Yet there is continued 'chatter' at Russell that the RAN will be retiring our x2 LHD's early in favour of smaller platforms. The decision to buy the Juan Carlos was made by PM Howard - the 2 options were the Juan Carlos and the French LHD's. Howard understood the force projection capabilities of these ships - PM Abbott wanted to convert x1 LHD into a carrier with the JSF STOVL. However Abbott was shafted before he could make the call - the cost analysis by Russell was around $500,000+. That involved a hardened deck for the STOVL downdraft + ammunition storage changes. Half a million or up to a million is chickenfeed when it comes to the DoD Budget. Several China sops like Hugh White/Geoffrey Barker/Beazley never wanted these LHDs - they lobbyied furiously against getting them. HMAS Choules is also being talked about as a retirement option. As always Labor and defence are like oil and water. Russell? Utterly hopeless.
it is easy to modify just like Japan is doing - minor changes include hardening the aft deck for the STOVL downdraft and also re designing the storage of ammunition. Russell conducted a comprehensive analysis after PM Abbott directly told them however he was rolled by Turnbull before anything could be done - as Japan is showing it does not take a lot of work to enable a now fully FOC F35STOVL platform to operate from flat tops. It is all about appeasing China - especially under Labor who will do ANYTHING to appease China - 'if' we went ahead and copied Japan's lead the CCP would go ballistic - a fight Albanese and Marles do NOT want to have. So Australia sits by and watches the PLAN build up a MASSIVE surface + submarine fleet while RAN gets bugger all. It is a national scandal our deeply corrupt media won't ever touch for fear of 'upsetting' Beijing.
That would have taken away from the primary purpose that they LHD's were procured for, namely troop transport. We got caught out during Timor they were the solution. Using the LHD's to reconstitute a half arsed version of the FAA fast jets would achieve what exactly. The LHD's would not be big enough to carry sufficient aircraft to conduct a basic CAP.
@@BTR-xw4of I think your figured are off by an order of magnitude. The figures reported in the media at the time were $500m for both vessels including not only deck coatings but changes to internal spaces etc. That was before the added cost of procuring the F-35B and the years it would take to reconstitute the fast jet component of the FAA. I am not sure Abbott should be lauded as the be all and end all when it comes to government and military matters. We are talking the same man who had to be talked out of sending an army battalion into Ukraine after Malaysia MH17 was shot down and had to be talked out of it.
@@AndrewinAus the figure was correct - at the time I was a seconded DLO to PM+C. Plus both my undergrad + Masters are in defence. I started as a graduate entrant at the ANAO and have been enormously lucky, but you have to earn it and have worked for several Dpt's. NEVER trust media reporting would be my suggestion - these hacks are NOT members/political staffers vetted to TS+ who sit in on NSC Cabinet. They get leaks for personal agendas. I don't plan on retiring for another 30 years so I will be moving into 'Gareth's Gazebo' DFaT as a diplomat - the Graduate Entry maps out your entire career - it's extremely competitive but it opens so many door. I would NOT reply on media reporting as a suggestion with respect - we have too few legacy media defence writers - the cost what I argued I will stand by 100%. As for Tony - you have your opinions, I mine. RAN have never given up hope for a new carrier and Prince of Wales may well soon be up for sale the new hard left UK Labour Party are proposing 'more' cuts. If we got it recruitment would imo NOT be a problem, imagine being a young sailor, imagine working on a carrier. But we can still mod out x1 LHD like Japan. Again, the only changes needed are the storage of ammunition, and hardening the flight deck. Given DoD's Budget Appropriations they can EASILY afford $1 billion + to do exactly what the Japanese are doing. The things Russell spend money on is absurd [coffee mugs, toys, alphabet morning teas, welcome to my own country - it is a disgrace. Many thanks for your reply - I love debate.
1 chopper? 😂 where did you get that from? And we dont need aircraft carriers because our army isnt an offensive one thats why the focus is more on amphibious ships and land based missile systems
@@KipKil1igan what are you talking about.. not an offenseive army.. whats its point to be destroyed by a more offensive one? its job is to kill the enemy and our is designed to be killed by the enemy coz of left wing governments and idiots.
