The Navy Vol_67_No_2 Apr 2005 - Navy League of Australia

The Navy Vol_67_No_2 Apr 2005 - Navy League of Australia

APR–JUN 67 NO. 2$5.45 (including GST)The Magazine of the Navy League of AustraliaTime toPut TheCat OutPiracy onthe RiseFremantle’sWartimeInfernoTomcatTalesAustralia’s Leading Naval Magazine Since 1938

OUR BUSINESS IS ABOUTFLOATING GREAT IDEAS.ADI1364Right now, ADI is undertaking the most sophisticated enhancement of warships seen inAustralia – the upgrade of the Royal Australian Navy’s guided missile frigates. HMASSydney is the first of the warships to have its combat system upgraded, which includesthe installation of a vertical launch missile system. All of this has been possible becauseof ADI’s technology resources and the proven skills and capabilities of our people. ADI’sexperience in naval prime contracting, ship and combat system design and integration,and building the Huon Class minehunters, has given us the skills for future projects likeamphibious ships and air warfare destroyers. For more about Australia’s leading defencecontractor, visit our website today,

THE NAVYVolume 67 No 2ContentsTIME TO PUT THE CAT OUT Page 4TOMCAT TALESBy David Karonidis Page 10PIRACY, A TWENTY FIRST CENTURYPROBLEM ON THE RISEBy Paul Johnstone Page 22FREMANTLE’S WARTIME INFERNOBy Vic Jeffery Page 26Regular FeaturesFrom the Crow’s Nest Page 2From our Readers Page 2Flash Traffic Page 12Observations Page 20Hatch, Match & Dispatch Page 30Product review Page 31League Policy Statement Page 32The opinions or assertions expressed in ‘THE NAVY’ are those ofthe authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Council of theNavy League of Australia, the Editor of ‘THE NAVY’, the RANor the Department of Defence. The editor welcomes correspondence,photographs and contributions and will assume that by makingsubmissions, contributors agree that all material may be usedfree of charge, edited and amended at the editor’s discretion.No part of this publication may be reproduced without thepermission of the editor.Front cover: An F-14B Tomcat of VF-32 about to launch off the USNcarrier USS HARRY S. TRUMAN. The F-14 is about to retire fromUSN service despite a recent modernisation to expand its role from airsuperiority to include strike, as seen by this Tomcat equipped with two500lb. laser guided bombs on the belly pylons which normally carriedthe impressive AIM-54 Phoenix missile. (USN)The NavyAll letters and contributions to:The Office of The EditorTHE NAVYNavy League of AustraliaGPO Box 1719Sydney, NSW 2001E-mail to: editorthenavy@hotmail.comAll Subscription and Membership enquiries to:The Hon Secretary,Navy League of Australia, NSW DivisionGPO Box 1719,Sydney, NSW 2001Advertising enquiries (only) to:Mr James Rickards0419 731 371, e-mail: james@rickards.netDeadline for next edition 5 May, 2005The Navy League of AustraliaFEDERAL COUNCILPatron in Chief: His Excellency, The Governor General.President: Graham M Harris, RFD.Vice-Presidents: RADM A.J. Robertson, AO, DSC, RAN (Rtd): John Bird,CDRE H.J.P. Adams, AM, RAN (Rtd). CAPT H.A. Josephs, AM, RAN (Rtd)Hon. Secretary: Ray Corboy, PO Box 2063, Moorabbin, Vic 3189.Telephone: (03) 9598 7162, Fax: (03) 9598 7099, Mobile: 0419 872 268NEW SOUTH WALES DIVISIONPatron: Her Excellency, The Governor of New South Wales.President: R O Albert, AO, RFD, RD.Hon. Secretary: Elizabeth Sykes, GPO Box 1719, Sydney, NSW 2001Telephone: (02) 9232 2144, Fax: (02) 9232 8383.VICTORIA DIVISIONPatron: His Excellency, The Governor of Victoria.President: J M Wilkins, RFD * .Hon. Secretary: Ray Gill, PO Box 1303, Box Hill, Vic 3128Telephone: (03) 9884 6237, Fax: (03) 9884 4482.Email: Secretary: LCDR Tom Kilburn MBE, RFD, VRDTelephone: (03) 9560 9927, PO Box 1303 Box Hill VIC 3128.QUEENSLAND DIVISIONPatron: Her Excellency, The Governor of Queensland.President: I M Fraser, OAM.Hon. Secretary: Matthew Rowe, PO Box 13402, George Street Post Shop,Brisbane, Qld 4003. Telephone: 0405 734 437State Branches:Cairns: A Cunneen, PO Box 1009, Cairns, Qld 4870.Telephone: (07) 4054 1195Townsville: I McDougall, PO Box 1478, Townsville, Qld 4810.Telephone: (07) 4772 4588Bundaberg: I Lohse, PO Box 5141, Bundaberg West, Qld 4670.Telephone: (07) 4151 2210.SOUTH AUSTRALIAN DIVISIONPatron: Her Excellency, The Governor of South Australia.President: Alan Preskett, RFD, 15 Sleeps Hill Drive, Panorama SA 5041.Hon. Secretary: Miss J E Gill, GPO Box 1529, Adelaide, SA 5001.Telephone: (08) 8272 6435 (H)TASMANIAN DIVISIONPatron: Mr Tony LeePresident: Mrs J M Cooper, 42 Amy Road, Launceston, Tas. 7250Telephone and Fax: (03) 6344 1531.Hon. Secretary: Mrs Lois Lanham, 67 Hardwicke Street, Launceston,Tas. 7250Telephone: (03) 6344 3245.State Branches:Launceston: Mr A Lanham, 67 Hardwicke Street, Launceston, Tas. 7250Telephone: (03) 6344 3245.Ulverstone: Mr D Cunningham, P.O. Box 93, Ulverstone, Tas. 7315Telephone: (03) 6425 2164.Devonport: Mr P O’Leary, 11 Tasman Place, Devonport, Tas 7310.Telephone: (03) 6424 5064.Burnie: Mr G Davis, 40 Cherry Street, Burnie, Tas 7320.Telephone: (03) 6431 4023.WESTERN AUSTRALIAN DIVISIONPatron: His Excellency, The Governor of Western Australia.President: T C Vincent.Hon. Secretary: Trevor Vincent, 3 Prosser Way, Myaree, WA 6154Telephone: (08) 9330 5129, Mob: 0417 933 780, Fax: (08) 9330 5129,Email: ADVISORY COUNCILF. Geoffrey Evans, OBE, VRD, ChairmanNeil Baird, Chairman Baird PublicationsWm. Bolitho, AM.Vice Admiral David Leach, AC CBE, LVO, RAN (Rtd)Lachlan Payne, CEO Australian Shipowners’ AssociationVice Admiral Sir Richard Peek, KBE, CB, DSC, RAN (Rtd)John Strang, Chairman Strang International Pty LtdCorporate MembersThe Australian Shipowners’ AssociationHawker De Haviland LimitedComputer Science of Australia Pty LtdStrang International Pty LtdTHE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 1

FROM THE CROW’S NESTThe recent devastation wrought on the coastlines of ournorthern neighbours has served to highlight the emerging21st century role of the military, and focus many on the realpossessor of weapons of mass destruction, Mother Nature.Despite Australia being one of the first nations to reactit seemed from the early stages that the US Navy, in theform of the aircraft carrier USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT,contributed significantly at a time when it was most needed inorder to save lives. The flexibility of the aircraft carrier, andNavies in general, for this sort of work has never been doubtedby many of the world’s military experts. THEODOREROOSEVELT’s aircraft, specifically its helicopters, werevital. As were the ‘hotel’ services of the ship which were ableto produce large volumes of clean drinking water for the manywho had lost access to such a simple life giving necessity.Many Australian Parliamentary memories do not extend tothe devastation wrought upon Darwin during the seventies byCyclone Tracey (coincidently at a similar time of the year) andthe disaster relief effort following. One of the real workhorsesof the relief effort was the much-maligned Australia aircraftcarrier HMAS MELBOURNE. Again, the aircraft carrier’sflexibility came to the fore in a role it was not designed for.But does this lesson, and the recent lesson off Indonesia, stillring loud in Australia?Australia’s two new helicopter carriers (i.e. the ADF’samphibious capability requirement), while not being in thesame league as the THEODORE ROOSEVELT, will be verycapable at conducting disaster relief operations and willprove themselves vital to our own and the region’s disasterrelief efforts in the future. The ships will not only provideand support helicopter operations but contain full hospital,command and communication facilities and have the abilityto carry numerous military vehicles such as heavy engineerequipment. This capability is currently lacking in the ADF,which will be brought into the 21st century in more ways thanone with the introduction of these two ships. Thus, let us hopethat party politics and self proclaimed ‘Strategic Think Tanks’do not succeed in scuttling this vital national capability in theinterests of notoriety in order to boost profits.By ThemistoclesThe US Navy’s USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN was one of the first naval unitson the scene and provided helicopter evacuation, food supply drops andeven transported fresh water in plastic bottles made by the ship’s own waterpurification system. Truly a great disaster relief capability. (USN)FROM OUR READERSAN OPEN LETTER TO VICE ADMIRALCHRIS RITCHIE, CHIEF OF NAVY.Dear Admiral RitchieDuring the last federal election campaign, Prime MinisterHoward stated that two more Armidale class patrol boatswould be built to bring the class to 14 ships. With this in mindI would like to put forward a request that the following namesbe considered.They are MURCHISON and VOYAGER. I understand thatthese names break with the current line of naming the patrolboats after regional cities. Yet both names have a rich historywith the RAN and both should be seriously considered.For those unaware the first HMAS MURCHISON(K-442/F-442) was a Modified RIVER (BAY) class frigatebuilt in Australia by Evans Deakin and Company Limitedat Brisbane in Queensland, launched in October 1944and commissioned in December 1945. Named after theMurchison River in the North West of WA, which risesin the Robinson Range and flows into the Indian Oceanat Gantheaume Bay. HMAS MURCHISON served withdistinction during the Korean War. Known as the ‘Baronof the Han’, MURCHISON engaged in several close quartergunnery duels with Communist artillery units duringmissions deep up the Han River from July to September 1952.MURCHISON was decommissioned in January 1956. Forher exploits in Korea alone, the name MURCHISON andher motto “With Undaunted Heart” should be revived withinthe RAN.The first HMAS VOYAGER was a W class destroyer thatwas commissioned into the RAN in 1933. VOYAGER I sawservice in the Second World War in both the Mediterraneanand Pacific Theatres. Her battle honours are Calabria 1940,Libya 1940-41 (where VOYAGER made the Tobruk ferryrun 11 times), Greece 1941, Crete 1941, Mediterranean1941, and Pacific 1942 before the destroyer was run agroundand abandoned on Betano beach on Timor and scuttled inSeptember 1942.As is commonly known the second VOYAGER was aDarling class destroyer (D-04). Built in Sydney, she wascommissioned in 1957 and served with the RAN until theaccident with HMAS MELBOURNE (R-21) off Jervis Bay inFebruary 1964 with the loss of eighty-two sailors.Both VOYAGERS’ have made history with the RAN andit is still a worthy name for a fighting ship. With the motto“Where Destiny Calls” naming a patrol boat VOYAGER wouldhonour both ships, as well as those lost during the accident.I am sure others will have thoughts on these names, or havetheir own ideas. For myself, I would like to see these namesabove all the others onto our fighting ships, the Armidale classbeing the most appropriate ships available at this time.Ian JohnsonNaval Historian and author.Fremantle, WA2 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

Sea Power Ashore and in the Air2005 King-Hall Naval History ConferenceDPS FEB049/05THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 3

Time to Put the Cat OutThe F-14 TomcatThe US Navy is about to retire its front line carrier borne fighter the F-14 Tomcat. A Stalwart Warrior of the ColdWar the Tomcat has been in service for 30 years and undergone three major modifications to improve its lethality andlongevity. Sadly, funds for continual upgrades are no longer available with the F-14 being replaced by the new BoeingF/A-18 E/F Super Hornet. THE NAVY takes a look at the history of the Tomcat, with a few cat tales as well.DEVELOPMENTIn the late 1950s, the US Navy was interested in obtainingan interceptor to protect carrier battle groups from adversarystrike aircraft. For this the Douglas aircraft company proposedan aircraft named the F6D-1 ‘Missileer’. The Missileer wasto carry an advanced radar and eight large Bendix AAM-M-10 Eagle long-range airto-airmissiles (AAMs)to knock downlumbering missile truck that would not be capable of close-indogfighting, and the Eagle missile program faltered as well.The Missileer was cancelled in December 1960. However,the work on the advanced radar was not abandoned, and theUS Navy still retained the requirement for a fleet-defenceinterceptor.In the early 1960s, American Defense Secretary RobertS. McNamara wanted to promote commonality of equipmentbetween different US armed services, and he believed thatthe Navy could fill their requirement for a fleet-defenceinterceptor with a navalised version of the US Air Force’svariable geometry or swing-wing General Dynamics F-111A.Few thought this was a good idea since the F-111 was a big,heavy machine, not all that adaptable to carrier operation, butMcNamara insisted.The US Navy never became enthusiastic about theintruders at distancesof up to 205 kilometres (110nm), before theycould get close enough to be a real threat.The whole idea was at least a bit ahead of its time andthe development program didn’t go well. The Missileer itselfbegan to look unpromising, since it was envisioned as aF-111B, as their variant was designated. The prototypeperformed its initial flight on 18 May 1965, with flight trialsleading to a Navy report in October 1965 that concluded theThe initial prototype of the F-14A performing its first flight on21 December 1970 (Grumman)The Tomcat’s impressive array of weaponry, Sidewinders to Sparrows toPhoenix to bombs. The D model would be known as the Bombcat due to thespecialised air-surface precision guided munitions it could emply.4 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

