Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)

In the background of these photos you can see a rare site..The Thai CV HTMS Chakri Naruebet (CVH 911). It is my understanding that the ship seldom goes to sea. And to man it for this little jaunt the Thais had to muster sailors from all over their tiny navy. The PLAN should consider buying this ship and put it to use. Just my opinion.

GULF OF THAILAND (July 13, 2009) The guided-missile destroyer USS Chafee (DDG 90) leads a formation of Royal Thai Navy ships including HTMS Naresuan (FFG 421), HTMS Khirrirat (FS 432), HTMS Makutrajakuman (FF 433) and HTMS Chakri Naruebet (CVH 911) during the at-sea phase of Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) Thailand 2009. (U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Ed Early/Released)

Click to expand...

GULF OF THAILAND (July 13, 2009) The guided-missile destroyer USS Chafee (DDG 90) leads the Royal Thai Navy aircraft carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet (CVH 911) during the at-sea phase of Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) Thailand 2009. CARAT is a series of bilateral exercises held annually in Southeast Asia to strengthen relationships and enhance the operational readiness of the participating forces. (U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Ed Early/Released)

Click to expand...

Thailand's experience with the Chakri Naruebet demonstrates that just because you can afford the initial purchase price does not mean you can afford to crew, operate and maintain a carrier. The payroll on a Nimitz class, ship's company only, not the air wing, is half a billion dollars a year. Total cost for the ship, no air wing, is $1.5 billion a year. Now add the cost of the air wing.

Ambivalent. you are so correct. And as I've stated many times >>> Just because you have a CV does not mean you can operate said ship efficiently and safely. It takes years of actual time at sea training. And as you stated lots of cash.

bd popeye said:

Ambivalent. you are so correct. And as I've stated many times >>> Just because you have a CV does not mean you can operate said ship efficiently and safely. It takes years of actual time at sea training. And as you stated lots of cash.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%. However as regards the Thai Navy and their carrier, I have long felt that for them, ownership of a carrier is far more important for reasons of national prestige than the ability to operate it sea for any protracted period. Thus I think it highly unlikely they would part with her anytime soon, as it would involve some 'loss of face', a very important concept in the far east. On the other hand, the Thais must have copies of the building plans (she was built in Spain but the Thais would have recived copies of the plans with the ship when she was delivered) and these could be just as valuable as the ship herself. The Chinese could do a deal with the Thais to buy copies of the plans, and 'buy time' aboard the ships itself for training much as they are reported to be doing with Brazil. This would provide the Thai Navy with the funding to keep the ship active more of the time, training PLAN deck crews and aircrew to provide them with the much needed experience. The Chinese would by this also gain experience in two different types of carrier very quickly, CTOL and STOVL, both of which are relevent to STOBAR operations most deem likely to be used in the future Chinese carriers. By this method the PLAN gains a training 'pipeline' for their own crews to gain realworld carrier experience form Navies that were trained by the west (Brazil recieved assistance from both France and the US, whilst the Thais were trained by Spain mostly) which would in effect allow them to leapfrog ahead of where they would be if they had to truly start from scratch.

Obi Wan Russell said:

I agree 100%. However as regards the Thai Navy and their carrier, I have long felt that for them, ownership of a carrier is far more important for reasons of national prestige than the ability to operate it sea for any protracted period. Thus I think it highly unlikely they would part with her anytime soon, as it would involve some 'loss of face', a very important concept in the far east. On the other hand, the Thais must have copies of the building plans (she was built in Spain but the Thais would have recived copies of the plans with the ship when she was delivered) and these could be just as valuable as the ship herself. The Chinese could do a deal with the Thais to buy copies of the plans, and 'buy time' aboard the ships itself for training much as they are reported to be doing with Brazil. This would provide the Thai Navy with the funding to keep the ship active more of the time, training PLAN deck crews and aircrew to provide them with the much needed experience. The Chinese would by this also gain experience in two different types of carrier very quickly, CTOL and STOVL, both of which are relevent to STOBAR operations most deem likely to be used in the future Chinese carriers. By this method the PLAN gains a training 'pipeline' for their own crews to gain realworld carrier experience form Navies that were trained by the west (Brazil recieved assistance from both France and the US, whilst the Thais were trained by Spain mostly) which would in effect allow them to leapfrog ahead of where they would be if they had to truly start from scratch.

Click to expand...

Excellent thoughts Obi Wan. But could China do this without losing face with it' own population?..I think maybe. Afterall they have had the Varyag for 9 years.

bd popeye said:

Excellent thoughts Obi Wan. But could China do this without losing face with it' own population?..I think maybe. Afterall they have had the Varyag for 9 years.

Click to expand...

In addition, only displaces about 12,000 tons full load. Though its listed as capable of carrying up to 18 aircraft, it is very light indeed and makes one wonder about its ability to take much punishment.

May well be light on any heavier armour, weapons systems, sensors, etc.

I believe the PLAN will want a heavier carrier when the time comes.

My favorite all time pic of the Chakri Naruebet is the following:

Jeff Head said:

I do not know for sure that the "Aviation Variant" A/V mentioned in the Global Security document has been finalized yet , but I believe it is close if it hasn't already been done.

But, since they are calling it a "variant", then that implies that there will also be some of the LHA(R) that do have well decks. Perhaps only two or three will be the Aviation Variants.

Just the same, for those vessels that have no no well deck, then those particular LHA(R)s will not be able to land any heavy armor (tanks) and will have to depend on the Wasp class or the San Antonio class for that function. Perhaps that is the intent, in which case, with more aircraft capability, particularly JSF, these LHA(R)s will have more strike capability for the US Marines in terms of air support during and after the landing when no airfield or CVN is available.

