WI: The Commonwealth Navy

In the 60s NZ purchased 4 frigates, even the most enthusiastic participation in a great-value-for-money Commonwealth navy isn't going to stretch 4 frigates into 3 light carriers. Today NZ has 2 frigates, 2 OPVs and an Army support ship. It might stretch an LST or something but if OTL is any guide it won't be running a carrier. I can easily see Australia and Canada operating surplus Centaur or Hermes, Canada possibly even going bigger due to its population/wealth advantage over Australia although where it would get this bigger ship is a mystery.
 
One possible back door might be financial/economic interest.

If the members agree that all naval purchases, or perhaps all types of military purchases, will come from their own industries this might give encourage such cooperation while creating business and union voices in favor of continuing and even expanding such a program.

The problem is that this would have to cover all the needs of the members as one carrier can't be in two places at once so perhaps if it starts with smaller ships and proves to save enough money that a larger number can be purchased...
 
One possible back door might be financial/economic interest.

If the members agree that all naval purchases, or perhaps all types of military purchases, will come from their own industries this might give encourage such cooperation while creating business and union voices in favor of continuing and even expanding such a program.

The problem is that this would have to cover all the needs of the members as one carrier can't be in two places at once so perhaps if it starts with smaller ships and proves to save enough money that a larger number can be purchased...

Definately - the benefits of joint development aswell as being able to domestically produce both cheapens development costs as well as boosts industry.

However, I can't see Canada or Australia operating two Malta sized ships - that would stretch their armed forces budget beyons the limit. new Zealand is the same - defo not three helicopter carriers. What I can see is this:

1960:

RN: 3 Audacious Class Carriers, 2 Implacable Class Carriers (rebuilt), a number of Majestics converted to Commando Carriers.
RCN: 2 Centaur Class Carriers
RAN: 2 Centaur Class Carriers

By the 1990's the fleet has been extensivly modernised and it's aircraft capable vessels are:

RN: 3 CVA-01 Type Fleet Carriers, 2 Landing Helicopter Dock's (30,000-34,000 tons), 4 Albion Type Landing Platform Docks.
RCN: 1 CVA-01 Type Fleet Carrier, 1 Landing Helicopter Dock (30,000-34,000 tons), 2 Albion Type Landing Platform Docks.
RAN: 1 CVA-01 Type Fleet Carrier, 1 Landing Helicopter Dock (30,000-34,000 tons), 2 Albion Type Landing Platform Docks.

Roughly, by 2000 this means that the combined navy has a strenghth of:

5 Carrier Battle Groups
4 Amphibious Assault Groups.

While this goes on, New Zealand operates a modest (but still bigger) fleet of escorts and support ships in conjunction with Australia. Other remaining core Commowealth areas, such as the West Indes, Singapore, Malta and Hongkong, depending upon their status operate a small fleet of patrol frigates, or at least fund them and freeing up CANZUK ships for other duties.

Furthermore, perhaps a unified, i.e. jointly funded and controlled Royal fleet Auxilliary can slo spread the costs of supporting these ships around the World?

Russell
 

Sachyriel

Banned
QUESTION: How do you respond to comments made by the Americans that the Commonwealth navy has more racism than the USN? With such different cultures between the nations in it, incidents have risen dramatically, and their comments have merit. Will this problem be solved in the future?

[cmon guys, answer!]
 
QUESTION: How do you respond to comments made by the Americans that the Commonwealth navy has more racism than the USN? With such different cultures between the nations in it, incidents have risen dramatically, and their comments have merit. Will this problem be solved in the future?

[cmon guys, answer!]

"While statistically racial incidents within the Royal Navy* are some 10% higher than those in the USN, violent incidents and staff complaints about other service personelle are over 35% LESS than those in the USN.

While racism in any of its forms is never acceptable, it must be remebered that the Royal Navy is far more multicultural than it's American counterpart. Men and women from all parts of the Commowealth (not just the Commonwealth Union) serve in Her Majesties armed forces, some 54 nations in all. The RN is a more diverse and mutlicultural insitution than the USN and therefore it must be expected that some instances of racial discrimination will occur, no matter how unfortunate. The Royal Navy and Commonwealth Ministry of Defence are commited to stamping out all forms of racism in the Military but this is an ongoing process and will, inevitably take time to deal with fully"

*The navy in general, although still subdivided into RN, RCN, RAN, ect, is generally just referred to as the "Royal Navy" as was the case prior to the War.

Russell
 
I've been thinking about the proposed carrier fleet and don't believe it would have been worthwhile modernising the armoured carriers. In real life the Victorious was hugely over budget and already obsolescent by the time she recommissioned (6 times the estimated cost). What I would propose would be for the admiralty to not build the Majestic class but go straight to the Centaurs and the Planned Audacious Class. The Malta's I'm sorry to say I can't see surviving the post war cuts, they were just too expensive in both finacial and resource terms.

The Colossus class would be used as OTL to plug the gaps in the fleet untill more capable ships were available.

By 1960 I see the Fleet as:-

UK 4 Audacious Class CV. 2 Batch 2 Centaur Class (otl Hemes) CVL
2 Colossus Class Commando Carriers.

Canada & Australia 1 Batch 1(otl Centaur) & 1 Batch 2 Centaur CVL each.

Common Reserve 2 Batch 1 Centaur CVL. 1 Colossus CVL maintainance ship & 1 Colossus class Commando Carrier.

Rest of the Colossus CVLs sold off as real life.

While the Ark Royal proved that properly modernised Audacious Class ships could operate Buccanniers and Phantoms I would sugest for Fighters using smaller aircraft such as the F8, or develop the Buccannier as a true multirole aircraft. Use Ganets as AEW and whirlwinds for anti submarine and plane guard.

For the Centaurs air Groups I would sugest A4 Skyhawks, a smilar sized fighter and Ganet AEW aircraft with Wasp helicopters for anti submarine and rescue work
 
Hmm, the Skyhawk is a somewhat small and incapable aircraft and the Buccaneer is too inflexible to be used as a multirole fighter. Perhaps a better option would be to have them all use the Sea Vixen, or better yet use a carrier capable version of the Hawker Hunter (saves money) as their main multirole fighter. that in turn can be replaced by a mutlirole version of the hawker p.1103 in the mid 60's.

Russell
 
The problem here is increasingly different priorities. Really I can only see New Zealand being keen on military integration with Britain, Australia I doubt and really don't see Canada buying it.
 
Sea Vixins and Buccaneers are fine for the larger Audacious class carriers, thou by the mid 60s the Vixin will need replacing. Both of these aircraft can with difficulty be operated in small numbers from the Centaur class but were really too large for them which is why I would choose skyhawk for the attack role. A Sea Hunter would be a reasonable fighter for the time but it was purely a day fighter so you're looking at modifying it not just for carrier use but also for all weather operations, the naval fighter would therefor have to be based on the two seat trainer version. Another option might be an enlaged Gnat built arround an afterburning Avon engine, but that also has problems as the Gnat was notoriously difficult for the ground crews to work on. There were plans to develop the Buccaneer as a fighter but they were killed by the defence cuts. Having both fighter and attack versions of the Buccaneer would be attractive to both the treasury and the navy due to the commonality of spare parts. Another possibility for a fighter could be the experimental Fairey Delta 2. It was proposed to convert this to an operational type and it should have been possible to operate it from the smaller carriers.
 
Last edited:
Top