Two of the Tomcat’s air-air weapons. From top to bottom; the AIM-9LSidewinder heat-seeking AAM on a side mounting off the main under wingpylon and a AIM-7 Sparrow semi-active radar homing AAM.The heart of the Tomcat arsenal, the AIM-54 Phoenix AAM. The Tomcatcould carry six Phoenix which could be used to engage six targetssimultaneously at 100nm (185km) and in fire-and-forget mode.F-111B was highly unsatisfactory. Attempts were made tofix the problems, but it was impossible. Congress cut fundsin May 1968, work was halted in July, and the program wasformally axed in December, after the construction of a total ofseven F-111B prototypes and evaluation aircraft.The Grumman company had actuallybeen responsible fordevelopingthe F-111B as a subcontractor for GeneralDynamics. In January 1966, following the highlynegative US Navy report on the F-111B, at the Navy’srequest Grumman began work on a set of designs for amore effective carrier-based interceptor, with the companydesignation of G-303, derived from their F-111B work.Grumman submitted their finalist proposals to the Navy inOctober 1967.In July 1968, when the F-111B was clearly dead, theUS Navy began a new competition for a fleet defenceinterceptor under the VFX program. Grumman submitted theG-303 against proposals from North American, LTV, GeneralDynamics, and McDonnell Douglas. Grumman, which tendedto have a leg up in any competition for the Navy as thecompany had been supplying excellent aircraft to the servicefor decades, won the award in January 1969. The projectwas assigned high priority. The Navy was worried about newSoviet threat aircraft like the MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’, and the longdelays in fielding an improved fighter that piled up from thecancelled Missileer and F-111B programs left the admiralsvery worried.Navy officials inspected a mockup of the definitive G-303concept in the spring of 1969. Although some of the earlierconcepts had featured fixed wings, the mockup used swingwings.An initial development contract for six prototype andevaluation YF-14A Tomcats, as the type was designated, wasawarded to Grumman that same year. Incidentally, the nameTomcat was selected partly to pay tribute to Navy AdmiralsThomas Connolly and Thomas Moorer. Connolly was such astrong supporter of the program that the aircraft was referredto as Tom’s Cat, and the name stuck. The contractwas later modified to fund twelve YF-14As.The initial prototype F-14A performedits first flight on 21 December1970. Initial deliveriesAn F-14D Tomcat of VF-103‘The Jolly Rogers’ off theUSS JOHN F. KENNDEY on their final deployment. (USN)of production Tomcats to the Navy took place in October1972, with the aircraft arriving at Naval Air Station (NAS)Miramar in California. The Tomcat entered operationalservice with Navy fighter squadrons VF-1 and VF-2 on boardthe carrier USS ENTERPRISE in September 1974. TheUS Navy eventually acquired 478 F-14As, including the 12development aircraft, with the type replacing the McDonnellDouglas F-4 Phantom and Vought F-8 Crusader in US Navyservice.THE F-14AThe F-14A is a big aircraft, with tandem seating for a pilotin front and Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) in back both onMartin-Baker GRU-7A ‘zero-zero (zero speed, zero altitude)’ejection seats. The cockpit layouts are specialized for the pilotand RIO, and have little duplication.The variable-geometry wing scheme incorporates anumber of advanced features. One is the fit of glove vanes,small triangular foreplanes mounted in the wing gloves thatare automatically extended at high speeds as the main wingsare swept back, compensating for any change in aircraft pitchcaused by the change in wing geometry.The wing sweep is controlled by a Mach sweep programmerthat automatically moves the wings through the range of 20THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 5

degrees to 68 degrees sweep, as dictated by flight requirements.The pilot can also set the sweep manually, and can select aspecial 55-degree mode for ground attack. The wings can beset back 75 degrees to an over sweep position, overlapping thehorizontal tailplane, for carrier-deck storage.The F-14A follows in the Grumman tradition of buildingrugged aircraft. It is built primarily of aircraft aluminium alloyand titanium, with selective use of graphite-epoxy compositeassemblies. The aircraft was initially powered by twin Pratt &Whitney (P&W) TF30-P-412 turbofans with 54.9 kN (5,600kgp / 12,350 lbf) dry thrust and 93 kN (9,480 kgp / 20,900lbf) afterburning thrust each. The TF30 was one of the itemsinherited from the F-111B.The engines are fitted in separate housings underneath thefuselage. The major rationale for this configuration was thatit ensured adequate airflow to the engines, which had been amajor problem for the F-111. It also gives maintenance crewsdirect access to the engines and makes engine replacementeasier, though it has a few drawbacks as well. Each engine hasa wedge-style inlet with a variable ramp in the throat, and iscanted slightly away from the fuselage. A single external tankwith a capacity of 1,011 litres (267 US gallons) can becarried under each engine pod. A retractable in-flightrefuelling probe is fitted to the right side of the nose.The Tomcat’s distinctive weapon is the big HughesAIM-54 Phoenix AAM with a range of 185 kilometres(100 nautical miles) and a fully active radar seeker, allowingthe missile to perform its terminal-phase attack ona target without requiring that the Tomcat to keepthe target illuminated with radar. In principle, itgave the Tomcat the ability to destroy intruders atvery long range. In principle, the Tomcat, which is theonly aircraft to ever carry the Phoenix operationally, cancarry six Phoenix missiles, with four carriedin the fuselage tunnel between theengines and two on wing pylons.However, the Phoenix, nicknamedthe “Buffalo” because of its size, is soheavy that a Tomcat can’t carry six of them if theaircraft is to land on a carrier. No such restrictionexists if the Tomcat is operating off a land base. Anotherproblem with carrying six Phoenix missiles isthat the drag of the two extra missiles onthe wing glove pylons cuts into aircraftperformance and flight endurance.In practice, a full armament load usuallyconsists of four Phoenix missiles on the tunnelstations, plus two AIM-7 Sparrow semi-active radarhoming (SARH) medium-range AAMs and two AIM-9Sidewinder heat seeking short-range AAMs, for a total ofeight AAMs. A Sparrow and a Sidewinder are carried on aspecial dual rack mounted on each wing glove pylon, with aSparrow on the bottom of the rack and a Sidewinder to theoutside.In the A model the Phoenix and Sparrow are controlled bya Hughes AN/AWG-9 radar and the AN/AWG-15 fire controlcomputer. The AN/AWG-9 gives the Tomcat a wide-area airsurveillancecapability, with a range of 160 kilometres (100miles) or more. The radar can search while tracking 24 targets,and engage six targets simultaneously.Early F-14As were fitted with a steerable AN/ALR-23Infrared Search and Track (IRST) sensor under the nose thatcould be slaved to the radar or used independently. In theearly 1980s, the IRST was replaced in Tomcat productionwith the Northrop AN/AXX-1 Television Camera Set (TCS),a steerable daylight video camera with a telephoto lens, andthe TCS was retrofitted to the earlier F-14As. TCS allows aTomcat to inspect a target at long range before engaging it,at least in daylight/clear weather conditions. The inability todetermine if a target was a friend or a foe had been one of thelimiting factors for use of beyond visual range (BVR) AAMssuch as the Sparrow in Vietnam.The Tomcat features a built-in General Electric (GE)M-61A1 six-barrelled Gatling-type 20mm cannon, with anammunition store of 675 rounds. The cannon is fitted underthe left side of the cockpit.The F-14A saw its first combat in 1981 duringconfrontations between the US and Libya. Colonel Khaddafihad declared the Gulf of Sidra, bounded by Libya’s coast inthe Mediterranean, as Libyan waters, and in defiance in thesummer of 1981 President Reagan ordered the US Navy tosteam into the gulf and dare Khaddafi to do something aboutit. There was a confrontation between US Navy Tomcats andLibyan fighters on 18 August, but nobody made any wrongmoves and nobody opened fire.The next day the Libyansgot more aggressive andfighting broke out. TwoTen F-14D Tomcats ofThe Grim Reepers’in formation during an air show atNaval Air Station Oceania in Norfolk Virginia.Libyan Sukhoi Su-22 ground-attack fighters confrontedtwo US Navy F-14As, piloted by Commander Henry “Hank”Kleeman and Lieutenant Larry “Music” Muczynski from thecarrier USS NIMITZ. The Su-22s approached head-on, withthe first firing an AAM that failed to track. Both Tomcatsfocused on the lead Su-22 as it was the most immediate threat,but when Muczynski reported that he had a target lock on thebandit Kleeman turned to get on the tail of the second Su-22,which was passing them.Both F-14As fired AIM-9L Sidewinders and scored hits.Both Libyan pilots ejected, though only one parachute wasseen to open. It hadn’t been much of a contest.The next action was much more successful, though itwas mostly theatre as well. In October 1985, four Palestinianterrorists hijacked the Italian cruise liner ACHILLE LAURO in6 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

An F-14D Tomcat about to ‘trap’ aboard one of theUS Navy’s Nimitz class aircraft carriers. (USN)the Mediterranean, where they murdered an elderly Americantourist. The terrorists managed to cut a deal with Egypt to takean Egyptair Boeing 737 airliner to Libya.American signals intelligence was monitoring thewhole affair, and seven Tomcats were scrambled fromthe carrierTomcats flew air patrols again during the 1988-1989Persian Gulf convoy operations, occasionally firing missiles atIranian F-4 Phantoms but not scoring any kills. F-14s also flewduring the 1991 Gulf War, performing air patrols to protectNavy ships, which as it turned out were never presented withany real threat. It appears that the only kill scored by F-14Asduring the conflict was of a Mil Mi-8 ‘Hip’ helicopter, shotdown by two Tomcats on 6 February 1991.USS SARATOGA to intercept the airliner.They forced it to land at Sigonella, Italy, where theterrorists were arrested and tried by the Italians. It mightnot have been a massive blow to terrorism, but it was greataction-movie stuff. It is little wonder in hindsight why RonaldReagan was so popular in his time.The US Navy performed yet another provocation exercisein the Gulf of Sidra in early 1989. Two Tomcats from the USSJOHN F. KENNEDY (JFK) were on combat patrol when theywere confronted by two Libyan MiG-23 fighters. The Tomcatcrews were given the authorization: “Warning yellow, weaponshold” – indicating they were recognized as being under threat(“warning yellow”) and were free to prepare for and engage incombat (“weapons hold”, as opposed to “weapons tight”). Thefighters launched two Sparrows and a Sidewinder, with oneSparrow and the Sidewinder scoring kills. Both Libyan pilotsejected successfully, but were apparently lost at sea.F-14B / F-14DIt is difficult to tell an F-14B from an F-14A. The F-14Bhas bigger exhaust nozzles, no wing glove vanes, a modifieddoor near the gun port, and antennas for a new AN/ALR-67Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) under the wing gloves. Thenew engines not only provided improved performance, forexample allowing carrier takeoffs without afterburner, theywere also more fuel-efficient, permitting longer loiter times ora greater radius of action, and could be operated without thesame kind of babying demanded by the old TF30s.The Navy also decided to obtain an F110-powered Tomcatwith a substantially improved digital avionics suite, includingan AN/APG-71 radar system; a modernized cockpit layout,featuring new display systems and compatible with nightvisiongoggles (NVGs); new Martin-Baker Mark 17 ejectionseats; an AN/ALR-67 RWR; dual MIL-STD 1553B digital databuses; and both IRST and TCS sensors. The new variant wasTHE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 7

Two F-14B Tomcats on a training sortie at Naval Air Station Oceania at Norfolk Virginia.designated the F-14D Super Tomcat, with four conversionsfrom F-14As as development prototypes, the first flying on 24November 1987.The AN/APG-71 is a considerable improvement on thepowerful but elderly AN/AWG-9 radar. It was derived from theAN/APG-70 built for the McDonnell Douglas F-15E StrikeEagle, with about 60% commonality between the two radars,and provides improved search and tracking at slightly longerranges than the AN/AWG-9, as well as improved resistanceto countermeasures. The IRST and TCS sensors are fitted ina distinctive dual chin pod that provides a recognition itemfor the F-14D relative to the F-14A, at least when viewedfrom head-on where the pod’s double-barrelled appearance isobvious.A total of 37 F-14Ds were built, the first entering operationalservice in November 1990, along with 18 F-14D(R) upgradesfrom F-14As. The original intent had been to upgrade theentire Tomcat fleet to F-14D standards, but with the end of theCold War the full upgrade program was judged too expensive.The F-14Ds were the last Tomcats built.THE BOMBCAT 1992 - 2003Despite the fact that ‘strike’ versions of the Tomcat hadn’tmaterialised, the idea remained alive, with the concept that theexisting fleet of F-14s could be assigned the job. The Navy hadbeen experimenting with dropping bombs from Tomcats as farback as 1987, though weapons clearance went at a very slowpace. It wasn’t until 1992 that the Tomcat was even cleared tocarry iron bombs operationally.Although the advanced strike Tomcat concepts hadfeatured wing pylons to carry weapons, the standard Tomcatwas restricted to carriage of four bombs on munitions adaptersmounted on the Phoenix stores stations. It is possible to fittriple ejector racks (TERs) that can carry three bombs each,but this is apparently only done to carry practice bombs.Even after clearing the Tomcat for bomb carriage, theUS Navy still seemed half-hearted about the idea. Tomcatsdid perform a few strikes in Bosnia in 1995, but they had nomeans to designate targets for laser-guided bombs (LGBs)themselves and Hornets had to provide buddy designationfor them. However, by this time the attack Tomcat conceptwas building up momentum, driven by the time gap betweenthe phase out of the A-6 Intruder and the arrival of the SuperHornet. By 1994 Grumman and the US Navy were proposingambitious plans for Tomcat upgrades to plug that gap, butCongress balked. The upgrades were priced in the billions, abit much for an interim solution, and they would take too longto implement to meet the looming gap.The solution finally devised was a limited cheap andquick upgrade, with fit of the Lockheed Martin ‘Low AltitudeNavigation & Targeting Infra-Red for Night’ (LANTIRN)targeting pod system to the Tomcat, which would give theF-14 a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) camera for nightoperations and a laser target designator to direct LGBs.The upgraded Tomcats would also go through a service lifeextension program (SLEP) to keep their airframes airworthyand would be fitted with a set of modest improvements.Although LANTIRN is traditionally a two-pod system, withan AN/AAQ-13 navigation pod with terrain-following radarand a wide-angle FLIR, along with an AN/AAQ-14 targetingpod with a steerable FLIR and a laser target designator,the decision was made to only use the targeting pod. Thiswas apparently done for cost reasons, though the Tomcat’sLANTIRN targeting pod did feature some improvementsover its baseline configuration, most significantly a GlobalPositioning System / Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS)capability that would allow a Tomcat to find its own locationat any time. The pod is carried on the right wing glove pylon.Fit of the AN/AAQ-14 pod didn’t require any updates to theF-14’s own system software, which would have substantiallyincreased the time and expense of the upgrade. It did requirethat the Tomcat have the MIL-STD 1553B bus, fitted standardto the F-14D and available on updated F-14A/Bs. The RIOreceives pod imagery on his display and guides LGBs using anew hand controller. Initially the hand controller replaced theRIO’s recce pod control panel, meaning a Tomcat configured8 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