We'll have to see. Right now if you go to the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

...it does not mention the aviation variant and indicates that the specifications for the ships are still yet to be determined.

Click to expand...

There is a debate going on right now about building two additional LHA(R)'s and assigning these to the Military Sealift Command as a part of the pre-positioned groups they manage. Civilians would staff the ship's company, the Marine ground and air units would meet the ships en-route to combat.
If you read the PEO's website carefully, all that verbiage about expanded avaition facilities for LHA 6 means there will be no well deck on these ships.

Obi Wan Russell said:

I agree 100%. However as regards the Thai Navy and their carrier, I have long felt that for them, ownership of a carrier is far more important for reasons of national prestige than the ability to operate it sea for any protracted period. Thus I think it highly unlikely they would part with her anytime soon, as it would involve some 'loss of face', a very important concept in the far east. On the other hand, the Thais must have copies of the building plans (she was built in Spain but the Thais would have recived copies of the plans with the ship when she was delivered) and these could be just as valuable as the ship herself. The Chinese could do a deal with the Thais to buy copies of the plans, and 'buy time' aboard the ships itself for training much as they are reported to be doing with Brazil. This would provide the Thai Navy with the funding to keep the ship active more of the time, training PLAN deck crews and aircrew to provide them with the much needed experience. The Chinese would by this also gain experience in two different types of carrier very quickly, CTOL and STOVL, both of which are relevent to STOBAR operations most deem likely to be used in the future Chinese carriers. By this method the PLAN gains a training 'pipeline' for their own crews to gain realworld carrier experience form Navies that were trained by the west (Brazil recieved assistance from both France and the US, whilst the Thais were trained by Spain mostly) which would in effect allow them to leapfrog ahead of where they would be if they had to truly start from scratch.

Click to expand...

I would not bet money on the Thai's having any of the building plans for that ship. Something most people who are outside military procurement circles do not realize is that most military organizations do not own the drawings or the data rights to the majority of their systems, particularly the most recently purchased systems. Most military contracts do not include these data rights because they are so expensive to buy, and owning data rights is not always necessary if the manufacturer is also going to be the source of a system's maintenance. They are paid to build it and fix it, and often the contract is constructed to reward the vendor if their system meets or exceeds certain performance specifications such as mission availability or full mission capable rates, and sanction the vendor if these performance specs are not met. This is called Performance Based Logistics and it's mandated in the acquisition law of many nations now. When buying COTS, Commercial Off The Shelf, items most vendors will not sell you their data regardless of how much money you might wave at them. They consider that proprietary information and fear selling it to a military organization will allow it to become public knowledge. I work with this limitation daily.

Ambivalent said:

There is a debate going on right now about building two additional LHA(R)'s and assigning these to the Military Sealift Command as a part of the pre-positioned groups they manage. Civilians would staff the ship's company, the Marine ground and air units would meet the ships en-route to combat.
If you read the PEO's website carefully, all that verbiage about expanded avaition facilities for LHA 6 means there will be no well deck on these ships.

Click to expand...

I'm aware that there will be no well deck on the air variants of the LHA/R. I believe having more strike and close support capabilities will be a good thing, as long as there are enough Wasps and San Antonios around to take up the slack for heavy lifting.

The post you quoted from me was from some time ago. I believe, at least for the USS America LHA-6, that the principle configuartion of that vessel have been determined. The keel for the America was laid just yesterday in Pascagoula, Mississippi.

Ambivalent said:

I would not bet money on the Thai's having any of the building plans for that ship. Something most people who are outside military procurement circles do not realize is that most military organizations do not own the drawings or the data rights to the majority of their systems, particularly the most recently purchased systems. Most military contracts do not include these data rights because they are so expensive to buy, and owning data rights is not always necessary if the manufacturer is also going to be the source of a system's maintenance. They are paid to build it and fix it, and often the contract is constructed to reward the vendor if their system meets or exceeds certain performance specifications such as mission availability or full mission capable rates, and sanction the vendor if these performance specs are not met. This is called Performance Based Logistics and it's mandated in the acquisition law of many nations now. When buying COTS, Commercial Off The Shelf, items most vendors will not sell you their data regardless of how much money you might wave at them. They consider that proprietary information and fear selling it to a military organization will allow it to become public knowledge. I work with this limitation daily.

Click to expand...

All warships (and indeed all merchant ships) carry their own plans for damage control purposes. Whilst they may not be as detailed as those used by the builders, they will be good enough to kick start construction, especially if access to the ship itself is permitted to cross check details. It's not hard to work out the grade of steel used in hull plating, bulkheads and decking for example, cable runs will show up on the plans and can be checked and noted visually. The Chinese may not hqave built carriers before, but they have built complex warships, and a carrier is at heart a large complex warship. It's more a matter of the Chinese engineers learning how much of their existing knowledge is suitable and adaptable to carrier construction and what gaps in the knowledge and experience can be gained from examination of the plans and the ship itself. As an example of the similarities, the same yards and shipbuilders that built type 42 DDGs also built Invincible class CVSs, and technologically there is a geat deal of commonality between them. The Chinese have already had a chance to examine in great detail Russian and British carrier design (two Kiev class, Varyag and HMAS Melbourne) from which they will have been able to deduce much of what they need to about the specifics of carrier design, enough to produce realistic and workable carrier designs of their own. Of course the finished product wouldn't be a match for a Nimitz by any means, but it doesn't have to be. The Chinese are thinking in terms of decades, not years, so their final force levels and capabilities are still a long way from being realised.