Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Lifestyle

Home loans made clear

HMAS Canberra arrives!

By johnboy 17 October 2012 24

Canberra

The Royal Australian Navy have put up a gallery of pictures from the arrival in Melbourne today of the new HMAS Canberra.

They tweeted just how important this ship and its sister Adelaide are going to be:

Canberra bombers yesterday, Canberra class aircraft carriers today (yes I know we’re still pretending it’s for humanitarian relief). Another little clue to the ship’s importance is they’re winding back the clock and putting the hull number 01 on the side.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
24 Responses to
HMAS Canberra arrives!
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
johnboy 10:08 pm 18 Oct 12

indeed

Masquara 9:29 pm 18 Oct 12

johnboy said :

I’d guess we might even start with US Marine’s

Pardon the pedantry:

US marines

Duffbowl 9:17 pm 18 Oct 12

Snarky said :

this boat… by boat?

A ship, being transported by a ship. Reasons all explained quite well.

farnarkler said :

I am truly surprised that Defence didn’t buy the US Wasp class carriers.

Bigger than needed, with a crew that’s unachieveable on current manning levels. The RAN could get one, which means no redundancy and a move away from a two ocean system.

farnarkler said :

Sorry but the septics have had over 20 years and 8 examples of the Wasp class to get things right. I’m sure they’d sell a couple to their good allies like Australia.

From memory, the last time the Yanks looked after us, we got two landing ships that were barely serviceable, and paid more per ship for them than Morocco did. Strong allies do not get the discounts…

Pork Hunt said :

Stop it, you’re making sense. DMO is completely incapable of buying anything off the shelf.
First they have to argue and get xx % Australian content and partial assembly in Australia followed by a squillion modifications from the standard bit of kit.
If you bought a car the same way defence buy weapons platforms, you would get your MY 2012 wheels in about 2020.
They would be brand new of course with zero k’s, just obsolete…

The problem with just about any hi-tech weapons platform is time to service, and time to expire. I’m sure Defence would be more than happy to get your opinion on it. It feels like burning to defend DMO, so I’ll stop now 🙂

BerraBoy68 7:35 pm 18 Oct 12

Pork Hunt said :

BerraBoy68 said :

[

On a positive note, the Hercules C130J project was a good one. They wanted new C130’s so they went to Lockheed and bought some. Doesn’t get easier than that.

Also the C-17 and Super-Hornets. Problem is, what we want isn’t always what is readily available (or on offer).

c_c 7:30 pm 18 Oct 12

johnboy said :

farnarkler said :

Sorry but the septics have had over 20 years and 8 examples of the Wasp class to get things right. I’m sure they’d sell a couple to their good allies like Australia.

US makes their ships waaay more manpower instensive than we can afford to operate.

Luckily they’re working on that now: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13576_3-57477138-315/navys-new-ship-sails-the-seas-on-half-the-gas/

    johnboy 7:33 pm 18 Oct 12

    1,000 sailors is still more than three times what we’re planning to put aboard.

    johnboy 7:49 pm 18 Oct 12

    And reading that article the Makin is considerably more primitive still bringing up steam for top speed. Canberra is all electric.

Pork Hunt 6:57 pm 18 Oct 12

BerraBoy68 said :

Pork Hunt said :

farnarkler said :

If you bought a car the same way defence buy weapons platforms, you would get your MY 2012 wheels in about 2020.
They would be brand new of course with zero k’s, just obsolete…

Except of course no shipbuilder builds these in bulk in the hope that someone will just wonder by and buy one. The process to buy a new aircraft, ship etc. takes years during which time new technology will be developed that buyer will also want at additional cost etc.. Occasionally, a supplier will let you jump the queue and take a platform nearing completion, but there you go….

For my money, flying any UAV of decent size (e.g. at least a Predator) off one of these within the next 10-15 year is a dream.

Half of the problem is the time taken to reach agreement to the specification from all the stake holders.
One way of expediting progress would be to embed ADF personnel with US Defence people when they look at new ships/aircraft etc. They are our number one ally after all.
Do it with members of several different ranks, get them to make contacts for their the whole of their defence force career so that when they become Air Vice Marshall’s and Defence Chiefs there is some corporate knowledge in house
This way we could get spots on production lines, commonality of design and delivery dates that are realistic and within budget.
IMHO the F35 saga is just another repeat of the F111 story except much more expensive.

On a positive note, the Hercules C130J project was a good one. They wanted new C130’s so they went to Lockheed and bought some. Doesn’t get easier than that.

johnboy 6:52 pm 18 Oct 12

farnarkler said :

Sorry but the septics have had over 20 years and 8 examples of the Wasp class to get things right. I’m sure they’d sell a couple to their good allies like Australia.

US makes their ships waaay more manpower instensive than we can afford to operate.

With the ski ramp I think this will turn out to be far more useful.

It’s big, it’s roomy, it’s capabilities are largely determined by what we load it up with so it’s very flexible and good into the future.

Also the well dock has some intriguing possibilities for running unmanned underwater craft in the future too.

