the deal. The Harriers were probably only bought as a stopgap measure at the time (being second hand the price would have been within the Thai Navy's budget) and they most likely expected to be able to upgrade to a better variant of the Harrier by now, either second hand RN Sea Harrier FA2s or AV-8Bs from America. Economic problems have curtailed their plans and the ship is being retained more as a symbol of national pride (very important in Asia) until such time as the Thai economy improves. Whether or not the Harriers are still operational is difficult to say as they have been keeping a low profile and the only pictures of the Narubet I have seen recently show her devoid even of helos.
Perhaps another suitable buyer for the ship would be Australia, and she would be a better buy than the two LSTs (HMAS Manoora and HMAS Kanimbala) they bought from America in the 90s, which cost more to refit than if they had bought a 20,000ton carrier, plus both ships were pushing 30 years old at the time of purchase. Also, from out of the blue, what if India stepped in and made an offer for the ship? They have a stated aim of expanding to a three carrier force and buying second hand may be the cheapest option.

bd popeye · 09-16-2006

The Thai's have probally had trouble keep the Harriers operational for some time. I found this old article from 1999 about the Thai CVH. The page in the link has a link about Y2K!!!

http://www.pattayamail.com/308/features.htm

H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet’s day out

On June 4th, the Royal Thai Navy took Southeast Asia’s only aircraft carrier, His Majesty’s Ship the Chakri Naruebet, out to sea for a little shake down training. The press was invited along, and Pattaya Mail’s staff reporters turned in the following report.

Admiral Narong Yuthawong, Sattahip Naval Base Commander (left) and navy staff members address the press during the operational demonstration.

During the demonstration, H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet and H.M.S. Taksin showed how they transfer equipment between the two ships by helicopter, as well as procedures for evading air attack, surface water danger training, and the pursuit of submarines.

While the ship headed out to sea for the training, Admiral Narong Yuthawong, Navy Fleet Commander, explained and showed a video to the press about the Fleet’s various missions. He also made himself available for answering questions.

A Sea Harrier (AV-8) sits at the raady aboard the H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet.

Since June 1998, the main mission of the ship has been protecting and ensuring the nation’s independence and sovereignty. The carrier shares patrolling responsibilities with other ships. In addition, the ship participates in the joint exercises involving foreign ships during the Cobra Gold and Carat exercises.

The carrier may also be called on to assist the public during natural disasters and incidents occurring on the sea.

...to another while out to sea.

An example of the Navy’s public assistance occurred during December 1998, when the H.M.S. Sukothai was called upon to transfer tourists from Tao Island to shore during a heavy storm. The ship transported more than 120 Thais and 280 foreigners.

The navy has also been involved in over 250 other incidents ranging from piracy to providing fresh water to residents during the dry season.

In 1998, nine Sea Harrier aircraft (AV-8) were acquired and assigned to the H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet. Stories have circulated that the aircraft are non-operational due to maintenance problems, especially the unavailability of spare parts. However, Admiral Narong explained that this is untrue. The parts are available and are produced to this day. Spare parts are ordered from both the U.S. and Spain.

Trying to distract the onset of seasickness parhaps? Crewmembers and reporters participate in ship games.

H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet leaves port for training once every two months. Each of these exercises costs one million baht. It costs 50,000 baht per day to maintain the ship at dock.

The cost of training pilots, which comes to about 10 million baht per pilot, must also be considered along with the maintenance cost of the aircraft, the Admiral said.

After the demonstration, the ship docked in the afternoon hours. All were invited to gather at the Royal Naval Fleet Club for dinner.

Jeff Head · 09-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Jeff, no insult intended but last year I pointed out that the first pic wwas "PS"..Look at the ships bow at the water line. No wake. There should be a wake because they are launching Harriers.

Great observation Popeye. I am surprised I missed that obvious point and did not see your pointing it out last year. I have replaced that pic in the post above with another I have of the Thai vessel with Harriers on deck.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

The rest of the pic are probally real. Hey where was the Thai CVH during the Tsunami if it is operational??? Maybe I missed it? Was it in re-fit?

I bet the Thais are finidng out how expensive it is to operate and maintain such a vessel.

bd popeye · 09-16-2006

No problem Jeff. The ship is probally used for "show" only..You know the good looking car at the drag race that never races. It looks like a capable ship. Kinda small. But I really think the PLAN should buy it and use it for training or an active CV. Probally could get it cheap.

That reminds me. Last year I posted an article about the HMS Invincable being taken out of service. we may have previously discussed this but.... Is there any chance that the UK will sell the ship?

IDonT · 09-16-2006

Video of Chakri Naruebet

Enjoy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfPGs-O4HpI

Russian Carrier fleet at sea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A576qsee17k

Jeff Head · 09-16-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

H.M.S. Chakri Naruebet leaves port for training once every two months. Each of these exercises costs one million baht. It costs 50,000 baht per day to maintain the ship at dock.

The cost of training pilots, which comes to about 10 million baht per pilot, must also be considered along with the maintenance cost of the aircraft, the Admiral said.

After the demonstration, the ship docked in the afternoon hours. All were invited to gather at the Royal Naval Fleet Club for dinner.

So, in addition to whatever actual missions she is called upon to execute, she goes out once every two months for a day for training and show? What's that, six days a year? Apparently they get out some to conduct actual operations...humanitarian, joint exercises, etc. But is sure looks like that that do not get much at sea time and just plain training.

My guess is that the PLAN is pretty focused on the Varyag initially, followed by their own designs, which certainly are on the drawing board and may already have had first steel cut.

