Sukarno stays in power - what would Asutralia do?

[Archibald]

There is a bit of problem - what exactly a Clemenceau-like carrier, build in 1970s, would operate in terms of fighter aircraft? The F-8 Crusader production ended by 1965; the F-4 and F-14 are likely too heavy for medium-size carrier.

So the option for Australia seems to be either second-hand F-8G from US naval reserves, or pushing for Jaguar M (a prototype was build, and Australian interest might actually help it to won over Super Étendard)

Plus the Crusader was very hot, if not an outright killer. Out of 42 F-8E(FN) procured in 1964, the Aéronavale lost at least 16 in crashes. When they modernized 18 of them in the early 1990's, it was the bulk of the remaining fleet !

The Jaguar M, as flown, was a dog. Then again, it had Mk.102 Adours without the modulated reheat - it pioneered it actually, and passed it to the AdA Jaguars. From the Aéronavale testing on Foch, 1970-72 the Jaguar M would, first and firemost need a larger wing and the british Adour 104 with far more thrust - or the 106 eventually.

Well ok, let's start from there: bigger wing, modulated reheats, Adour Mk.104. Next: a radar in the nose, I think the indian Jaguars got the Super Etendard radar. Which was a derivate of the Mirage F1 Cyrano IV. Which in turn, would allow Matra Super 530F missiles on top of the Magic 2. There was a lot of room in the Jaguar nose, no reason it couldn't get a compact Cyrano radar, if the contemporary F1 and S.E got it.

Of course you could do the same from the british side of the fence: unlike the french they adopted the Mk.104 Adour, and there were Big Wing Jaguars projects like Big Wing Harriers. For the radars: Blue Fox, Blue Vixen. For the missile: AIM-9L and perhaps the Tornado ADV Skyflash. If the SHAR Blue Vixen handled AMRAAMs, it can certainly handle Skyflash.

 

[Dilandu]

Plus the Crusader was very hot, if not an outright killer. Out of 42 F-8E(FN) procured in 1964, the Aéronavale lost at least 16 in crashes. When they modernized 18 of them in the early 1990's, it was the bulk of the remaining fleet !

True. And it's limited to Sidewinders, so no real forward-attack capability outside AIM-9C model - at least till all-aspect Sidewinders would became available.

Well ok, let's start from there: bigger wing, Adour Mk.104. Next: a radar in the nose, I think the indian Jaguars got the Super Etendard radar. Which was a derivate of the Mirage F1 Cyrano IV. Which in turn, would allow Matra Super 530F missiles on top of the Magic 2. There was a lot of room in the Jaguar nose, no reason it couldn't get a compact Cyrano radar, if the contemporary F1 and S.E got it.

That's quite a good idea! Matra Super might be a bit too late, of course, but better late than never.

 

[Dilandu]

P.S. Just recalled, that OTL Jaguars were suggested to Australia in 1969. So Australia could quite reasonably join the Jaguar project - both as land-based strike aircraft, and carrier-based fighter/strike one.

 

[Archibald]

True. And it's limited to Sidewinders, so no real forward-attack capability outside AIM-9C model - at least till all-aspect Sidewinders would became available.

The upgraded Crusaders - F-8P - got Magic 2, all aspect. As for SARH, medium range: they could fire the old and clunky R-530, in IR and radar guided variants.
Getting the F1 Super 530F would be much more complicated as - once again - some kind of Cyrano radar would need to fit inside the Crouze bullet nose.
Well, by 1989 when Hornets were rejected thanks to Dassault Rafale lobbying (sigh) the initial F-8P plan was to graft the Mirage F1 radar and missiles on the old airframe. But it was too complicated and expensive, so the upgrade stopped at IR Magic 2.

 

[Dilandu]

The upgraded Crusaders - F-8P - got Magic 2, all aspect.

Magic-2 appeared only in 1986, i.e. for 1960-1970s timefraime it's not exactly a promising idea.

As for SARH, medium range: they could fire the old and clunky R-530, in IR and radar guided variants.

Hm, as far as I know, the French F-8 could not use SARH R-530; they lacked Cyrano radar, which they were designed to operate with. They used only IR R-530 version.

 

[Archibald]

Main problem for the Jaguar M was, it was kinda an orphan on both sides of the Channel.
On the british side: no more carriers, so no Jaguar M order.
On the french side: Jaguar was initially Breguet, not Dassault (who got AFVG, bad deal !). Yet despite having won the Jaguar Breguet was sinking, so the french government ordered Dassault to buy and merge them. It took four years (1967-71) and Dassault inherited the Jaguar... which they hated. They scorned it as the proverbial camel, horse designed by a committee. Plus, it competed with the last Mirage III, turned ground attack (the Mirage V and 50) and also the similar, radarless F1A designed for South Africa. So Dassault essentially dumped the Jaguar to the british with no regrets whatsoever.