All that and it will be the first asset sent for disaster relief too.

farnarkler 6:32 pm 18 Oct 12

Sorry but the septics have had over 20 years and 8 examples of the Wasp class to get things right. I’m sure they’d sell a couple to their good allies like Australia.

BerraBoy68 6:16 pm 18 Oct 12

Pork Hunt said :

farnarkler said :

If you bought a car the same way defence buy weapons platforms, you would get your MY 2012 wheels in about 2020.
They would be brand new of course with zero k’s, just obsolete…

Except of course no shipbuilder builds these in bulk in the hope that someone will just wonder by and buy one. The process to buy a new aircraft, ship etc. takes years during which time new technology will be developed that buyer will also want at additional cost etc.. Occasionally, a supplier will let you jump the queue and take a platform nearing completion, but there you go….

For my money, flying any UAV of decent size (e.g. at least a Predator) off one of these within the next 10-15 year is a dream.

Pork Hunt 6:00 pm 18 Oct 12

farnarkler said :

Considering the superstructure is going to weigh in at 2-3 thousand tons, the ship would lean and capsize if it was floated right now.

I am truly surprised that Defence didn’t buy the US Wasp class carriers. Seeing as we lean on the US as defence partners in the region, why not have the same hardware? Off the shelf, they’re $100 million more, however, are bigger. The Spanish design which has been purchased looks to be just like the subs; the hull made by one company, the weapons systems by another, the propulsion by yet another, etc. Ultimately not working properly. It looks like Defence didn’t learn from their mistakes!!

Stop it, you’re making sense. DMO is completely incapable of buying anything off the shelf.
First they have to argue and get xx % Australian content and partial assembly in Australia followed by a squillion modifications from the standard bit of kit.
If you bought a car the same way defence buy weapons platforms, you would get your MY 2012 wheels in about 2020.
They would be brand new of course with zero k’s, just obsolete…

caf 3:17 pm 18 Oct 12

Snarky said :

A question to people who know about these things – why did they have to transport this boat… by boat? Is it not yet completely watertight? Why ship it before it’re ready to float across itself?

Because we heard you like boats, so we put a boat in your boat.

p1 1:42 pm 18 Oct 12

johnboy said :

How many people think buying a 30,000 tonne flat top is anything like buying a car?

It is exactly like buying a car. A car which has four wheels and two chassis rails and little else. I guess the crew could have been issued with paddles?

farnarkler 12:37 pm 18 Oct 12

Considering the superstructure is going to weigh in at 2-3 thousand tons, the ship would lean and capsize if it was floated right now.

I am truly surprised that Defence didn’t buy the US Wasp class carriers. Seeing as we lean on the US as defence partners in the region, why not have the same hardware? Off the shelf, they’re $100 million more, however, are bigger. The Spanish design which has been purchased looks to be just like the subs; the hull made by one company, the weapons systems by another, the propulsion by yet another, etc. Ultimately not working properly. It looks like Defence didn’t learn from their mistakes!!

Snarky 12:17 pm 18 Oct 12

johnboy said :

Because it’s not ready to sail yet. We’re building the superstructure here in Australia and welding it on next year.

Ah! The missing part of the puzzle. Thanks.

Snarky 11:49 am 18 Oct 12

johnboy said :

It could have been towed, but that would have been a high risk operation for such an expensive and rare bit of kit (even if you had the money to replace it you’d wait years for it to be built)

Or we could have put a crew on it and sailed it home ourselves. How many people buy a car and have it delivered by car carrier to their driveway? So – why did we ship it?

    johnboy 11:55 am 18 Oct 12

    Because it’s not ready to sail yet. We’re building the superstructure here in Australia and welding it on next year.

    How many people think buying a 30,000 tonne flat top is anything like buying a car?

dtc 11:37 am 18 Oct 12

AFAIK, its just the hull; there isnt much inside it. So towing could create some issues

Snarky 11:02 am 18 Oct 12

A question to people who know about these things – why did they have to transport this boat… by boat? Is it not yet completely watertight? Why ship it before it’re ready to float across itself?

    johnboy 11:16 am 18 Oct 12

    It could have been towed, but that would have been a high risk operation for such an expensive and rare bit of kit (even if you had the money to replace it you’d wait years for it to be built)

bundah 10:40 am 18 Oct 12

A modern day Noah’s Ark?

neanderthalsis 9:25 am 18 Oct 12

While being “mobile helicopter platforms for humanitarian relief efforts”, I’m guessing the ski jump would make it impractical for super hornets. So do we have any plans to buy V/STOLs ? Harriers and Ospreys would be cool.

    johnboy 9:43 am 18 Oct 12

    drones and f35b’s for the ski ramp.

    I’d guess we might even start with US Marine’s embarking for the fixed wing aviation at least while we figure it out.

    There’s been a lot of talk about getting US assistance in LHD operation, which very much includes fixed wing.

    But even as a helicarrier operating with an air warfare destroyer and a submarine we’ll be able to put a real force to sea, and keep it there in the face of enemy action, for the first time since Melbourne was retired in 1982.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site