for LANTIRN couldn’t carry a recce pod, but eventually aworkaround was developed that allowed a Tomcat to carryLANTIRN or recce pod as needed.Initial flight of a LANTIRN-equipped Tomcat was on 21March 1995 and the test program went smoothly. Officialrollout of the first F-14 Precision Strike Fighter was on 14June 1996. The ‘Bombcat’ had finally come of age and wason its first operational cruise by the end of the month, on thecarrier USS ENTERPRISE. Lockheed Martin engineers wereon board the carrier to provide fixes and make changes asrequired. The Bombcats flew sorties over Bosnia but did notsee any combat.Interestingly, Bombcat crews reported that the FLIR onboard the LANTIRN pod was more effective in checking outdistant targets than the old TCS system. The FLIR has 4x, 10x,and 20x magnification capabilities and can be steered 150degrees off the aircraft centreline. Later on, when a datalinkwas fitted to the F-14, LANTIRN FLIR imagery could berelayed along and recce pod and TCS data to provide nightreconnaissance imagery in real time.The LANTIRN Bombcat made its combat debut inOPERATION DESERT FOX, air strikes conducted againstIraq in December 1998 after Iraqi dictator Saddam Husseinevicted UN arms inspectors. The Bombcats saw more combatin the NATO air campaign against Serbia over Kosovo in thespring of 1999, flying hundreds of sorties, and then in morestrikes on Iraqi air-defence targets.Tomcats also flew in the air-defence role during the Iraqstrikes, and on 6 January 1999, one fired two Phoenix missilesat two Iraqi MiG-25s at extreme range. Both missiles missed.This was the first time the US Navy had ever fired the Phoenixin anger. Two more were fired at Iraqi fighters in September1999, missing again.These incidents leave the effectiveness of the Phoenix anopen question. Apparently the Iraqi fighters were at extremerange and just trying to be a nuisance, and the missiles weremainly fired to suggest that the Iraqis get lost. However, theblank combat record of the Phoenix is consistent with theblank record of the Hughes Falcon series of AAMs in general.The AIM-120 AMRAAM, a Sparrow derivative with a fullactiveradar seeker, is a more modern and by the evidencea much more effective weapon than the Phoenix, thoughAMRAAM’s range does not match that of the Phoenix. Newramjet-powered versions of AMRAAM are being consideredthat may outrange the Phoenix. Plans were made to modify theTomcat for AMRAAM carriage but fell through.In any case, by this time the Bombcat was receiving a newstrike capability in the form of the GPS-aided GBU-31/32Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) guided glide bomb.Details of the implementation of JDAM on the Tomcat are abit unclear and it is not apparent if the bombs can be loadedwith GPS target coordinates in flight, or if the coordinateshave to be preloaded before the mission. Tomcat LANTIRNpods were also improved to permit high-altitude operationup to 12,200 meters (40,000 feet), with the first updatedLANTIRN 40K pod going into service in 2001.Bombcats got a chance to use their new weaponryduring OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM, the Americanintervention in Afghanistan in the winter of 2001:2002. Whiledetails of the Afghan campaign remain unclear, it appears thatBombcats performed close-support strikes using LGBs andJDAMs, and also marked targets with LANTIRN for F/A-18 Hornets. It is plausible that F-14s also participated in theAmerican invasion of Iraq in the spring of 2003, but details arenot known at this time.A 'Bombcat' trapping aboard. The Bombcat model is usually distinguishable from other variants by the LANTIRN pod under the starboard wing pylon.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 9

An F-14 doing a high-speed lowaltitude banking pass along thedeck edge of its aircraft carrier.The F-14 was a surprisingmanoeuvrable dog fighter beingable to out dog fight the F-4Phantom which gained a goodreputation in the close in fightermode against North VietnameseMiG-15s,17, 19s and 21s.An F-14A Tomcat firing a AIM-54 Phoenix AAM. In theory theTomcat could carry six AIM-54but the combined weight of thesesix missile meant she could notland back on a carrier. It was acase of use them or lose them. Inpractice the most carrier basedTomcats would carry was fourAIM-54 plus two AIM-7 Sparrowand two AIM-9L Sidewinder.Tomcat TalesBy F-14 Pilot David "Hound" KaronidisAfter 30 plus years the F-14 Tomcat is being placed intoretirement. Squadrons are disbanding and in some casesreforming with the Tomcat’s successor, the F/A-18E/F SuperHornet. The good news is the cat will still be in the air fora couple of years but by 2006-7 there will no longer be VFsquadrons in the US Navy.The F-14 has been a great success for the US Navy, notonly as a fighter but also in the last 10 years as the only longrange, heavy strike aircraft deployed to the US fleet. All threeversions (A, B and D) have been upgraded with quickstrikesoftware, this allows the aircraft the carry the LANTIRNnavigation/targeting pod and Paveway III 2,000lb LGB’s(Laser Guided Bombs).Kosovo was where the deep strike capabilitiesof the upgrade F-14 were first proven. VF-41‘The Black Aces’ refined and proved theA sight soon to be relegated to the history books.Six F-14D Tomcats in formation during an air show atNaval Air Station Oceania in Norfolk Virginia.An F-14D conducting carriage and drop tests of2,000lb LGB. The addition of the LGB to the Tomcat’sweaponry gave the US Navy a capability it lost when theA-6 Intruder was retired from service.No. Not a very low flyingTomcat but a Tomcat being towedto take up its new role of ‘gatesentry’. With the demise of theTomcat many are now appearing,sadly, as static displays at theentrance to many US Navy airbases.precisionstrike powerof the F-14.They worked hardon close air support(CAS) and pioneeredthe tactics of ForwardAir Controller-Air (FAC-A)working with the airwing’s F/A18C’s and USAF F-16’s to getfirepower on Serbia Army units. Onone last minute mission a single tomcatput a LGB into a road tunnel to stop a Serbunit, only to return a few days later to rehit thesame target to stop Serb bulldozers trying to clearthe blockage.‘Black Aces’ would find hidden tanks or truckstaging posts, mark the target with their own bomb then call10 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

for support from any strike aircraft, ‘lasering’ the target forprecision attacks by other aircraft.But time was against the Tomcat, VF-41 would trade to theF model Super Hornet on their return to homeport. VF-154the ‘Black Knights’ of CVW5, the only forward deployedF-14 squadron, flying the oldest A models, returned toOceania, Virginia, to convert to the Super Hornet, replacedwith F model flying VFA-102 Diamond Backs.For the VF squadrons retiring the Grumman feline andtaking up Super Hornets and becoming VFA’s it is a slowbut steady process. Soon the only flying Tomcats will be asmall number that will work for the USNFWS (USN FighterWeapons School) ‘Top Gun’ but they will have a short lifetimethere.Much will be and has been written on the F-14, so it istime for a few day to day stories to come to the fore. Notonly are the flight crews a source of interesting tales but thehard working maintenance crews. Such as the time during aIt must be remembered that each Tomcat built had its ownpersonality, some made strange noises, some had electricalproblems, some hydraulic and some came with demons thatno amount of time and effort could find a fix. One aircraftwas the dubbed “supreme hanger queen”, you name it, andit was a problem. The aircraft was dispatched to the factoryat Long Beach for a major rebuild (inspect and repair) to bereturned to the fleet as a new aircraft. Sadly not to be, on atranscontinental flight some where near St Louis, in stormyweather, system after system failed. Radar, auto pilot, lighting,computers systems all decided to act up. Finally, a lightningstrike settled things and the crew declared an emergency to StLouis field. Only to make a perfect landing but to blow bothmain tyres and aquaplane off the very end of the runway. Backto the factory. This airframe was lost at sea a year later withboth crew surviving.For those who followed the Tomcat career and collectedthe squadron/cruise patches, made famous in the film ‘TopGun’, the stand down has created some interesting comments.Firstly the famous nickname of “Rhino” has been passed onfrom the F-4 to the new F/A18E and F. Transition patcheshave appeared for squadrons changing aircraft. Lastcruise patches and farewell patcheshave appeared. VeryMediterranean cruise,when night launchesare at best hecticany problem seamsto multiply by afactor of ten. A ‘YellowShirt’ flight deck crewman grabbed a young plane captain,informing him that an aircraft (third in line for the cat) neededtrouble shooting.Running up to the plane the pilot signalled that that hiscockpit video screen was “down”, now there was only aminute or two before he would taxing up to catapult 2 forlaunch. The “tweak” or electronics trouble-shooter was nearthe fantail and no time to get him. The ‘Yellow Shirts’ wereabout to redirect the plane, with pilot and RIO (Radar InterceptOfficer) looking very upset, the young plane captain changedhis mind and signalled the pilot to give the instrument panela good thump. The pilot got it just right. The plane captaindidn’t need to see the thumbs up as the pilot’s helmet, faceand canopy all lit up with the green reflection as soon as thevideo display worked.The first appearance of the F-14 on the silver screen wasin the film ‘The Final Countdown’. Carrier Air Wing 8’sVF-84 “The Jolly Rogers” supplied the stars. As usual thepeople from Hollywood knew better and wanted to placecameras on a missile station to film a dogfight with twoJapanese Zero’s. A wiser and knowledgeable Chief PettyOfficer tried to explain that the way the film crews weremounting the camera was wrong, but they knew better. Yes,aircraft returned from filming but the camera did not. Thechief was consulted from that day on.collectable but a sad sight.So what will be missing from thefleet? A long range interceptor/fighter/strike aircraft that could track and engagemultiple targets at ranges of 100nm. The lossof the AIM-54 Phoenix missile system and the only beyondvisual range anti-cruise missile. The Super Hornet is workingout very well with its baptism of fire over Iraq but the aircraftare not up to full specs as yet, it appears funding is as mucha problem for the ‘Rhino’ as it is for the Tomcat. For thosewho would like to read more about a final cruise of a Tomcatsquadron under fire the 2003 book “Black Aces High” byRobert Wilcox is a must. This shows the F-14 at its best as theUS Navy’s best long range strike fighter doing what she doesbest over Bosnia during the Serbia conflict.At this time the only F-14 squadrons still flying are VF-31Tomcatters, VF-213 Black Lions, VF-143 The World FamousPukin Dogs, VF-11 Red Rippers. VF-103 Jolly Rogers anda small number at the USNFWS. All these squadrons are ondeployment and on their return will transfer to F/A 18E or F.A long list of famous or infamous aviators have beenlinked to the Tomcat, they include CDR Dave “hey Joe”Parsons, CDR Tom “tumor” Twomey, RADM Jay “Spook”Yakely, LT Larry “Music” Muscyzinski, the late, great CDRHenry “Hank” Kleenman, RADM Paul “Gator” Gillcrist, topguns Dale “Snort” Snodgrass and Joe “Hoser” Satrapa andADM Tom Connelly, who without his courage the F-14 wouldnot have come into being.By the end of 2005 the F-14 will be retired, Carrier AirWings will in some cases comprise of all Hornet squadrons(including EA-18 Growlers) naval aviation goes on butthere will be many aviators who will sadly miss the best thatGrumman produced, The F-14 Tomcat.An F-14D Tomcat of VF-103 ‘The Jolly Rogers’ off theUSS JOHN F. KENNDEY on their final deployment. (USN)THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 11

AWD bids announcedFlash TrafficDefence Minister Robert Hill hasannounced that Defence had receivedthree proposals from Australian industryfor the role of shipbuilder in the $4.5to $6 billion Air Warfare Destroyerproject.Proposals were received from ASCShipbuilding, Northrop Grumman ShipSystems and Tenix Defence.Defence is currently evaluatingthe three ship designer proposals fromBlohm + Voss, Gibbs & Cox and Izar,which closed on 24 November 2004. TheDepartment is also evaluating responsesfrom BAE Systems, Raytheon Australiaand Saab Systems for the CombatSystem-System Engineer, which closedon 10 December 2004.The construction of the Air WarfareDestroyers will be one of the mostsignificant shipbuilding projectsundertaken in Australia to date, andwill provide an enormous challenge forAustralian industry.The AWDs will have the US sourcedAegis air warfare system as the core oftheir combat system, and will providesustained maritime area air defence fordeployed forces. The ship will be highlyinteroperable with the US and othercoalition partners.The proposals will now be thesubject of rigorous and detailed analysis.Selection of the shipbuilder will be basedon a number of key criteria including:• Commitment to the principles of along-term risk sharing arrangementwith the Commonwealth and otherindustry partners for the constructionof the AWDs;• A cost, overhead and pricing structurethat will enable the cost effectivedelivery of the AWDs, including theability to build designs considering‘whole of life’ costs;• A sound record of past performancein building naval vessels;• Commercial viability and financialbacking;• Access to the skilled workforcerequired to produce ships to theCommonwealth’s requirements;• Willingness to provide open financialaccounting data – including visibilitythrough to the sub-contractor level– to the Commonwealth;• Capacity to provide the Commonwealthwith transparency and contractualinfluence over major subcontractors;and• Capacity to access sensitive technologyrequired for the AWDproject.Companies bidding for the AWDswere required to include Australianskills and training programs in theirtenders, with Defence to fund companiesfor extra skills generation and trainingbenefits in the programs.Tender awarded forHMAS SIRIUSTenix Defence Pty Ltd has beenselected as the preferred tender toupgrade and refit the recently acquiredcommercial tanker which will replacethe Royal Australian Navy’s ageingauxiliary oiler, HMAS WESTRALIA.The purpose of the conversion willbe to modify the vessel so that it has thelatest technology and equipment capableof refuelling Navy vessels, including theAnzac, FFGs and the new Air WarfareDestroyers that will enter into servicefrom 2013.The contract, valued at around$60 million, is for the design, initiallogistic support and modification ofthe merchant tanker DELOS, with themodified ship to enter service in June2006.Defence Minister Senator Hillsaid the modifications to the shipwill be carried out at the CommonUser Facility at Henderson, south ofFremantle, in Western Australia. It willhave an Australian Industry Involvementcomponent of 95 percent.Some of the specific modificationswill include:• The installation of a replenishmentat sea rig;• Various accommodation modificationsfor Navy personnel includingA computer generated image of what thecompleted HMAS SIRIUS will look like after herconversion. (RAN)heating, ventilation, air-conditioning,freshwater and sewerage.• A number of other additions includea helicopter landing pad, RigidHulled Inflatable Boats and a relatedcrane, and Navy life saving anddamage control works.The DELOS is currently charteredto Teekay Shipping Singapore undera commercial arrangement. Followingcontract negotiations it will be deliveredto Western Australia.Once complete, the crew of theship will be transferred from HMASWESTRALIA, ensuring a seamlesstransfer of operational capability to theNavy. The DELOS will be commissionedas HMAS SIRIUS on completion of theproject.V-22 to beginoperational evaluationA V-22 Osprey of the USMC lifts off the deck ofa USN LHD. (USN)The Operational Evaluation(OPEVAL) testing program for theBell Boeing V-22 Osprey has now beenapproved. On February 24, Tom Laux,the US Military’s Program ExecutiveOfficer for Air Anti-SubmarineWarfare, Assault, and Special MissionPrograms, certified that the V-22 Ospreyaircraft is ready for operational test andevaluation.“This is great news signifying acrucial step forward in reaching ourgoal of getting this tremendous aircraftto our customers,” declared RobertKenney, Bell Helicopter vice presidentand director of the V-22 Joint ProgramOffice.The actual start date for OPEVALwill be determined by Marine CorpsCol. Glenn Walters, commandingofficer of VMX-22, the squadron basedat MCAS New River, NC, which hasthe mission of performing the V-22OPEVAL.12 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