 

[Dilandu]

Main problem for the Jaguar M was, it was kinda an orphan on both sides of the Channel.

True, but as export plane it was quite a sucsess - and provided a hefty profit)

 

[Archibald]

Considering Dassault influence on the french side of the channel, I'd suggest to take the British option. Cherry on the cake, they use Adour Mk.104 - and the Jaguar certainly needed more power.

 

[uk 75]

I had Moskva in mind for Indonesia as an appropriate prestige replacement for Irian.
India got a nuclear submarine from Russia much later than your period but might be a possible one.

 

[Dilandu]

So let's summarize the basic idea; to replace HMAS Melbourne by the late 1970s with a French-build Clemenceau-class derivative, with the aim to have an air group of large-wing Jaguar-M fighters (capable of using the SARH missiles) and likely the venerable A-4 as strike aircraft.

UPD: Just learned from Archibald, that French F-8 were actually refitted to use SARH version of R530, so the situation with deck fighters could be greatly simplified.

 

[Archibald]

@Dilandu You picked my curiosity so I've checked what kind of R530 did the Crusaders carried - and they carried both, literally: one per side ! (unlike the Sidewinders, only two R530 could be carried below the cockpit)
Infrared of course, but also the SARH variant: the APQ-104 radar was adapted to it. Seems it was an upgraded APQ-94 found on the F-8E, which makes sense as the french planes were F-8E with a few goodies, and F-8E were the last "fresh" Crusaders in 1965.

Vought F8U/F-8 Crusader

Now back to the Jaguar M : you could easily fit R530s on it with a basic radar, but the price to pay is, they were as bad and unreliable as, say, an AIM-7A-E Sparrow of Vietnam fame. Super 530F is like AIM-7F : the first valuable variant.

 

[Dilandu]

I had Moskva in mind for Indonesia as an appropriate prestige replacement for Irian.

Yes, but Moskva was... too useful for Soviet Navy to sell her. At least not well into 1990s, when the first of 1143.5 carriers would become available.

 

[Dilandu]

@Dilandu You picked my curiosity so I've checked what kind of R530 did the Crusaders carried - and they carried both, literally: one per side ! (unlike the Sidewinders, only two R530 could be carried below the cockpit)
Infrared of course, but also the SARH variant: the APQ-104 radar was adapted to it. Seems it was an upgraded APQ-94 found on the F-8E, which makes sense as the french planes were F-8E with a few goodies, and F-8E were the last "fresh" Crusaders in 1965.

Hm! I really did not know that! Thanks for the data!

In that case, the situation likely would be much simplified; the RAN could order surplus F-8E from USN reserves, and let the French repair and refit them to use SARH missiles.

 

[Archibald]

Some additional info about second generation french carriers.
-After PA58 and PA59 not funded in 1960, that decade is mostly toast, after all Clemenceau and Foch are brand new.
-France return to carriers (which kickstarted the CdG is September 1980, then in February 1986) starts with PH75, in 1970.
-PH75 is a 18 000 tons Invincible / Garibaldi / Asturias lookalike, early on with the F67 frigates propulsion, then going nuclear from 1972.
-Clem and Foch are still young, the one that needs a successor in plain old Arromanches (a half-brother of Sidney and Melbourne !)
-Arromanches (gone early 1974) however is a swiss knife, multipurpose carrier, and so is PH75: hospital, asw, training, assault..
-a full blown Clemenceau / Foch successor (PA75) don't start before September 1980 and inherit PH75 nuclear propulsion. The legacy of two oil shocks that ruined French economic growth (les 30 glorieuses)
-PH75 / PA75 pivot.

So, if you play smart...

-Australia asking for a Clemenceau or PA58 / CdG size carrier (30 000 - 45 000 tons) sometimes in the 1960's could work as some kind of return of (d'uh) PA58 or PA59, lost in 1960.

-Australia asking for a Clemenceau or PA58 / CdG size carrier (30 000 - 45 000 tons) sometimes in the 1970's could accelerate the shift from PH75 to PA75 or simply nix the PH75 entirely. Which may butterfly the shift to nuclear, happened somewhere in 1972-73.

And I swear (@Jemiba ?) that France offered a Clemenceau design carrier to Spain in the 1960's, before they went for Independance-class Dedalo & AV-8A Harriers, in 1967. And SCS Asturias later.

 

[Dilandu]

-Australia asking for a Clemenceau or PA58 / CdG size carrier (30 000 - 45 000 tons) sometimes in the 1970's could accelerate the shift from PH75 to PA75 or simply nix the PH75 entirely. Which may butterfly the shift to nuclear, happened somewhere in 1972-73.

The second scenario is more likely, IMHO. In 1960s Melbourne still have enough life in her, and replacement would start to be seriously considered later.

