Apart from the FD-class frigates, I think requisitioned merchant ships and, possibly, a dedicated aviation capable vessel would be ideal platforms for RSAF naval aviation and rotary wing assets operating on and from the sea.

A flat deck and small island superstructure would greatly facilitate helo operations from ships, for example the Peace Triton Seahawks.

My 2 cents.

are you hinting hinting something?

everytime you write this kind of message.....something magically will happen later.....

when it comes from CJ, you guys better buy newspaper this coming few days.....

Interesting. Well in fact, the Dokdo-class came to mind somewhat, however, the staffing complement requires 300.

or a development of the current endurance class, similar to the enforcer 18000

Enforcer LPD

The Chinook on the stern of the Enforcer 18K is a nice inclusion. :D

yup :D

Would such capabilities require us to have other support vessels for escort duties? As for the flat-top, would it be appropriate to base our Apaches on board too?? For ground support/attack roles plus of course some ASW Seahawks if we're getting some more...or would the flat-top be solely for transport purposes??

assuming we could man it, such an LPH/helicopter carrier would imply serious blue-water power projection aspirations for RSN. with FFGs and AIP Vastergotlands providing escort, the next step would then be a dedicated UNREP support ship for independent extended deployments.

with only 6 Seahawks, each of which will already be based off an FFG, IMO the hypothetical LPH will require its own separate aviation complement. either these be new acquisitions of navalised transport/ASW/attack helicopters, or else existing RSAF rotary-wing assets will have to be marinised for long-term operations at sea.

it's my impression that its fine to deploy land-based helicopters at sea for short periods - eg. Falklands War, or our Meulaboh deployment - at the cost of considerably increased maintenance. in the long term however, it'll be much more efficient to acquire or marinise proper naval helicopters.

Civilian LHD, like the following?

IMO, we ought to have heli-assault ships to assist in coastal-hook manuevers.

We can even hop apache's off them if necessary. Land Guardsmen using Seahawks etc...

we'd need more choppers and heavy force projection assets (f35b ?)

every seahawk deployed would mean one less for ASW. the TD tun razak might be pretty deadly. better have more dedicated choppers, dedicated roles.

ospreys would be nice but hideously expensive for the capacity and loads it can carry.

Really hate it whenever CJ does that...the anxiety...urgh!

I will very much like to see a dedicated naval aviation platform but i think a converted or able to be converted merchant ship will be more economically, politically and 'manpowerly' feasible for RSN. :D

i think manpower wont be that much of an issue when you factor in the "partial demob" of the other 2 bedok class as stated in monday's 90 cent paper.

plus, the "helo support" ship can pick up some of the slack in minefield clearance. it can allow mine clearing sleds to be deployed. can function as a mothership for future USV deployments ?

Considering our navy is under manned? how are we gonna staff any more new ships? reduce fleet size by getting rid of older ships?

I am thinking along the lines of an "upsized" version of the Endurance class or mini LPD. But whatever the future holds, hopefully those planners had learnt the lesson of the tsunami, and cater for hovercraft ability along with it. We took too long to secure a beachhead that time, and is under non-combat situations.

Looking at the current manning state for our frigates, I can't help but agree with the merchant suggestion... Afterall there are quite a few ex-RSN guys in the commercial shipping world, right?

I hope great care is taken in evaluation before a decision is made to use a converted merchant ship. Damage control standards etc are going to be vastly different compared to a purpose built warship. After conversion They may look and give the feel of a warship, but they are usually compromises taken in times of emergency, like the jeep carriers of ww2 or the converted carrier me the falklands.

I guess the Navy is going to reduce the strength of those vessels that were originally designed for single role eg. the non-ASW patrol vessels, and maybe even one of the Endurance class.

There would be ready recipients for these vessels if they do become available for transfer- Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia...

If RSN gets an LPH and RSAF gets some F35Bs, guess what would happen?

We have one old thread here that we talked about having a helo carrier, lot of opinions and options has beed discussed:

http://militarynuts.com/index.php?showtopic=242&st=45

Gary,
yes, thanks for bringing up the thread... I was just being tongue in cheek when I made the passing remark.... just some food for thoughts for us as to where this is all heading ;)

This one is very cheeem ... too many if-but variables.

First up, LL's comment on the Dokdo's 300 crew. To me it sounds correct if you consider the crewing requirement for an 18k ton vessel plus the air wing pilots, crew and support staff for 10 rotary wing aircraft. We may be able to reduce this but it won't be by much.

Which brings up the point raised ... if the SAF is really facing that bad a manpower shortage in the RSN, than it wouldn't make sense for the LHx to have it'd own dedicated aviation wing. I favour the possibility raised by others that it's more for normally land based helos ... and most probably in support of a amphib op. The way I see it, at 2 helos per Endurance, the amphib elements lack the ability to do any serious surge of man & materials beyond the surf zone. Having a Dokdo analogue will help greatly as well as provide much more immediate and accurate CAS for the amphib guys.