Two Ospreys were deliveredin February from Bell HelicoptersAmarillo, Texas, manufacturing facilitybringing the calendar year delivery totalto three aircraft so far. The V-22 programcalls for a total of 458 aircraft to bedelivered to US Government customers.February deliveries included the CV-22Additional Test Asset (ATA) to EdwardsAFB, Calif., and Osprey No. 48 wasdelivered to VMX-22 at MCAS NewRiver, NC.ADI to supply MSIGun systems to NZADI Limited (Australia) has beenawarded the contract to supply themain gun systems for the New ZealandMinistry of Defence’s Project Protectorprogram by the lead contractor, TenixDefence Pty Ltd.The systems are the MSI DS25Mdesigned by MSI-Defence Systems, UK.This modern modular design enablesa smaller calibre gun system to beconfigured in virtually any format tomeet the full spectrum of potential navalconfigurations, from manned, with basicsighting, to full autonomous control bya ship’s systems or control at a remotestation.The systems for the Protector vesselswill incorporate the ATK 25mm M242Bushmaster cannon, common to theNZ Army’s light armoured vehicles,giving the NZ navy commonality ofammunition and cannon training andsupport.“ADI has chosen to continuecollaborating with MSI to offer newsupply and through life support for theMSI modular gun systems. Previouslywe produced six 30mm MSI gun systemsfor the Royal Australian Navy’s HuonClass minehunters,” said Mr Lucio DiBartolomeo, ADI’s managing director.“ADI considers the MSI modulargun system as the best in the market.It is extremely well designed, veryrobust, while maintaining a lightweightfootprint.“Its marinisation is excellent. This iscritical in achieving reliability and lowthrough life costs. This has resulted ina system capable of withstanding thepounding from heavy seas and greenwater exposure while then continuing todeliver the best reliability and availabilityof the systems currently available in themarket.”Flash TrafficThe MSI DS25M designed by MSI-DefenceSystems, UK. The RNZN’s Protector vessels willincorporate the ATK 25mm M-242 Bushmastercannon, common to the NZ Army’s lightarmoured vehicles, on the MSI mount. (ADI)MSI has well over a hundred units inservice with a range of navies.Tenix was awarded the ProtectorProject in July 2004 after an extensivecompetition involving over 25shipbuilders worldwide. The Protectorfleet will comprise one multi-role vessel,two offshore patrol vessels and fourinshore patrol vessels to be progressivelydelivered in 2006 and 2007. The MSIgun systems will be installed on theMRV and the two offshore patrolvessels. Tenix tendered the MSI gun inits baseline offer to the MoD and hasbeen negotiating with ADI to concludethese contractual arrangements now inplace.First steel cut for newNZ fleetTenix Defence began cutting steelfor the NZ$500m Project Protectornaval shipbuilding contract at itsWilliamstown, Melbourne shipyard.NZ Secretary of Defence, MrGraham Fortune, switched oncomputerised cutting equipment to beginmanufacturing plates for two 85m, 1500tonne Offshore Patrol Vessels for theRoyal New Zealand Navy.The ships are being constructed aspart of Royal New Zealand Navy sevenshiporder, which includes four 55mInshore Patrol Vessels and a 131m Multi-The Offshore Patrol Vessel design for theRNZN’s Protector Project. (Tenix)Role Vessel, as well as the OffshorePatrol Vessels.Tenix Defence CEO Robert Salterisaid the ceremony at Williamstownunderlined the skills and capabilitiesdeveloped by Tenix Defence and itssuppliers and subcontractors in Australiaand New Zealand.The seven ships are being built atthree locations:The Multi-Role Vessel is being builtin the Netherlands, with final fit-out atWilliamstown.The Offshore Patrol Vesselswill utilise the modular constructionmethod used with the ANZAC frigates.Modules will be built at Williamstownand the Tenix facility at Whangareiin New Zealand, and the ships willbe consolidated and launched atWilliamstown.The Inshore Patrol Vessels will beconstructed entirely at Whangarei.MINSK WorldbankruptThe scrapyard is beckoning for themothballed Soviet-era aircraft carrierMINSK, whose previous date with thebreaker’s yard was put off by a detourto form part of a Shenzhen theme parkin China.‘MINSK Aircraft Carrier World’,one of the hottest tourist attractions inShenzhen, is seeking a ‘white knight’’to rescue it from bankruptcy after thefinancial shipwreck of its parent, D’LongInternational Strategic Investment.Shenzhen government officials havebeen actively enlisted in the hunt fornew investors, foreign or domestic,hoping the MINSK will cheat deathagain to occupy a place of honour in theentertainment and tourism hub they planto develop along the eastern shore of theSpecial Economic Zone.MINSK World is reported tohave defaulted on a 200 million Yuan(HK$187.9 million) loan from ChinaConstruction Bank (CCB), one of thebig four state-owned lenders. Since theGuangzhou Maritime Court froze itsassets, it has been under the trusteeshipof China Huarong Asset Management.The chance to clamber over one ofthe world’s most formidable warshipshas attracted more than five millionvisitors and generated 450 million Yuanin revenue since the theme park openedin September 2000.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 13

MINSK World ranks amongShenzhen’s top four attractions,averaging 2,000 visitors on weekdaysand as many as 5,000 per day at theweekend. The recent National Dayholiday was a bonanza, with 110,000visitors pushing through the turnstiles.The admission fee is 110 Yuan.The 42,000-tonne, 275-metrelongcarrier once carried 42 aircraftas the flagship of the formerSoviet Union’s Pacific Fleet. Afterthe Soviet Union dissolved, Russiawas unable to manage the upkeep,and the carrier was decommissionedin 1994. In 1998, an unidentifiedChinese businessman purchased itafter its weaponry was stripped offin South Korea.It then passed to the themepark’s owner, D’Long Group, whichis based in the northwest XinjiangUygur Autonomous Region. BrothersTang Wanxin and Tang Wanli, whoset up the company, were seen asparagons of the new entrepreneurclass until early this year, when theircomplex funding mechanism basedon dubious stock transactions groundto a halt.Flash TrafficThe public gangway entrance to the once proud 42,000-tonne, 275-metre-long flagship of the formerSoviet Union’s Pacific Fleet. Now a theme park in China.The aft end of the forward missile battery of theKiev class carrier MINSK is now a Pepsi stand.Picnic tables now stand where once stoodSoviet Yak-38 ‘Forger’ VSTOL fighters. In thebackground are some of the aircraft on display atMINSK World. None of which actually operatedfrom the carrier.Russian Bombers torange out with missiletestsRussia’s long-range bombers willconduct several missile test launches invarious parts of the world in 2005.“The testing area will be considerablyenlarged,” said Igor Khvorov,commander of the 37th Strategic AirArmy.Test launches will be carried outduring joint exercises with the RussianNavy in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans,and their number will be much greaterthan in 2004, he said.In the nuclear triad, long-range aviationis the best means of implementingthe policy of deterrence, Khvorov said.He added that during flights to variousregions, long-range aircraft “gather agreat deal of information.”Rolls-Royce deliversworld’s most powerfulmarine gas turbineRolls-Royce, under contract toNorthrop Grumman, the primecontractor for the USN DD(X)program, has delivered its first MT30marine gas turbine generator set tothe US Navy.The MT30, the world’s mostpowerful marine generator set on themarket today, was shipped to the USNavy’s test facility in Philadelphia topower test runs for the DD(X) destroyer,a leading-edge program key to futurecapabilities.The MT30 will drive the DD(X)Integrated Power System EngineeringDevelopment Model, which willprovide risk mitigation for the mainpropulsion and shipboard systems. Theshipment marks the first delivery of alarge Rolls-Royce gas turbine for theUS Navy.“We are delighted to deliver thistransformational technology to theUS Navy,” said Patrick J. Marolda,president of the Rolls-Royce navalmarine business in North America.“The MT30 incorporates leading-edge,proven aero engine technology into aunique marine power system.”The 36 megawatt (MW) MT30has 80 percent commonality with theTrent 800 aero engine which has won amarket-leading 44 percent of the Boeing777 program and achieved more thansix million flying hours since enteringservice in 1996.Final assembly of the MT30 tookplace at DRS Power Technologies, Fitchburg, MA. The generator set leftFitchburg and travelled by truck to theport of Lynn, MA where it was loadedon a barge for the trip to the test facilityin Philadelphia.SM-3 interceptsballistic missileThe Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense(BMD) Weapon System and StandardMissile-3 (SM-3) destroyed a ballisticmissile outside the earth’s atmosphereduring an Aegis BMD Program flighttest over the Pacific Ocean.The Feb. 24 mission, the fifthsuccessful intercept for SM-3, wasthe first firing of the Aegis BMD14 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

‘Emergency Deployment’ capabilityusing operational versions of theSM-3 Block I missile and AegisBMD Weapon System. This was alsothe first test to exercise SM-3’s thirdstage rocket motor (TSRM) singlepulsemode. The TSRM has two pulses,which can be ignited independently,providing expansion of the ballisticmissile engagement battlespace.The SM-3 was launched from theAegis BMD cruiser USS LAKE ERIE(CG-70) and hit a target missile thathad been launched from the US Navy’sPacific Missile Range Facility on Kauai,Hawaii.Japan has made decision to procureAegis BMD with SM-3 for its Kongoclassships.An SM-3 leaves the Mk-41 VLS of theUSS LAKE ERIE during what turned out tobe another successful anti-ballistic missile testshoot. (USN)US demands return ofUSS PuebloAs diplomatic efforts to end anuclear standoff between Washingtonand Pyongyang make little headway, aresolution has been introduced in theUS Senate demanding that North Koreareturn an American intelligence shipseized by the hardline communist state37 years ago.The attack on the USS PUEBLOby North Korean naval vessels andMiG jets on January 23, 1968 leftone American dead and several morewounded while 82 surviving crewmembers were captured, held prisonerand tortured for a year.-Flash TrafficThe US Senate resolution demandsthe return of the vessel, believed still inNorth Korean hands.“North Korea’s inhumane treatmentof our sailors, and the refusal ofPyongyang to return this vessel shouldnot be forgotten,” said Senator WayneAllard, who filed the resolution inFebruary after the Stalinist State stunnedthe world by publicly boasting about itsnuclear weapons arsenal.The Republican Senator fromColorado said although it had been morethan three decades since the “disgracefulepisode” occurred, “the United Statesgovernment should demand the returnof the USS PUEBLO to the US Navywithout further delay.”Washington has been quite reluctantto demand its return because of theembarrassment caused by the incident.It had to apologise to North Korea forthe spying mission before receiving thesurviving crew.The US Navy had publicly termedthe mission a research ship conductingoceanographic studies but North Koreanofficials shared the secrets they unearthedfrom the vessel, including codes andcipher machines that enabled the Soviets todecipher many of the restricted Americandocuments, according to reports.It was the first US Navy ship to behijacked on the high seas by a foreignmilitary force in over 150 years.Senator Allard said he would pressfor passage of his resolution during thecurrent session of the Congress andwork with the veterans of the USSPUEBLO and their respective groups to“take positive steps” towards getting thevessel back.The ship was named after the cityof Pueblo in the senator’s constituency,where some residents plan to convert itinto a “theme park” on its return.Fred Carriere, executive director ofThe Korea Society and an experiencedKorea hand, said he visited the ship lastyear during a trip to Pyongyang with theThe USS PUEBLO as she stands today inPyongyang’s Tedong River. The North Korean’sregard her as one of their most sacred trophies.society’s chairman and ex-ambassadorto South Korea Donald Gregg.“It was docked in the Tedong Riverand is still impressive and seaworthy,” hesaid. “From the Korean point of view itis an educational exhibit and one of themost sacred trophies aimed at makingthe point of history about Americaninvasions of Korea,” he said.Carriere said the ship was docked atthe same spot where the Koreans sanka US merchant ship called GENERALSHERMAN, among the first Americanvessels that sailed into Pyongyang inthe 1860’s in an apparent bid to ‘openup’ the Korean peninsula to the outsideworld.Taiwanese Navyprepares for first worldvoyageTaiwan’s navy plans to make its firstround-the-world voyage this year, said aTaiwanese newspaper, in what would bea display of long-range sea power sure torile rival China.Three ships would sail around theworld in 101 days, from March toJune, docking in seven countries thatrecognise Taiwan but also refuelling incountries without formal diplomatic tieswith Taipei, the China Times said.Taiwan’s Defence ministry said thenavy regularly made overseas excursions,but it declined to give details.“Every year we make long-distancetraining trips, and the countries visitedare principally diplomatic allies,” saidDefence Ministry spokesman Liou Chihchien.“But for now, the routes and countriesto be visited haven’t been decided, andwe don’t publicise them before they setoff for security consideration,” he said.The China Times said the ships wouldset off in mid-March and sail throughSoutheast Asia, the Indian Ocean, aroundSouth Africa into the Atlantic Ocean andthen through the Caribbean and thePanama Canal.They would then cross the PacificOcean and arrive back in Taiwan onJune 19.The ships – a French-made Lafayettefrigate, a Cheng Kung Perry-class frigateand a support vessel – will stop inSenegal, Gambia, St. Vincent, Panama,the Marshall Islands, Kiribati and Palau,the newspaper said. It did not identifyits sources.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 15