 

[Archibald]

And Melbourne, like Sydney, is Arromanches sistership. So the needs are somewhat converging, with Arromanches retirement early 1974. How about that.

 

[Archibald]

Thinking about it, we need an alternative history where somebody is smart enough circa 1962 to tackle the Colossus / Majestic replacement problem - also the Independance class for Spain. France, Great Britain or the United States: whatever it takes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1942_Design_Light_Fleet_Carrier#Foreign_service

Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Canada

India

Netherlands

Add Spain and Italy to the tally, and you have a market...

 

[Pioneer]

Thinking about it, we need an alternative history where somebody is smart enough circa 1962 to tackle the Colossus / Majestic replacement problem - also the Independance class for Spain. France, Great Britain or the United States: whatever it takes.
...

I think at the end of the day, specifically in the case of Australia at least, the rusted on notion of her cheapness of the Majestic-class, which gives impetuous to her continually extended life well beyond useability could/would have only been broken if she'd been used in combat during the VietNam War. Such combat would have irrufutably shown her limitations (lets face it, this was always appreciated by the RAN) in a serious manner that would have embarrassed or at least highlighted to the purse string bearers - the politicians/government, that HMAS Melbourne indeed needed replacement. Add to this appreciated shortfalls of HMAS Melbourne, the increasing threat and capabilities of Indonesia in this scenario.

In essence, from a political aspect, if it's props are turning and planes can just barely take off and land, that constitutes a degree of geopolitical prestige.....which has annoys the shit out of me, especially when one thinks today it's the utter reverse, where politicians are more than willing to spend stupendous amounts of money on massive Destroyer, sub and Frigate program that are literally off the board, risky and eveytime over budget, late IOC and problematic in service....

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Rule of cool]

I think everyone is getting a bit carried away with the bombers and how the RAN needs a big carrier to combat them.

We're not talking the AVMF here, Indonesia received 26 Tu16s and Iraq and Libya received 14 Tu 22s so I imagein that's how many Indonesia will receive. Kh-22 that the Tu22 could carry were not exported, and IIUC the Tu22 did not carry the KSR-2 or KSR-5. These bombers will not be focused on the Melbourne alone, they will be the only means with which Indonesia cas strike Australia, so will likely be heavily engaged in that task, while also trying to avoid being targeted by the F111s and SAS.

By the time the Melbourne needs o be replaced in the mid 80s the RAAF will have also acquired a Mirage replacement, which even if it is still the F/A18A the RAAF will be able to put much greater pressure on these bombers at home. Further, the RAN will have acquired more Standard SAM ships to defend the fleet.

Perhaps most importantly, this scenario occurs after the Australian Government has already decided to keep the Melbourne for another 15+ years. During the process they looked at other options, including a CVA01 and an Essex class and rejected them, so for better or worse the RAN is stuck with the Melbourne during the 70s.

 

[Pioneer]

I think everyone is getting a bit carried away with the bombers and how the RAN needs a big carrier to combat them.

We're not talking the AVMF here, Indonesia received 26 Tu16s and Iraq and Libya received 14 Tu 22s so I imagein that's how many Indonesia will receive. Kh-22 that the Tu22 could carry were not exported, and IIUC the Tu22 did not carry the KSR-2 or KSR-5. These bombers will not be focused on the Melbourne alone, they will be the only means with which Indonesia cas strike Australia, so will likely be heavily engaged in that task, while also trying to avoid being targeted by the F111s and SAS.
By the time the Melbourne needs o be replaced in the mid 80s the RAAF will have also acquired a Mirage replacement, which even if it is still the F/A18A the RAAF will be able to put much greater pressure on these bombers at home. Further, the RAN will have acquired more Standard SAM ships to defend the fleet.

Perhaps most importantly, this scenario occurs after the Australian Government has already decided to keep the Melbourne for another 15+ years. During the process they looked at other options, including a CVA01 and an Essex class and rejected them, so for better or worse the RAN is stuck with the Melbourne during the 70s.

Fair call Rule of cool, I concur with your analogy. Especially when one considers that Australia wouldn't have the balls to do a 1967-Israeli like pre-emptive strike against Indonesian bomber bases.

Some time ago, I came to the conclusion that for the cost and lack of political support of replacing HMAS Melbourne with a CTOL carrier design, that the ADF would be far better off putting its money into replacing its A-5C+ Vigilante's with maturely developed F-111E's/P-3C Orion's/P-3 AEW fleet supported by a substantially sized air refuelling tanker fleet, which would be a very powerful and flexible defensive and or strike force....
For a carrier battle group is a massive cost in terms of purchase, maintance cost. While at the same time very vulnerable militaraly and politically. Let's face it, it's much easier for a nation to loose 10-20 aircraft and perhaps a hundred airman than say an aircraft carrier with 1,500 crew, which has to sail into harmsway to conduct its operations.....


Regards
Pioneer