I'd thought it was an easy question to answer with your title of this video: "SEAMEN"
Easy answer. It’s full of seamen 💦
Yet there is continued 'chatter' at Russell that the RAN will be retiring our x2 LHD's early in favour of smaller platforms. The decision to buy the Juan Carlos was made by PM Howard - the 2 options were the Juan Carlos and the French LHD's. Howard understood the force projection capabilities of these ships - PM Abbott wanted to convert x1 LHD into a carrier with the JSF STOVL. However Abbott was shafted before he could make the call - the cost analysis by Russell was around $500,000+. That involved a hardened deck for the STOVL downdraft + ammunition storage changes. Half a million or up to a million is chickenfeed when it comes to the DoD Budget. Several China sops like Hugh White/Geoffrey Barker/Beazley never wanted these LHDs - they lobbyied furiously against getting them. HMAS Choules is also being talked about as a retirement option. As always Labor and defence are like oil and water. Russell? Utterly hopeless.
They should have been built to utilise F35-B's, but no the gov and top brass like to stuff around with the procurement process.
it is easy to modify just like Japan is doing - minor changes include hardening the aft deck for the STOVL downdraft and also re designing the storage of ammunition. Russell conducted a comprehensive analysis after PM Abbott directly told them however he was rolled by Turnbull before anything could be done - as Japan is showing it does not take a lot of work to enable a now fully FOC F35STOVL platform to operate from flat tops. It is all about appeasing China - especially under Labor who will do ANYTHING to appease China - 'if' we went ahead and copied Japan's lead the CCP would go ballistic - a fight Albanese and Marles do NOT want to have. So Australia sits by and watches the PLAN build up a MASSIVE surface + submarine fleet while RAN gets bugger all. It is a national scandal our deeply corrupt media won't ever touch for fear of 'upsetting' Beijing.
That would have taken away from the primary purpose that they LHD's were procured for, namely troop transport. We got caught out during Timor they were the solution. Using the LHD's to reconstitute a half arsed version of the FAA fast jets would achieve what exactly. The LHD's would not be big enough to carry sufficient aircraft to conduct a basic CAP.
@@BTR-xw4of I think your figured are off by an order of magnitude. The figures reported in the media at the time were $500m for both vessels including not only deck coatings but changes to internal spaces etc. That was before the added cost of procuring the F-35B and the years it would take to reconstitute the fast jet component of the FAA.
I am not sure Abbott should be lauded as the be all and end all when it comes to government and military matters. We are talking the same man who had to be talked out of sending an army battalion into Ukraine after Malaysia MH17 was shot down and had to be talked out of it.
@@AndrewinAus the figure was correct - at the time I was a seconded DLO to PM+C. Plus both my undergrad + Masters are in defence. I started as a graduate entrant at the ANAO and have been enormously lucky, but you have to earn it and have worked for several Dpt's.
NEVER trust media reporting would be my suggestion - these hacks are NOT members/political staffers vetted to TS+ who sit in on NSC Cabinet. They get leaks for personal agendas.
I don't plan on retiring for another 30 years so I will be moving into 'Gareth's Gazebo' DFaT as a diplomat - the Graduate Entry maps out your entire career - it's extremely competitive but it opens so many door.
I would NOT reply on media reporting as a suggestion with respect - we have too few legacy media defence writers - the cost what I argued I will stand by 100%.
As for Tony - you have your opinions, I mine. RAN have never given up hope for a new carrier and Prince of Wales may well soon be up for sale the new hard left UK Labour Party are proposing 'more' cuts.
If we got it recruitment would imo NOT be a problem, imagine being a young sailor, imagine working on a carrier.
But we can still mod out x1 LHD like Japan.
Again, the only changes needed are the storage of ammunition, and hardening the flight deck. Given DoD's Budget Appropriations they can EASILY afford $1 billion + to do exactly what the Japanese are doing.
The things Russell spend money on is absurd [coffee mugs, toys, alphabet morning teas, welcome to my own country - it is a disgrace.
Many thanks for your reply - I love debate.
@@AndrewinAus disagree - and I was present as a DLO at the time these discussions were had.
Wtf was that it wasn't even a full video
Australia has 2 carrier's no aircraft no fleet air cover only 1chopper no defence weapons.
pathetic as usual, we fight natural disasters not wars
1 chopper? 😂 where did you get that from? And we dont need aircraft carriers because our army isnt an offensive one thats why the focus is more on amphibious ships and land based missile systems
@@KipKil1igan what are you talking about.. not an offenseive army.. whats its point to be destroyed by a more offensive one? its job is to kill the enemy and our is designed to be killed by the enemy coz of left wing governments and idiots.
Me when I lie:
@@KipKil1iganisn’t offensive? I think the RARs would disagree