The voyage may coincide with avisit by President Chen Shui-bian’s toPacific allies in May and the Taiwanleader could stay on board one of theships, the newspaper said.A Chinese navy destroyer andsupply ship made the first cruisearound the world by a Chinese navalflotilla in 2002.Derby AAMs forIndian Navy?India and Israel are expected to signa US$25 million deal for 20 air-airDerby missiles for the Indian Navy.The deal is for beyond visual range(BVR) air-to-air Derby missiles.According to senior Defenceministry sources, the deal will alsoinclude six practice missiles. Themissiles are designated for the IndianNavy’s Sea Harriers, which are on boardINS VIRAAT aircraft carrier.India has been conducting aworldwide search for BVR missilesfor its Fleet Air Arm since 2000. Thecontract for arming its Sea Harrier jetswas opened in 2003, sources added.Once the agreement is finalised,the Israeli company will be stationingits specialists in India to train the navalofficers in maintenance and operationof the missiles. Officials said that thecompany will also supply racks andtrailers for transferring and installingthe missiles.Delivery of the missiles will start 30months after the contract is signed, andbe completed a year after that, sourcessaid. These missiles have a maximumrange of 20 km, a flying speed of Mach1.2, and can lock in on the target evenbefore being launched, or shortly afterthe launch.An Israeli Derby BVR AAM on the outboardwing pylon (white nose cone closest to camera)of an F-16 fighter. The addition of Derby tothe Indian Sea Harrier fleet will give them amuch greater air-air capability againstmodern air forces.Flash TrafficSources said that Indian Air Force(IAF) also needs next-generation BVRmissiles for upgrading its Mirage 2000Hand Sukhoi Su-30 MKI.The need for new missiles wasrevealed in early 2003, when the IAF’sweapon systems were unable to copewith those of the French during a jointIndo-French military exercise.Indian Navy purchaseMiG-29KA contract for the purchase of16 MiG-29K aircraft from RussianFederation for the Indian Navy wassigned on Jan 20, 2004. The value ofthe contract is US$740 million. Thedelivery of the aircraft will commencefrom June 2007.A MiG-29K. The Indian airforce is already auser of the MiG-29 thus enabling the IndianNavy to enjoy a level of cost efficiency due tocommonality.New Corvettes forVenezuelaVenezuela will buy four corvettesfrom the Izar Shipyard in a contractvalued between 600 & 800 millionEUROs. The corvettes are believed tohave the following specifications:Length overall 102.0 m, Beam 14.0m, Full load displacement 2,600 tonnes,Draught 3.75 m, Maximum speed +27kts, Cruise speed 15kts, Cruisingspeed range 4000nm, 30 days supply, 62crew, Helicopter staff 8 and margin for10 more crew.This contract was closed during adiscreet visit by Spanish Minister ofDefense Jose Bono made on 25 Januaryto Caracas.In addition to the corvette order, sixC-295 cargo planes made by the Spanishbranch of European partnership EADSwere also ordered. This second contractis valued at 150 million EUROs.Daewoo to build fourwarships for IndonesiaDaewoo International Corp, a majorKorean trading company, recentlyannounced it has signed a US$150-million contract to provide four warshipsto the Indonesian navy in what is viewedas a major step in boosting its presencein the naval technology business inSoutheast Asian countries.The four warships, three commonlanding platform docks (LPDs) anda command ship, will be exported toIndonesia from January for use by itsnavy, the firm said.The LPD is designed to transporttroops into a war zone by sea usinglanding craft. It embarks, transportsand lands soldiers and landing craftand can also be used for landings byhelicopters.Daewoo International said in astatement that the contract was a resultof the know-how and capabilities itand its partners have built up in themilitary ship business. South Korea’sDae Sun Shipbuilding & Engineeringhas manufactured two of the LPDsand will give technological support toIndonesian firms for the building of theremaining two, Daewoo said.LPDs are emerging as key militaryitems for Southeast Asian countries forenhancing naval defence capabilities,Daewoo International said, adding itexpects ‘mega’ deals from other nationsin the coming months.Daewoo International has beenplaying a bridging role between SouthKorean shipbuilding firms and theIndonesian navy for exports of navaltechnology. The firm signed a contractworth $50 million in 2000 to provide amulti-purpose hospital ship and tugboatsto the Indonesian navy. In 2003 it won a$60 million Indonesian military projectto enhance submarine facilities andnaval warfare capabilities.USSSAN FRANCISCOSkipper relieved ofcommandThe commander of US Seventh Fleet,Vice Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, relievedCdr Kevin Mooney of his commandof USS SAN FRANCISCO (SSN-711)on Feb. 12. The decision to relieve16 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

Flash TrafficCdr Mooney was made following nonjudicialpunishment (NJP) proceedingsheld in Yokosuka, Japan. Additionally,as a result of the NJP, Mooney receiveda Letter of Reprimand.Following the submarine striking anunderwater seamount Jan. 8, Greenertreassigned Mooney to the staff ofCommander, Submarine Squadron15, based in Guam. During theconduct of the investigation into thisincident, it became clear to Greenertthat several critical navigational andvoyage planning procedures werenot being implemented aboard SANFRANCISCO. By not ensuring thesestandard procedures were followed,Mooney hazarded his vessel.One Sailor died and several wereinjured as a result of the groundingduring operations in the Western PacificOcean. Of 137 on board, 98 Sailorsexperienced some injury and 23 wereinjured seriously enough that they wereunable to stand duty during the sub’stransit back to Guam.Cdr. Andrew Hale, DeputyCommander, Submarine Squadron 15,has assumed the duties as commandingofficer of SAN FRANCISCO.TS CANNING winsNavy League ofAustralia EfficiencyTrophyThe Navy League of AustraliaEfficiency Trophy award has been wonbe TS CANNING with the presentationof the trophy by the CN Vice AdmiralChris Ritchie AO RAN to TS Canning.In 1984 four years after TS Canningwas commissioned, the Unit was grantedthe Freedom of Entry of the City ofCanning, won the State Colours, theVickridge Trophy, and the Navy Leagueof Australia Efficiency Trophy, andnumerous other awards in the followingyears.In 2003 the Unit won the StateColours, and was runner up for the NavyLeague Trophy.2004 was a very successful year forthe Unit having won the State coloursand the Navy League of AustraliaEfficiency Trophy.It is the dedication of the staff, cadetsand especially the continuing effort andsupport of the parent’s committee thatmake all this happen.The smashed bow of the SSN USS SAN FRANCISCO. (USN)Victor III dismantledunder Japanese projectThe first nuclear powered submarineof the Victor-III class based in theRussian Far East has been dismantled.The retired submarine was scrappedand its spent nuclear fuel was unloadedunder the framework of the Russian-Japanese project ‘Star of Hope’ atthe navy shipyard Zvezda in BolshoyKamen settlement. The empty reactorcompartment was shipped to the siteof the DalRAO Company. The spentnuclear fuel was delivered to the Mayakreprocessing plant, and the scrappedmetal was sold.Last year Japan signed a co-operationagreement with Russia and pledgedabout US$180m for nuclear weapondismantling works.The ‘Star of Hope’ project stipulatesdismantling of one nuclear submarine.According to Kiselev, the next projectfor scrapping five submarines is underconsideration now. 46 retired nuclearsubmarines are waiting for dismantlingat the Russian Far East.In 2004 Russia disposed of 17nuclear-powered submarines, accordingto the head of the Federal Atomic EnergyAgency Alexander Rumyantsev.“Twelve railroad shipments ofspent nuclear fuel from reactors of thedisposed submarines were made to theMayak plant,” he said.Zvezda and Zvezdochka plantsprocessed 874 cubic meters of liquidradioactive waste and 1,588 tonnes ofsolid radioactive waste in northwestRussia. The processed waste was put intemporary casing.A former Soviet Victor-III SSN on the surface.The Victor-III were reported to be as good as thefirst batch of US Los Angeles class SSNs.US Navy to christenKIDDThe US Navy has christened thenewest Arleigh Burke class guidedmissiledestroyer KIDD, on Saturday,Jan. 22, 2005, at Northrop GrummanShip Systems Ingalls Operations inPascagoula, Miss.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 17

Flash TrafficThe ship honours Medal of Honorrecipient Rear Adm. Isaac CampbellKidd. He was born in Cleveland, Ohio,on March 26, 1884, and graduated fromthe U.S. Naval Academy in 1906. OnDec. 7, 1941, Kidd was commander ofBattleship Division One and the seniorofficer present afloat during the Japaneseattack on Pearl Harbor. From the bridgeof his flagship, the USS ARIZONA,Kidd directed the counterattack againstenemy aircraft until the magazine ofARIZONA was exploded by enemyordnance, eventually sinking the ship,and a direct hit to the bridge took hislife.Two previous U.S. Navy destroyershave been named in honour of Kidd. Thefirst ship was a Fletcher-class destroyerthat was in service from 1943-1974.It is now a floating veterans memorialand museum in Baton Rouge, La. Thesecond, a Kidd-class destroyer wasalso built at Northrop Grumman ShipSystems. It served from 1981-1998 andwas then sold to Taiwan.KIDD is the 50th ship in the ArleighBurke class of guided-missile destroyers.Singapore to acquireSeahawkSix new Sikorsky S-70B navalhelicopters will join the Republic ofSingapore Navy’s (RSN) operation inthe next few years, the Ministry ofDefence (MINDEF) announced in astatement on recently.Equipped with advanced anti-surfaceand anti-submarine warfare sensors andweapons, the helicopters will operate offthe RSN’s new frigates.The Singaporean Ministry of defencenoted that this acquisition would enhancethe RSN’s capability to undertake awide spectrum of missions and carryout its mission of defending Singaporeand its vital sea lines of communicationsmore effectively.Under a contract signed betweenMINDEF and Sikorsky AircraftCorporation of the United States, thehelicopters are scheduled for delivery tothe RSN between 2008 and 2010.Final Arleigh BurkeorderedThe US Department of Defense hasannounced that Bath Iron Works, a unitof General Dynamics, received a $562.1million modification to its FY02-05DDG-51 class multi-year contractto build the final ship of the ArleighBurke class. As the 34th DDG-51 classdestroyer built by Bath Iron Works,DDG-112 represents the culminationof new construction for the US Navy’sAEGIS shipbuilding program and marksthe beginning of a major transition forthe Navy as it moves from the DDG-51to the next generation of destroyer, theDD(X).The Honorable John J. Young Jr.,assistant secretary of the navy forresearch, development and acquisition,described the action as another“landmark on the highway” of AEGISshipbuilding.“This is the last of 62 DDG-51class ships, the final act of a play thatwill be reviewed as one of the mostsuccessful defence acquisition programsin history,” said Young.The first of the RAAF’s new 737 Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning & Control aircraft over Sydneyduring a recent visit to Australia. The aircraft was visiting the bi-annual Avalon airshow and returnedto the US for further fitting out and tests before returning later this year to enter service with theRAAF’s 2 Squadron based at Williamtown in NSW. (RAAF)Like its other Arleigh-Burke classships, DDG-112 will be a 9,200-tonmulti-mission guided missile destroyercapable of conducting a variety ofoperations, from peacetime presenceand crisis management to sea controland power projection, in support of theNational Military Strategy. DDG-112will be capable of fighting air, surfaceand subsurface battles simultaneouslyand will contain myriad offensive anddefensive weapons designed to supportmaritime defence needs well into the21st century.The ship will be built in Bath,Maine, and the Navy expects deliveryin December 2010. DDG-112will benefit from the considerabletechnological advancements andengineering upgrades that have beendeveloped, tested and installed inthe class since the commissioning ofDDG-51 July 1991.Second French aircraftcarrier design phasebeginsThe French Minister of Defence,Mrs Michèle Alliot-Marie, has launcheda design phase for the French Navy’ssecond aircraft carrier.This step marks the end of theprogram’s preparatory phases, duringwhich the aircraft carrier’s maintechnical and operational characteristicswere defined. They also validated theFrench President’s decision to optfor conventional, rather than nuclear,propulsion for the new ship.Teams from the Ministry of Defenceand participating manufacturers willnow undertake the ship’s detailed design,which will lead to the beginning of theproduction phase, presently scheduledfor 2006.A contract for the design work, worthapproximately 100 million EUROs, willbe awarded by the defence procurementagency, DGA, to DCN and Thales NavalFrance, which will act as joint primecontractors. Other major manufacturersinvolved in the naval sector, such asAlsthom-Chantiers de l’Atlantique andEADS will also participate in the designphase.Inline with the strategic guidelinesdecided during the French-Britishsummit meeting of November 2004, thedesign phase will include risk reductionand co-operative opportunity studies so18 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