Having a part-time land based air wing should help cut down the extra "permanent" manning requirement by at least half. It should also go a long way to cover a soft spot in our amphib ability.

I honestly don't see how the Seahawks come into the picture. The Seahawks will pair up well with the FDs. There is really no need for a LHx to support them unless we are getting more ASW helos. Either that or we are really looking after the aircrew's welfare by getting a LHx just to let them have a meeting place and larger crew lounge ;)

Likewise I don't see how F-35Bs come into the picture. We have no business doing power projection anywhere beyond a short distance from our shores. The extra range a carrier platform provides is negated by the need for the 35Bs having to do VTOL. Adding a sufficient number of 35Bs to the LHx also brings down the number of helos the LHx will carry ... and I think the helos are more important than the 35Bs. The range we expect our amphib assets to operate in can be quite easily covered by land based assets.

i was thinking of how the possible "LHx" could come in pretty handy as a support/supply/LHD ships for coalition operations.

endurance class + /upsized ? any link with the LST's that the thais plan to buy ?

it'd be a pretty useful thing to have if there's any showdown over the spratly islands happening soon. can stash away some F35bs in there as a insurance policy too. you'd know, Just in case.

I feel, any LPD,LHD for coalition operations does not need to be a Dokdo analogue. I'm pretty sure we will not be asked to deploy a aviation brigade, because any allies that may call on us for any naval venture, will be able to handle that by themselves.

As for F-35Bs in a potential Spratlys disputes, while the concept sounds very cool, I shudder to think of expensive metal as such being there without anything short of a frigate task force(s) to help just to cover their six, let alone having to operate offensively with them.

It will be useful, but if we ever have to step foot there, I doubt we will step foot there alone.

something like that, but not in that sense.

i was thinking if the spratlys really got out of control because of certain countries, having a LHx and F35Bs would go a long long way in extending and covering our ass. by acting as a strategic reserve, and a possible wildcard force

in the sense that not all our airforce would be on our island, we can hedge them somewhere as a deterrent force. risk diversification ? but it wouldnt be much anyway.

as a wild card force, rather not go into that line of thought, afterall, our doctrine dosent call for that right ?

just curious, in what sense Dokdo analogue ? i was thinking we could have something like a Hyuga class "destroyer"

If you want a wildcard force, the ability to conduct naval strikes at that radius from land is sufficient at the moment.

I don't see how any rogue nation rampaging in the Spratlys could affect our land-based assets? Could you clarify? :lol:

I just got cautioned for raising the Japanese general issue. so i m currently abit unaware of the O.B markers now.

In the Sense that in the event of a Spratlys incident. we are unlikely to be involved directly. have you seen the ASEAN charter yet ?

from the ASEAN Charter:

Asean Charter PDF:
http://www.aseansec.org/21069.pdf

Asean Economic integration High level task force
http://www.aseansec.org/hltf.htm

i dont know. at the moment, maybe not. but with China and India rising and ASEAN being pushed towards economic integration (ASEAN wide FTA by 2020, ASEAN economic community) political integration is likely to follow. Not unlike the EU i think, Political Leadership within countries, regional policy making.

There's no guarantee that a future military use clause would be included as well (however remote that might be). But i digress.

a Lhx can be mobile and be shifted around right ? i was thinking that given our regular troop training deployments and rotations. A LHx can become a wildcard as it has a hedge of a regular air wing. It being a wildcard in the sense of a staging post or floating midpoint refuel station for any US assets in the area ?

i.e if we draw a circle around spartlys, pretty much no US naval or air bases in the area unless if we want to count the one here in singapore. nearest one would be guam or Kadena, Okinawa right ?

If we had a LHx with a F35b wing. and put them somewhere in between the range circles. it would cover the gap that the US have between anything southwards of Japan to changi naval base, assuming that the phillipines wants nothing to do with US navy or air force assets in their area. It would help to make up for the big hole in air defense the Philippines is anyway. cant expect pac fleet/7th fleet to be everywhere at one time.

Plus, a LHx would allow for attack helicopter projection as well. the british are developing or marinising their apaches right ? pretty handy thing to have if we are facing a rogue nation claiming all of spratlys scenario.

but i think the wildcard force thing is a really flimsy idea.

In any case, a land deployment is possible but that puts a heavy strain on the supporting CSAR choppers and the tankers. its like the RAND report on US vs china with F22s. without the tankers, we are basically screwed.

too bloody cheeem. too bloody complex.

Short answer, IMHO, we don't need a fixed wing airwing on a light carrier for the Spratly or any other thing for that matter.

We most certainly don't need to act like a big brother for ASEAN. Won't be appreciated and won't happen in our lifetimes anyway.

Long answer ... will have to wait. No time now.

Sorry. My 0.2 cents.

