This is one key reason why we needed much bigger amphibs, the size difference between the new wheeled APC's and the Auslav is vast.
It was the same between our old and new Main Battle Tanks, this image flatters the Leopard, which is significantly smaller than the Abrams.
Why we bought Canberra and Adelaide
- MikeJames
- Club Member
- Posts: 4956
- Joined: 20 Jan 2010 09:43
- Fleet Base: Sydney
- My Ship Yard: RAN DDL HMAS Kokoda
Australian Coast Guard cutter Nemesis
RAN FCPB HMAS Wollongong
German SAR Launch DGzRS Berln
SS Geest Atlas (Building) - Location: Sydney
- Contact:
Why we bought Canberra and Adelaide
Last edited by MikeJames on 28 Feb 2017 19:07, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Committee
- Posts: 897
- Joined: 27 Jan 2010 12:59
- Fleet Base: Perth
- My Ship Yard: HMAS Adelaide (LHD), USS Roosevelt, USS Anzio, RFS Peter the Great, Scharnhorst, HMAS Melbourne, HMAS Sydney (AWD), ITS Carlo Bergamini, HNLMS Evertsen, HMS Middelton, HMS Severn, RFS Arkangelsk, Fairplay 30, Normand Master, Fure West
Re: Why we bought Canberra and Adelaide
It's a bit embarrassing actually. When they placed the order the LHD landing craft they spec'd them on the Abram's current weight and left no room for future growth. So between then and now the Army has updated the Abram's to keep them capable and guess what, they weight more now and the landing craft can no longer transport them......
So Choules is actually the only ship in the RAN that can currently land Abram tanks...... I presume sometime in the future they will do something with the landing craft to overcome this, but I have no idea when that will be. In the mean time, for Adelaide and Canberra to land them, they have to be stripped down, which sort of defeats the purpose.
The Adelaide and Canberra are perfectly capable of transporting the tanks and can embark and discharge them via cargo entries if tied up to a wharf, just not via the landing craft.
Robert
So Choules is actually the only ship in the RAN that can currently land Abram tanks...... I presume sometime in the future they will do something with the landing craft to overcome this, but I have no idea when that will be. In the mean time, for Adelaide and Canberra to land them, they have to be stripped down, which sort of defeats the purpose.
The Adelaide and Canberra are perfectly capable of transporting the tanks and can embark and discharge them via cargo entries if tied up to a wharf, just not via the landing craft.
Robert
- MikeJames
- Club Member
- Posts: 4956
- Joined: 20 Jan 2010 09:43
- Fleet Base: Sydney
- My Ship Yard: RAN DDL HMAS Kokoda
Australian Coast Guard cutter Nemesis
RAN FCPB HMAS Wollongong
German SAR Launch DGzRS Berln
SS Geest Atlas (Building) - Location: Sydney
- Contact:
Re: Why we bought Canberra and Adelaide
Landing craft are relatively cheap, the French in particular are doing some innovative things with landing craft so there is some potential for a new buy of much faster and more versatile LCTs in years to come.
- fastone045
- Club Member
- Posts: 434
- Joined: 25 Feb 2010 13:11
- Fleet Base: Sydney
- My Ship Yard: HMAS Jervis Bay
HMAS Sydney
FNS Tornio
IJNS Takao
Re: Why we bought Canberra and Adelaide
Funny I thought we got this class of ship so we the Australian ship modeller would have a big ship to build!