as to determine, by the summer of2005, the feasibility and the scope ofco-operation between the French andBritish aircraft carrier programs.The decision to equip the Frenchnavy with a second aircraft carrierwas included in the multi-year defenceplanning budget for 2003-2008. Thenew ship is to be commissioned in 2014,in time to ensure the French Navy’suninterrupted naval air capabilities whenthe current aircraft carrier, the nuclearpoweredCHARLES DE GAULLE, willbecome unavailable due to its scheduledrefuelling and refit.Navy League Victoriahost CN for CreswellOrationThe Annual Creswell Oration,organised by the Victorian Division ofthe Navy League of Australia, was givenby Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral ChrisRitchie at a luncheon hosted by TheNaval Officers Club, Navy League andNaval Association in the Headquartersof the Returned Services League inMelbourne, on the anniversary of thefoundation of the Australian Navy onMarch 1st 1901.The function was attendedby 80 people. 15 guests includedCN, SNO Vic., the Captains ofFlash TrafficThe Chief of Navy, VADM Chris Ritchie (left),receiving a presentation from CMDR JohnWilkins (Rtd), President Victorian Division ofthe Navy League of Australia, during the annualCreswell Oration in Melbourne. (John Bird)HMAS BALLARAT and NUSHIPTOOWOOMBA and other officersand ratings from HMAS CERBERUS.Also in attendance were ElizabethSevior, the grand-daughter of AdmiralWilliam Creswell, together with hersister-in law, Rosemary Creswell.The luncheon was hosted by JohnWilkins, President of Navy League inVictoria and CN was introduced byElizabeth Sevior.Admiral Ritchie in his address,compared the relatively unfetteredcommand of the Navy by Creswell andthe situation pertaining today, whereCN does not have operational control ofNavy, nor indeed unhindered day to daycontrol of naval personnel. He spoke ofsome of the proposed Navy acquisitionspresently in the pipeline and mademention of critics of the proposed AirWarfare Destroyers, emphasizing theurgent need for these vessels for themaritime defence of the nation.RSS STEADFASTlaunchedThe Republic of Singapore Navy’s(RSN) third Delta class frigate, RSSSTEADFAST, was launched on 28 Jan2005, by Mrs Tony Tan Keng Yam, wife ofDeputy Prime Minister and Co-ordinatingMinister for Security and Defence Dr TonyTan Keng Yam, at Singapore TechnologiesMarine yard. DPM Tan officiated at thelaunching ceremony.The launch of RSS STEADFAST,the second locally built frigate, is animportant milestone in the RSN’s frigateprogram. The RSN’s stealth frigates willbe equipped with advanced sensor andweapon systems, and have enhancedanti-air, anti-surface and anti-submarinewarfare capabilities.When the RSN’s frigates come intoservice from 2007 onwards, the Navy’sability to undertake a wider spectrum ofmissions and carry out its missions ofdefending Singapore and its vital SeaLines of Communications (SLOCs) willbe enhanced.The first Horizon class air warfare frigate, Forbin à quai, was launched on 10 March for the French Navy (Marine Nationale). (DCN)THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 19

ObservationsBy Geoffrey EvansCHANGES AHEAD FOR NAVIESTwo articles in the January 2005 issue of PROCEEDINGS,the journal of the United States Naval Institute, are ofparticular interest at a time when many nations are reviewingthe structure of their Armed Forces in the light of changedand changing international events. The first concerns a newwarship which it is claimed by the authors* will have a similareffect on world navies as the Royal Navy’s DREADNOUGHThad when the first turbine-driven, all big-gun battleship waslaunched in 1906.THE DD(X) PROJECTThe initials DD are normally used to distinguish (fleet)destroyers from, other classes of warship but the new surfacecombatant planned for the US Navy at 14,000 tons is wellinto the CA or heavy cruiser category. The ship will introducenew systems and capabilities expected to be passed on to newgenerations of surface warships; they include:• An integrated power system providing electric powerfor all the ship’s needs including the propulsion motors,combat systems, hotel services etc. (introduction of thesystem is likened to the shift from sail to steam). Theengine room will be unmanned.• An Advanced (155mm) Gun System firing longrange(85 nautical miles) precision-guided land attackprojectiles, together with a missile firing capability.• New cutting edge sensors and a combat system tocounter, threats from below, on and above the surfaceof the sea. Advanced command, control and computingsystems• Improved habitability and workplace standards forpersonnel.• Low signature design characteristics to reduce chancesof detection.The primary mission of the multipurpose DD(X) will beto operate in littoral areas and influence events on land. It isanticipated the critical systems will be installed in the leadship in the 2008-9 time frame. It might be expected that thedevelopments currently taking place in the USN will be keptin mind by those responsible for bringing into service theAustralian Navy’s (smaller) Air Warfare Destroyers, plannedto be available in 2013.AMERICANS LIKE AUSTRALIANCATAMARANSThe second article in PROCEEDINGS reported inenthusiastic terms on tests carried out on three Australianbuiltcatamarans, or HSVs (High Speed Vessels) as they aredescribed by the author of the article**.The three vessels involved – JOINT VENTURE,SPEARHEAD and SWIFT, the last-named incorporatingfeatures learned from earlier experimentation with the firsttwo – have created a great deal of interest in the US ArmedForces.Each component of the Forces sees a particular use forthis type of vessel; the Army as a support vessel able tomove personnel and materiel rapidly, the Marines agreeingand extending the use to non-combatant evacuations andriverine operations, while the Navy sees the HSV as a combatorientated platform. The three have been tested in a range ofmilitary operations in the Middle East.Because of the HSVs speed – SWIFT is reported to becapable of more than 46 knots – and their relatively shallowdraft compared to a conventional sealift ships and variety ofuses, they are well-suited to littoral operations.The newest of the three under test, SWIFT, is able toaccommodate two helicopters and the M-1A1 (Abrams) mainbattle tank as well as provide facilities for the operation ofsmall craft. Other activities envisaged include:• Command and Control• Anti-submarine Warfare• Mine Countermeasures and Mining• Medical Support for Land Forces.Armament is stated to be largely for self-defence.The RAN has had experience with HSVs, utilizing theleased catamaran JERVIS BAY for logistical purposes inthe 1999 East-Timor operation. As with the DD(X) onemust assume Navy and Defence are keeping a close eye onHSV developments and no doubt encouraging the Australianpioneers and builders, Incat in Hobart and Austal in Fremantle,to maintain their lead in this particular and important area ofmarine development.* Captain C. H. Goddard, Program manager in the Program ExecutiveOffice for Ships.Commander C H Marlzs, DD(X) Requirements Officer in the office ofthe Chief of Naval Operations.** Frank S Mulcahy, Civil Engineer Corps USN, former surface warfareofficer and Naval War College graduate.A computer generated imageof the USN’s DD(X).20 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

OBITUARY;ADMIRAL MICHAEL WYNDHAMHUDSON ACThe Navy League lost a wise adviser and strong supporterwhen Admiral Hudson – “Mike” to his colleagues and friends– died in Sydney on 27 February – just a few days short of his72nd birthday.It is not for this writer to provide a detailed account ofMike Hudson’s career in the Service he entered as a cadetmidshipman in 1947 and departed in 1991 as an Admiral;nor to write of his numerous ‘post retirement’ activities andinterests other than those with which the writer is personallyfamiliar. It is however, appropriate to record in THE NAVYa selection of the principal appointments listed in the 2002edition of Who’s Who in Australia.Although not mentioned in Who’s Who, Mike Hudsondistinguished himself at an early stage of his naval careerby receiving the King’s Medal (KM), a Gold Medal awardedannually by the Sovereign to the Cadet Midshipman whoduring his period of training, exhibits the most exemplaryconduct, performance of duty, and good influence amonghis fellows. Qualifications gained in later years includedFellowship of the Australian Institute of Management (FAIM)and following courses at the Naval Staff College, Canada(NDC (C)), the Joint Services Staff College (JSCC) and TheUnited States Armed Services Staff College (AFSC).The future admiral’s seagoing commands were HMA ShipsVENDETTA 1970, BRISBANE 1974-75, STALWART 1976-77 and MELBOURNE 1981-82. He was promoted to RearAdmiral in 1982 and appointed Flag Officer CommandingHMA Fleet, serving 12 months in that appointment beforebecoming Assistant Chief of the Defence Force Staff (Policy),a position he occupied until appointment as Chief of the NavalStaff (CNS) in 1985 and promotion to Vice Admiral. Insteadof the customary three years, VADM Hudson served as CNSfor six years, retiring on 8th March 1991 with the rank ofAdmiral. During his service in the RAN he was awarded theAO in 1985 and AC in 1987.The late VADM Mike Hudson AC. (RAN)As Federal President of the Navy League at the time, thewriter had the benefit of a number of discussions with CNSHudson. In his retirement, among his many other activities hebecame a member of the Navy League’s Advisory Council andthe discussions continued, albeit a good deal more frequently,especially when the League was preparing submissions to theParliamentary Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee. Hisadvice was invaluable.Mike Hudson was a determined man who knew what hewanted but in the writer’s experience, was always prepared to listento sometimes contrary opinions. The League will miss him.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 21

PIRACYA Twenty First Century ProblemOn the RiseBy Paul JohnstoneIn the Twenty-First Century context, when someone mentions piracy almost immediately the idea ofthe theft of intellectual property, trademark and copyright violations come to mind. Unfortunately,the traditional use of the word in the context of maritime high jacking, kidnapping, murder and rape at seahas remerged alive and well within both Africa and Asia.PIRATES?The United Nations Law of the Sea defines piracy as‘violence on the high seas’ and ‘an incident beyond any states12 nautical mile territorial waters’. When piracy occurs interritorial waters it is referred to as sea robbery. The romanticnotion of a pirate or buccaneer such as the likable rougeplayed by Hollywood actor Errol Flynn is in reality nowherenear the real world truth.Modern-day maritime pirates can be divided into threekinds:• ‘Smaller’ pirates who simply rob the crew and thendepart. This usually occurs when the victim vessel is atanchor or at port.• Pirates who rob the crew and steal the cargo on board.• The third type of pirates take over the vessel, re-flag it,and then run a “phantom ship” which in turn, steals thecargo of anyone foolish enough to consign such goodsto it.Smaller pirates are usually only interested in the safe ofthe ship and the possessions of the crew (the safe of a shipsometimes contains a considerable amount of money to payport and payroll fees). The crews are most often left aloneand the ships are usually set adrift. Occasionally the ships aretaken as well and the crew is set adrift in a dolly. The ship isthen re-painted, re-named and re-registered, and sold.When the pirates are finished looting a ship they canusually escape fairly easily because they usually leave thecrew imprisoned or theyforce them off the shipbefore they leave. Piratescan also choose whichnation’s coastal watersthey will escape to.Some of the people inthe coastal villages andlocal towns of Indonesia,Malaysia or Singapore areeven sympathetic towardsthe arrival of pirates. InThe face of modern piracy. Gone arethe swords, eye patches, outlandishhats and swinging from the mainmast.Modern high seas pirates are nowarmed with grenade launchers and havethe ability to coordinate several otherpirate entities through two-way radios toswarm a target vessel and warn others ofmovements by the authorities.the Far East, where manyof these piracy attacksoccur, pirates have severalharbors to hide in andoperate from, where thelocals will protect them.The second andthird types of piratestend to be muchmore organized,‘professional’pirates. They areoften linked toother criminalorganization, onland which assistthem to carry outthe sale of thestolen goods andcargo, and assist inthe forging of cargodocumentation.Here is an exampleof the activities thesepirates undertake:1. The pirateslook for acommodity With a string of 40mm grenades around hisseller or chest and brandishing an AK-47 assault rifleshipping agent fitted with a grenade launcher this pirateresembles a terrorist more so than a high seaswith a letter thief. The use of such dangerous weapons hasof credit that caused many to believe that modern pirateshas almost have close links with terrorist groups.expired (thishappens regularly since the demand for shipping spaceexceeds that which is available).2. The pirates then offer the services of ‘their’ ship. (Thisis the ship that is stolen, re-painted, re-named, and reregistered).3. A temporary registration certificate is then acquiredthrough a registration office at a consulate. To get sucha certificate a bribe combined with verbal informationor some false and/or forged documents is necessary.This certificate provides the ship with an official (new)identity.4. The ship is loaded and the shipper receives his bill ofloading.5. The pirates then sail to a different port than theone named as the destination on the bill of loading.There they unload the cargo to a partner in crimeor an unsuspecting buyer and change the temporaryregistration certificate once again.The third type of pirates described involves sophisticatedorganisations of pirates who are able to steal at least $200million a year worth of cargo. Many of the ships are then22 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

flagged in either third world or economically underdevelopedcountries (like Honduras and Panama), and usually take cargothat is easily disposed of but not easily traceable, such astimber, metals, and minerals. The significance of the thirdtype lies in the sophistication of these maritime thieves. Asindicated by the measures these pirates take, as outlinedabove, they are professional thieves.All three types of piracy are of concern. But, where thecargo and/or ship is the target, is of greatest concern sincelives are at stake; The crew of the hijacked ship could bemarooned or even thrown overboard by the sea raiders.PIRACY ON THE RISEFailed States and abject poverty in countries like those inAfrica has seen the re-emergence of maritime piracy withinthis region and subsequent threats to both shipping andpeople. The height of the Asian Economic Collapse saw therise of piracy in Asia, especially within the Malacca Straits.It is estimated that around 95% of the world’s commerceis currently carried by ship with approximately 600 ships aday moving through the Malacca Straits and South ChinaSea. Many of these ships are carrying cargos such as oiland Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) to the energy hungry anddeveloping nations of Asia. A principal challenge for anyNation is exercising control of their Economic Exclusion Zone(EEZ) and their Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC). Piracyis introducing new constraints, expenses and exposing manyof the sovereignty limitations many nations suffer from ineffectively responding to this form of maritime challenge.Open source intelligence reports have suggested that inAsia poorly paid naval elements of cash strapped nationshave at times resorted to piracy and kidnapping to supplementtheir incomes. Logically they have the tools at their disposalto conduct such operations and with no one to watch thewatchers they have little chance of being apprehended and orconvicted.The rise of economic refuges and people traffickinghas provided a steady source of prey and income for thoseinvolved in piracy. In Africa, it is often the dominant warlordwho has control of naval assets or who has effectivelymodified fast boats that have become seaborne predators.Unconfirmed reports have indicated that members of theIndonesian Free Aceh Movement or GAM have possibly usedpiracy as a means to fund their ongoing war against the Jakartagovernment.The fight against piracy is currently monitored and largelyco-ordinated from the International Chamber of Commerce’sInternational Maritime Bureau (IMB) in London, Kuala Lumpaand The United Nations International Maritime Organization(IMO). The IMB offers a rapid response investigation anda satellite tracking service as well as promoting and trailinga variety of systems to work as deterrents and preventativemeasures relating to acts of piracy. The IMO principallyattempts to coordinate international approaches to counterpiracy, by educational seminars and issuing regular reportsto notify shipping and shipping companies of regional piracyhotspots. Cooperation between Governments and officialsare also fostered through the efforts of IMO instilling abetter understanding of regional and international efforts andresponses to the act of piracy.Some of the physical deterrents to piracy that have beendeveloped for use on ships include a 9,000 volt anti-boardingfence around the perimeter of the ship’s deck. This ‘Secure-Ship Fence’ is both collapsible and storable and zones may berendered inactive to allow crew to conduct work on both thedeck and the cargo whilst still having the other zones live andproviding protection. With the fence is a sophisticated controlmodule that detects any attempts of entry and activates lightsand alarms to warn the crew. An advantage of the ships electricfence is that is protects the ship and crew while negating theneed to arm them. The 9,000 volt charge is not lethal, nothindered by salt water and will operate in all types of weather.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 23