How about the design and construction of a combo container ship / ULCC and LHD and place them under a civil resources (CR) acquisition program like the M/V Kendrick, you got to save on both cost and manpower. Improve damage controls and additional modular defensive system can be integrated from the design phrase, sounds feasible?

Might be something similar to the M/V Atlantic Conveyor during the Falklands War. If the situation is dire enough, you could even tow the marina floating platform out to sea, to be utilized as a helipad. :lol:

do we have any interest in the Spratly islands???

i think having a helo carrier for our AH64Ds, chinnoks and super-pumas will be good for supporting a shore landing operation up north...

Most likely is a step up from Endurance class to provide more landing spots and maybe a bigger hanger. This should be to allow 2 or more Chinooks to take off and land simultaneously.

The bigger space will also be useful to carry our new MBTs.

AFAIK ... NO.

Our only interest is in keeping the SLOCs (a.k.a Trade Routes) open whilst the belligerents duke it out. That may involve blowing things out of the way (unlikely) or it may be designating a detour and patrolling it to make sure nothing spills over.

the reason i raised spratlys is because,

aside from ourselves, East timor and thailand, virtually every other country here (ASEAN and SEA Region) has a claim in some form in full or in part to Spartly's island.

Definite powderkeg. with oil and gas currently getting harder to extract, any virgin field will definitely attract nations like bees to honey.

the danger is in the sense the conflict or skimrish spirals out of control. My personal opinion is, If shit hits the fan, i doubt that we can avoid it or stay neutral. either way it will be lose-lose situation. if we do sit it out, we can forget about stature in ASEAN or even remaining in there. I m not talking about now but something like 20-40 years down the road, with economic integration and some level of political integration.

Just take a look at the Myannmar Vs bangladesh over some oil fields. just exploration and they are poised to go to war over that.

even if we dont want to, by sheer virtue of political pressure and location, we might be dragged into a spratlys conflict. but the odds of that happening is low today and even in the medium term, relatively low. but in the long run ? i seriouslly dont see how a spratlys conflict can be avoided. it will come, sooner or later.

OTOH, with any shooting war or a destabilised North Asia situation (i.e N korea, China, Taiwan, S Korea) it will become imperative for Japan to secure its energy supplies by protecting its SLOC.

no prizes for guessing where it will become extremely important for Oil to reach safely and securely. thats where our LHx might come in really handy.

[edit] add clarification.

Most likely scenario if any of the above situation happens-- we sit tight and scream loudly for the UN (or anybody strong enough to ensure SLOCs stay open) to come and intervene. Conflicts of this nature are wayyy beyond what we should deal with, and despite what they say about Singapore punching above its weight, there are limits, especially in open conflict. The most we will do is probably offer to send in observers for peacekeeping/peace enforcement operations. Any consideration of a seaborne aircraft platform should probably focus on short ranged power projection up the peninsula.

Even that we won't need to worry about. The US 7th Fleet has subsidised our (and every other nation which has an interest in keeping the SLOCs there open) defense expenditure towards that end.

A notional LPH will be useful for deployments to the Mid East too. But whether a LPH will ever become reality, that of course depends on whether the money to purchase and the bodies to man the ship are available. I'm not so optimistic about that. Would love to be wrong on that though. :)

No, we won't wait for the UN to send bodies here.

History has shown that what one needs would be a UNSC resolution, and then with that in hand, proceed to deploy national power to achieve what is needed to be done.

There might be coalition ops, but waiting for blue helmets is just asking to be put down.

Such conflicts are not above our ability to handle, especially if SLOCs are our utmost national interest. If we cannot even try to defend what is in our own national interest, then the SAF is pretty much a mantelpiece, isn't it...

Hence my disclaimer-- or anybody powerful enough etc etc... I certainly don't see how we could make any significant difference by getting involved in one side or the other in a conflict over the Spratlys, for example. Or how we would be able to establish and maintain a sustained peace enforcement operation. YF comment about the 7th Fleet is probably correct--otoh, if the Chinese asymmetric naval warfare plans actually come to fruition and the 7th fleet is disabled, do you think we would then step in to oppose the Chinese? More likely for us to sit out the initial phase and then pick the winning team.

If the US 7th fleet for some reason got taken out, then expect the JMSDF and the ROKN to rush in. They are the ones who need the SLOCs open as badly as us. But I don't expect anyone to touch the 7th fleet on the open seas. There's little such thing as asymmetric naval warfare. Sending large numbers of small boats against major surface combatants isn't called asymmetric naval warfare, it's called mass suicide. :lol: Small boats are remarkably vulnerable, Desert Storm proved that. And even trying to pull a stunt like that off is easier said than done, the C&C issues are not trivial.

i was assuming in a scenario where the 7th fleet was tied up somewhere or incapacitated and delayed from reaching the location. if you think about it. the 7th fleet is stretched pretty thin for an area with soaring defence expenditure and weapons acquisition.