In addition, I believe they are going to produce some LPDs to augment their modern LST type designs of which they are producing quite a few.

Obi Wan Russell · 09-17-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by bd popeye

Last year I posted an article about the HMS Invincable being taken out of service. we may have previously discussed this but.... Is there any chance that the UK will sell the ship?

HMS Invincible was paid off purely for financial reasons, as the current government is as addicted to defence cuts as previous ones have been, in order to finance failing and ill thought out social programs. She remains available for further service (officially) until 2010 after which she will very probably be sold to a friendly nation (sources have mentioned India as prime candidate, others may step forward as the time approaches) and British Governments of any political colour have shown no qualms about selling warships to other nations in the past. I saw HMS Invincible laid up in Portsmouth Dockyard a few weeks ago (she is on the northside of Number 3 Basin next to the cross channel ferry terminal) and all her Radar Antennae and CIWS systems have been removed (presumably for maintenance and storage, and possible reuse in other ships) but appears otherwise to be in good condition. She has extensive command and control facilities and would be a bargain to any nation that bought her, and despite her age has been well maintained (the class was designed with the 'upkeep by replacement' principle so are much easier to refit than previous classes), so materially should be considered in 'mint' condition.

British influence on the JSF program has ensured that the F-35B will fit on an Invincible's lifts, an odd requirement as the intention was never to operate the aircraft from these ships but to introduce them into service with the CVFs. Perhaps they were looking ahead to export customers of both the JSF and the Invincibles. Here's a thought, what if Pakistan decides to upgrade to a carrier Navy in order to redress the imbalance with India? Also perhaps Chile, which currently operates several ex RN frigates and destroyers and has a large amount of the Pacific to patrol. An Invincible would meet their requirements very well, if their budget allows. Peru showed interest in buying the Commando Carrier (LPH) HMS Bulwark in the late 70s and Chile was offered HMS Hermes after the Falklands war, not to mention HMS Invincible's proposed sale to Australia as HMAS Australia prior to the Falklands war (perhaps they'll buy her after all, better late than never). Scrap prices are unlikely to rise significantly in the next decade so sale to a friendly foreign power is still the most likely option. The selling price of the ship is nothing compared to the value of the support contracts that would go with the sale, which is always popular with politicians trying to divert attention from their latest scandal.

Obi Wan Russell · 09-18-2006

Back on the subject of the HTMS Chakri Narubet, her sale to China would raise one or two problems not least the loss of face for the Thais if they were forced to give up such a symbol of national pride for financial reasons. That's why even though they are having a hard time paying her running costs the Thai Navy isn't entertaining any thoughts about selling her (publicly, privately things may be different). Should this hurdle be overcome then the question arises as to what aircraft would grace her deck in PLAN service. Other than Helicopters, the only STOVL types in service today are members of the Harrier family, and only the EAV-8As bought by the Thais would be likely to be offered to the Chinese. These are first generation Harriers built in the 70s with little value as front line combat aircraft due to the lack of any radar or nav/attack system beyond the 60s vintage Inertial Navigation System (INS) and the mk1 eyeball. The Thais only bought nine of them plus spares and two two-seaters, and these would mainly be of value to the PLAN as a means of reverse engineering a Harrier type fighter, possibly with the enlarged Sea Harrier style nose to provide space for a radar (from the intakes back the Sea Harrier is identical to the AV-8A structurally and there is plenty of information available to allow them to design their own SHAR style cockpit) and most impotantly to reverse engineer Pegasus engines (which they could then install in as yet undesigned new aircraft types, a twin engined STOVL transport/ AEW/ ASW/ bomber? The Germans tried something similar in the sixties with two pegasus engines...).

The Narubet is too small for CTOL or STOBAR operations and using her as an LPH only would be far from fulfilling her potential (though that appears to be how the Thais are using her when she does occasionally go to sea) but she would provide the PLAN with a second carrier prototype to complement the Varyag, and if Chinese Harrier copies could be manufactured then several of these 'Sea Control' type carriers could be built in a relatively short time to provide an effective ASW escort for the larger Varyag sized strike carriers. The 'Varyags' (by which I don't mean to imply the Chinese will be building carbon copies of the Varyag, I am simply referring to Varyag sized strike carriers, although stranger things have happened...) could then offload any ASW helos to the smaller ships and thus make room for more fighters, a similar idea to the RNs CVA-01/ Invincible class concept of the 60s.

Which is also pretty much what the original American SCS was designed for in the 70s, as a convoy escort and a replacement for the Essex class CVSs which were leaving service at the time. The CVN lobby in Washington saw the SCS as a threat to the 'Big ship' concept but it was actually intended to complement it by allowing the larger vessels to concentrate on the attack mission instead of having to make room for ASW types aboard the CV/CVNs. Eight SCS carriers could be built for the price of one CVN and the proposal was to forego one new CVN on order to buy them, a sensible move which would have boosted the USNs carrier numbers during a period of decline, after which CVN construction would have resumed. Alas politics and paranoia got in the way, the SCS was dropped by the Americans and the plans were bought by the Spanish, modified with a ski jump and built as the Principe de Asturias, later modified again and built for the Thai Navy as the Chakri Narubet (sorry for the history lesson, this is for the benefit of junior members who may not know the whole story, context is everything as my old history teacher used to say).

SinoDefence Forum

Aircraft Carriers

Aircraft Carriers

DefenceTalk Military Pictures

vBulletin Tweet Poster