Unfortunately, the electric barrier cannot be used on oil orLNG tankers or carriers of flammable materials.The satellite-tracking system, or SHIPLOC, is currentlybeing enforced through the International Ships and PortFacility Code (ISPS). SHIPLOC is a small satellite trackingsystem hidden upon a vessel allowing owners to monitor themovement of their ship. The Safety of Life at Sea Convention(SOLAS) has required all ships to display their InternationalMaritime Organisation (IMO) number visibly on their hulls.One simple defence mechanism and technique that hasproven to be most successful is to have crew posted on keypoints of the ship when entering dangerous waters equippedwith radios and charged fire hoses. Any attempt to board theship sees the unwelcome boarder hit with the full force of thefire hose, risking a fall and possible drowning or an encounterwith the ships massive propellers. This is particularly safedefensive option for oil and LNG tankers removing the risk offirearms, spark and flame.Nations such as Singapore are beginning to classify piracyalong the same lines as terrorism. Many groups involved inpiracy also have links with religious extremist groups eitherthrough family bonds or through economic dependancy. Asmentioned earlier it is thought the Indonesian Free AcehMovement or GAM have possibly used piracy as a means tofund their ongoing war against the Jakarta government. Skillslearned on the ‘piracy job’ can also translate to extremistsponsored or paid acts of terrorism (much like mercenaries).Links between crime gangs and terrorists are starting toemerge with the term ‘narco-terrorism’ being used to describeongoing Al-Qeada efforts to fund operations through drugmanufacture.Modern pirates are increasingly using sophisticatedequipment, with high levels of coordination, high levels ofviolence and modern weapons systems. This worrying trendhas seen the forum of ASEAN nations take notice giventhe growing similarity with modern terrorism. One concernhas been the worldwide links between religious militantsand the discovery of a plot to attack the Royal Navy aircraftcarrier HMS ARK ROYAL (CVS) as it transited the Straits ofGibraltar to support operations in Iraq in 2003. Other threatshave also been allegedly discovered against the recentlylaunched QUEEN MARY 2 and other luxury cruise liners.Just like the tanker wars of the 1980’s in the Persian Gulfa new and expensive naval or armed commitment of escortingsea trade may need to occur, and with this a cost that willhave to be passed onto the consumer. Currently, two thirdsof the world’s trade passes through South East Asia placingenormous pressure on the nations that border these alreadycongested sea lanes to guarantee both the rights of protectionand of passage. ASEAN has attempted to organise formalcooperation in policing areas such as the Malacca Strait onlyto have nations such as Malaysia reject the assistance offoreign forces to patrol its waters. This stance by Malaysia andothers has contributed to the already significant gaps withinregional maritime coverage and deterrent efforts. In the year2000, at the peak of international piracy the financial loss dueto maritime piracy was estimated to be US$16 billion.Africa is another significant point of piracy especiallyaround the continent’s East Coast, the Horn and Westernstretch of waters between Nigeria and Guinea. Piracy withinAfrican waters stems from unchecked activities from warlordsand militias who are active in hostage taking, ransomingand theft. Many of the weapons in the hands of militantsare reported to have come via Somalia which, as discoveredduring United Nations Operation Restore Hope, is a violentfragmented nation awash in an extensive range of weaponsand a population who know how to use them. The US hasresponded to threats in this region and its own interest throughthe African Coastal Security Program. Currently, 15% ofUS oil is coming from this region and is expected to growto around 25% as more oil platforms come on-line. Manyof the African coastal nations cannot effectively enforce orpolice their EEZ. Foreign and unauthorised incursions occurregularly alongside illegal fishing to such a degree that fishstocks are almost depleted. An inability to respond to thesethreats at the most basic level induces even greater concernswhen it comes to protecting shipping or oil platforms.Apart from the loss of life, shipping and commerce thereis the threat of severe environmental hazards resulting fromthe acts of piracy. In 1999, the fully laden crude carrier MTCHAUMONT was left uncrewed for 70 minutes sailing at fullspeed towards the southern end of the Malacca Strait afterbeing attacked by pirates. The environmental consequencesfrom running aground or colliding with other shipping wouldhave produced an oil spill of an unprecedented size in theregion. For a region that depends heavily upon the sea for fishproducts and desalination of water for drinking a spill of thismagnitude would have had severe economic losses as well asenvironmental.Taiwan and Japan are two nations that are totally dependantupon the shipping of foreign oil while China imports asignificant proportion of its oil to meet its energy productionneeds. An interruption or delay to oil deliveries would havedisastrous impacts upon the economies of these nationsand threaten their national security. A maritime responsewould most likely be enacted by Japan and China to threatssuch as this but Taiwan may be tied up with domesticsecurity considerations and international concerns about itsinvolvement offshore. Japan, on the other hand, has provided24 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

significant contributions to the war on terror in the form ofsupport ships and refuellers to allied navies. Regular Japanesepatrols and a desire for cooperation within the South EastAsian region will incur constitutional and regional concernsstemming back to Japan’s Imperial past. Alternatively China’sinvolvement would most likely be viewed as an attempt toexpand its regional ambitions and influence, altering a balancethat nations such as the US and Australia may feel they wouldneed to counteract.Earlier this year the C-IN-C USPACOM (Commander inChief US Pacific Command) Admiral Fargo testified to the USHouse of Representatives that the Pentagon was formulatinga Regional Maritime Security Initiative (RMSI) to combatthe threats of piracy, maritime terrorism, sea trafficking ofpeople and drugs. Principal components of the initiativewould be greater intelligence sharing with Asian membersof the Initiative and staging of US Marines and SpecialForces on armed high-speed interdiction vessels within theregion. The island State of Singapore has demonstrated themost enthusiasm for the proposal by negotiating with the USover the terms of RMSI. Indonesia and Malaysia have bothexpressed concerns relating to their own ability to maintainadequate security and meet the demands that would be placedupon their naval and Coast Guard services.A big part of the rationale behind the stance taken byIndonesia and Malaysia is that they view security as adomestic issue that they and other members of the region willsort out rather than introduce the issue of foreign intervention.Apart from the issues of national pride and sovereignty, it isbelieved an active participation by US or other foreign forcesmay be counterproductive to a degree that may provoketerrorist incidents and foster instability within these nationsthat have populations with strong anti-western, anti-Americanand radical Islamic beliefs.The ShipLoc system is currently providing vital intelligence to authoritieson merchant ships at sea that may be under attack or have been attacked andseized by pirates.THE FUTUREPiracy is alive and well globally and often has strongand effective links with modern maritime terrorism and theglobal War on Terror. For nations that rely heavily upon theSea Lanes of Communication for much of their economiclifeblood the threats of kidnapping, murder, disruption to tradeand environmental catastrophe is of enormous concern. Thecost to adequately policing and monitoring the high volumesof maritime trade is generally well beyond the capabilities,resources, finances and political will of shipping companiesand nations. It is unlikely that a coordinated effort wouldinduce an overall halt in pirate activity but would surelyreduce many of the threats in their current form.Piracy is estimated to have been occurring for over 3000years and has long been a means of instilling fear, interruptingtrade and commerce and its associated profits. In our regionthe Asian Economic Crisis was the trigger by which thisscourged remerged in its largest and most violent form sincethe conclusion of the Vietnam Conflict and the era of the boatpeople. The failed states and lawlessness of Africa have alsobeen active contributors to the rise of piracy along side theinternational reduction in naval surface fleets and their at seapresence. This is little doubt that these issues have aided andinspired confidence within the modern perpetrators of thisancient terror of the seas.PRESS RELEASE FROMTHE INTERNATIONALMARITIME BUREAU (IMB)OF THE EUROPEAN-BASEDINTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OFCOMMERCEANNUAL DEATH TOLL FROMPIRACY RISESLONDON, 7 FEBRUARY 2005 –Pirates preying on shipping were more violent thanever in 2004 and murdered a total of 30 crew members,compared with 21 in 2003, the ICC International MaritimeBureau reported in its annual piracy report for 2004.The number of attacks reported worldwide through theIMB Piracy Reporting Centre in Kuala Lumpur was 325,down from the 445 recorded in 2003.Indonesian waters continue to be the scene of thehighest number of attacks, with 93 incidents reportedin 2004. While this is down from 121 in 2003, it stillaccounts for more than one quarter of piratical attacksreported worldwide.The report said hijackings of tugs and barges and thekidnapping of crew members were on the rise, especiallyin Indonesian waters, in the Northern Malacca Straits,and off North Sumatra. While in the past these attackshad been thought to be the work of Aceh rebels, there werenow increasing signs that crime syndicates are also usingfishing boats for such attacks.Attacks in Nigerian waters were down from 39 in2003 to 28. However, the report said that offshore Nigeriastill had the third highest number of incidents and wasregarded as the most dangerous area in Africa for piracyand armed robbery at sea.The IMB is part of ICC Commercial Crime Services,the division of the International Chamber of Commercededicated to fighting all types of commercial crime.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 25

Fremantle’sWartime InfernoBy Vic JefferyThick black smoke obscures the blazing MV PANAMANIAN with the Royal navy submarine depot ship HMS MAIDSTONE and a US Navy submarine depotship, believed to be the USS EURYALE, forward of the merchantman. The RAN Signal Station can be seen between the two depot ships, located on top ofthe grain silos. The MV UMGENI is in midstream with a harbour tug after being moved away after outboard of the blazing ship.(Vic Jeffery collection)A major fire which threatened to cause major disruption and destruction to the allied war effort in thePort of Fremantle in 1945 was hidden behind a veil of strict wartime security.Vic Jeffery lifts the veil for readers of THE NAVYJanuary 17, 1945, was a typical hot Western Australiansummer’s day with the temperature being recorded as 107degrees Fahrenheit in the shade and with a shimmering heathaze hanging over the bustling harbour, crammed with alliedwarships, submarines, depot ships, and merchant ships.On that day a fire broke out at No. 8 berth at North Wharfaround 3.15pm, and quickly engulfed the MV PANAMANIAN,a 15,575 ton merchant ship. It then spread to the RoyalNavy submarine depot ship, HMS MAIDSTONE, berthedimmediately forward of the old freighter.MV PANAMANIAN had arrived in Gage Roads onNovember 26, 1944, coming into the inner harbour three dayslater to unload her cargo and then being moved several timesbefore ending up at No. 8 berth on that fateful day loadingbags of flour. It was only the advent of World War II that hadsaved the old ship from the scrapyard.By the time of the outbreak of fire, PANAMANIAN hadtaken on 154,487 bags of flour totalling 10,339 tons, all ofwhich was destined to be ruined.The temperature on the PANAMANIAN’s deck thatafternoon during loading operations was estimated at 117degrees Fahrenheit.As a protection against the heat emitted from the winchon board, a winchman placed a piece of a hessian wheat sackover the cylinder.During the afternoon tea break it was noticed to besmouldering and one of the stevedore’s gang stamped this outand left the hessian on the deck. It was only a minute or twolater another of the men, noticing that it was still smouldering,picked it up, just as the British freighter UMGENI was beingberthed outboard of the ship.Instinctively he threw it over the shoreward side expectingit to fall into the water between the ship and the wharf. As thesmouldering bag fell it ignited and burst into flames and wascaught by one of the horizontal timbers on the wharf structurewhere it remained burning.Part of the bag trailed on the water surface where it cameinto contact with the film of oil, which acting like a hugewick, saw a sudden burst of flame which shot up and ignitedmooring ropes and paint on the hull of the PANAMANIAN.The fire quickly spread to hessian bags onboard and leaptup to the bridge as well as under the wharf where it is believedthe summer conditions and the flammability of the dry wharftimbers added to the spreading blaze.26 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

Soon the ship was well ablaze, smoke billowing out ofthree holds, the saloon and promenade decks burning fiercelyand ammunition for the ship’s defensive armament of a single4-inch gun mounted on the stern, a 12 pounder, eight 20mmOerlikons, along with rockets, exploding.Much gallantry was displayed as men struggled to throwammunition overboard. Efforts to tow the double-bankedfreighter UMGENI were successful as the ship was cast offand was towed to safety by a harbour tug.Within a short space of time, the fire had raced westerlyalong 350 metres of the North Wharf opposite PANAMANIANand the Royal Navy submarine deport ship HMS MAIDSTONEwhere fire broke out on the bridge.With flames licking its side, MAIDSTONE was quicklytowed out into midstream and its fires extinguished. With itsload of torpedoes, ammunition and diesoline the submarinedepot ship was a floating bomb.Two US Navy submarine depot ships had been movedout of the inner harbour along with the submarines bustledalongside them. The fear of detonation of explosives onboarda ship or submarine was obviously a major concern.On that fateful day there had been a total of 13 UnitedStates Navy, six Royal Navy and one Dutch submarinealongside depot ships at North Wharf in Fremantle’s innerharbour.Aboard the PANAMANIAN the fire continued to ragefiercely. All essential personnel had been cleared away fromthe area when the flames reached the anti-aircraft magazine.The continuously maintained fire brigade of the UnitedStates Navy upon the North Wharf for the protection of itsown vessels enabled fire-fighting measures to be undertakenrapidly.One US submarine rescue ship, USS CHANTICLEER,steamed up and down pumping thousands of litres of water atand under the wharf with its large pumping plant and breakingup the oil on the water with its wash.Metropolitan fire brigades and the Fremantle HarbourTrust’s own volunteer fire brigade was quickly on the scenewhere the chief officer of the WA Fire Brigades Boardpersonally supervised firefighting operations.The first of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade engines toarrive took up a position on the wharf where, unfortunately, itbecame enveloped in the fierce fire and guttered.There were ample numbers of allied service personnelreadily available to assist the fire-fighting efforts in assistingthe various fire brigade units.After 6pm, all efforts were concentrated on extinguishingthe fire onboard PANAMANIAN, and soon after, with theamount of water being poured into it, the ship started tolist badly to port, which was in the direction of the harbourfairway, resulting in the mooring lines carrying away and thevessel drifting from the wharf and the streams of hoses.Tugs were quickly on the scene and pushed thePANAMANIAN back to the wharf. The decision was thenmade to reduce the delivery of water for the purpose ofextinguishing the fire and utilise it for the filling of starboardtanks of the vessel in an endeavour to bring her back to a moreeven keel.Owing to the danger of the fuel oil tanks likely to eruptand in the view of the fire then raging fiercely along thewhole of the promenade deck of the vessel as well as in theforward hatches, the naval authorities ordered all warships inthe harbour to stand-by ready to proceed instantly to CockburnSound or Gage Roads in the outer harbour.The US Navy submarine rescue ship USS COUGAL pumps thousands of litres of water on the burning MV PANAMANIAN and the burning North Wharfas she steams up and down the north eastern section of Fremantle Harbour breaking-up the oil on the surface whilst US Navy personnel help fight the fire onNorth Wharf. (USN)THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 27

The Harbour Master then gave corresponding directionsto all merchant vessels, and thereafter tugs were employedassisting in their removal.By daylight the next day the fire on the ship had then beenbrought under control and the immediate risk of its loss hadpassed.Tragically there was one fatality when a Royal NavyAble Seaman, Kenneth Shooter, fell down a hatchway on thePANAMANIAN while fighting a fire in a hold in which thecargo was ablaze.It was eventually seven days from the time of the outbreakof the fire until the last of the fire fighting equipment wasfinally withdrawn.Investigations concluded that the oil that ignited causingthe fire was a comparatively small quantity of furnace oilprobably recently discharged from the ship and had notdispersed being in the sheltered area between the ship and thewharf.Being an old ship, the MV PANAMANIAN had many oilleaks in the engine room which regularly pumped its bilgesout into the harbour.This, coupled with the surface oil present during the warthrough Allied submarines emptying and cleansing theirdiesoline tanks prior to receiving fresh supplies and thefurnace oil from the many visiting ships, left a continual filmof surface oil in the harbour.The Harbour commissioners had expressed concernwith this problem and tried unsuccessfully to alleviateit. Aggravating the problem was the fact that more than6,000 vessels a year were using the busy harbour duringthe war.There had been a smaller similar fire onboard themerchantman EDENDAL in Fremantle Harbour on November1, 1943 when a cutting plant onboard had ignited gas fromvolatile oil at No. 10 berth, North Wharf.In the case of EDENDAL the brief 30-minute fire hadcaused $110,000 damage.In 1946 the Eastern Asia Navigation Company Limitedlodged writs claiming $1,034,000 for damages to the MVPANAMANIAN and its cargo upon the Fremantle Trust. Thewrits were defended by the Fremantle Harbour trust and theCourt found in their favour.The cost had been high – one fatality, $50,000 to repairand restore the wharf, $1,000,000 damage to the MVPANAMANIAN and its cargo and the loss of valuable firefightingequipment.The Shanghai-registeredMV PANAMANIAN,seen prior to its fateful fire.28 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

A wartime aerial view of the crowded Port of Fremantle showing nearly 40 ships and submarines alongside and the floating US Navy dry dock ARD.10 inmidstream. (Vic Jeffery collection)THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 29

HATCH, MATCH & DISPATCHFIRST ARMIDALE NAMED ANDLAUNCHEDThe RAN has taken delivery the first of 14 Armidale classpatrol boats, NUSHIP ARMIDALE.Minister for Environment and Heritage, Senator IanCampbell attended the naming ceremony, held at the AustalShips construction facility, Western Australia on behalf ofDefence Minister Senator Hill.“This ceremony commemorates the successful launchof the vessel on 5 January 2005, following the design andconstruction over the past year,” Senator Campbell said.“This achievement is testament to Austal’s and TheDefence Materiel Organization’s ability to deliver on time andon budget.“I am sure that the ship trials over the next few monthswill also see the vessel’s ability to meet the requiredperformance”.The 56 metre all-aluminium monohull was named byMs Jana Stone, the eldest daughter of Ordinary SeamanDonald Raymond Lawson who served on the original HMASARMIDALE, a Bathurst class corvette, during World War II.This launch of the first vessel is a key milestone underProject Sea 1444 following the signing of a $553 millioncontract on 17 December 2003 with Defence MaritimeServices (DMS) for the supply and long term support of a newPatrol Boat fleet of 14 Armidale class boats.“I congratulate DMS, the principal contractor, and AustalShips, responsible for the design and construction of the vesselsfor their work on this project,” Senator Campbell said.The Armidale class vessels will substantially improve theRoyal Australian Navy’s capability to intercept and apprehendvessels suspected of illegal fishing and quarantine, customsor immigration offences. The patrol boats in this regard play amajor role in patrolling and protecting Australia’s coastline.Following the sea trials, NUSHIP ARMIDALE is scheduledfor acceptance in May 2005.The 14 patrol boats will be delivered at regular intervalsover the next two-and-a-half years.Chief of Navy, VADM Chris Ritchie, and the Austal Managing Director Mr John Rothwell walk past the newly named and launched ARMIDALE.30 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

THE STARVATION BLOCKADES:NAVAL BLOCKADES OF WW1By: Nigel HawkinsPubl: Naval Institute Press, 2004Reviewed By Mr Joe StrazeckPRODUCT REVIEWThe majority of books dealing with the naval history ofWorld War 1 see this in terms of the Battle of Jutland, thesubmarine war and eliminating German ships in distant seas.Whilst these events were elements of this conflict they donot place the overall war at sea into its proper context. Thisthough, is what Nigel Hawkins has done with The StarvationBlockades. In this book Nigel Hawkins places the GreatWar at sea into its historical context. The war at sea wasabout economic survival, both sides needed to import by seasignificant amounts of war material.Both Germany and Britain recognised each othersdependence on maritime imports and both countries took stepsto stop the flow of war material to the other. This is the war atsea which Nigel Hawkins describes.From the outbreak of the war the British initiated theirblockade of Germany. German ships were taken as prizesand neutral ships were intercepted and inspected for what theBritish considered contraband. Ships found to be carryingwar material had the cargo confiscated. These actions by theBritish infuriated the neutral, especially the United States. Inthe case of the United States the actions of the British weresuch that the possibility of a repeat of the War of 1812 was nottoo far fetched. Fortunately for the British the actions of theGermans in their submarine based counter-blockade ensuredthat this would not happen.As the central theme of The Starvation Blockades is abouteconomic blockade it is not surprising that Mr Hawkins devotessome time to examining the rules governing such operationsand the rights of neutrals. In his discussions he clearly showshow the British were able to manipulate the concept of ablockade because of the power of the Royal Navy. Yet stillthey needed to treat carefully in the context of the UnitedStates. Whilst the British blockade was not very successfulinitially, it became so as the war continued. The German mineand submarine blockade on the other hand not only ultimatelyfailed but also proved to be a strategic hindrance as it ensuredAmerican hostility to Germany.The success and subsequent failure of the submarinecampaign in the second half of the war is also examined.What is surprising about this period is the reluctance of theBritish Admiralty to introduce convoys, notwithstandingthe historical evidence of their utility. When pushed onthe issue the Admiralty found a number of excuses as towhy convoys would not work. Eventually however, theywere forced to try convoys and were pleasantly surprisedto find out that the system actually worked, and workedwell. This is not to say that there were no longer sinkingand everything functioned perfectly. The introduction ofthe convoy system effectively broke the German blockade.British industry and population were sustained and anentire Army of fresh troops was transported across theAtlantic to the Western Front.To read Nigel Hawkins’ book is to understand theimportance of winning the war at sea during the First WorldWar. Victory at sea ultimately ensured victory on land,defeat meant economic and industrial collapse and at besta negotiated settlement with your enemy. The StarvationBlockades is a well written and researched book which shouldbe read by all students of maritime strategy and those with aninterest in the First World War.NAVAL BUTTONS BUCKLESBANNERS AND BADGES 1748-2003By Commander John M Wilkins RFD RANR (Retd),Navy League VicReviewed by Nick Fletcher, Curator, Military Heraldry andTechnology, Australian War MemorialNaval ButtonsBuckles Banners &Badges 1748-2003 isthe latest version of adetailed study whichCommander John M.Wilkins RFD RANR(Retd), a prominentmember of the NavyLeague, has beenworking on for someyears. As its subtitle;‘History of Britishand Australian NavalButtons – A CollectorsGuide & Catalogue’suggests, this slimvolume is primarilydevoted to a sequential description of the buttons worn bythe Royal Navy, the Navies of the Australian Colonies, theembryonic Australian Navy (Commonwealth Naval Force),and its successor, the Royal Australian Navy.Heavily illustrated, the book depicts virtually every buttonvariation used during the period. It also features insertionswhere relevant, showing belt buckles, swords and flags.The catalogue provides a useful guide to size, rarity andcomparative value of the items listed, while a folding chart atthe rear traces the development of the British and Australiannational flags and naval ensigns. Potential buyers should beaware that the book is printed, edited and published by CmdrWilkins, and production values cannot be expected to matchthose of professional publishing houses. In general, however,it is admirably clear and well laid out, and should be easilyunderstood by the reader.Naval Buttons Buckles Banners & Badges 1748-2003provides an indispensable guide for those seriously interestedin the subject of Australian Naval uniform, and particularly inthe buttons worn by the RN, the RAN and its predecessors.Much of the information which it contains is otherwiseunobtainable, or at best difficult to locate. As such, thebook, which is published in a limited edition of 200 copies,represents excellent value at $30.00 plus postage.THE NAVY VOL. 67 NO. 2 31

STATEMENT of POLICYNavy League of AustraliaThe strategic background to Australia’s security haschanged in recent decades and in some respects becomemore uncertain. The League believes it is essential thatAustralia develops capability to defend itself, payingparticular attention to maritime defence. Australia is, ofgeographical necessity, a maritime nation whose prosperitystrength and safety depend to a great extent on the securityof the surrounding ocean and island areas, and on seabornetrade.The Navy League:• Believes Australia can be defended against attack byother than a super or major maritime power and thatthe prime requirement of our defence is an evidentability to control the sea and air space around us andto contribute to defending essential lines of sea andair communication to our allies.• Supports the ANZUS Treaty and the futurereintegration of New Zealand as a full partner.• Urges a close relationship with the nearer ASEANcountries, PNG and the Island States of the SouthPacific.• Advocates a defence capability which is knowledgebasedwith a prime consideration given tointelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.• Advocates the acquisition of the most modernarmaments and sensors to ensure that the ADFmaintains some technological advantages overforces in our general area.• Believes there must be a significant deterrentelement in the Australian Defence Force (ADF)capable of powerful retaliation at considerabledistances from Australia.• Believes the ADF must have the capability toprotect essential shipping at considerable distancesfrom Australia, as well as in coastal waters.• Supports the concept of a strong modern Air Forceand highly mobile Army, capable of littoral andjungle warfare as well as the defence of NorthernAustralia.• Supports the development of amphibious forces toensure the security of our offshore territories and toenable assistance to be provided by sea as well as byair to friendly island states in our area.• Endorses the transfer of responsibility for the coordinationof Coastal Surveillance to the defenceforce and the development of the capability forpatrol and surveillance of the ocean areas all aroundthe Australian coast and island territories, includingthe Southern Ocean.• Advocates measures to foster a build-up ofAustralian-owned shipping to ensure the carriage ofessential cargoes in war.• Advocates the development of a defence industrysupported by strong research and design organisationscapable of constructing all needed types of warshipsand support vessels and of providing systems andsensor integration with through-life support.As to the RAN, the League:• Supports the concept of a Navy capable of effectiveaction off both East and West coasts simultaneouslyand advocates a gradual build up of the Fleet toensure that, in conjunction with the RAAF, thiscan be achieved against any force which could bedeployed in our general area.• Is concerned that the offensive and defensivecapability of the RAN has decreased markedly inrecent decades and that with the paying-off of theDDGs, the Fleet will lack air defence and have areduced capability for support of ground forces.• Advocates the very early acquisition of the newdestroyers as foreshadowed in the Defence WhitePaper 2.• Advocates the acquisition of long-range precisionweapons to increase the present limited powerprojection, support and deterrent capability of theRAN.• Advocates the acquisition of unmanned surveillanceaircraft such as the GLOBAL HAWK primarily foroffshore surveillance.• Advocates the acquisition of sufficient Australianbuiltafloat support ships to support two naval taskforces with such ships having design flexibility andcommonality of build.• Advocates the acquisition at an early date ofintegrated air power in the fleet to ensure that ADFdeployments can be fully defended and supportedfrom the sea.• Advocates that all Australian warships shouldbe equipped with some form of defence againstmissiles.• Advocates that in any future submarine constructionprogram all forms of propulsion be examinedwith a view to selecting the most advantageousoperationally.• Advocates the acquisition of an additional 2 or 3updated Collins class submarines.• Supports the maintenance and continuingdevelopment of the mine-countermeasures force anda modern hydrographic/oceanographic capability.• Supports the maintenance of an enlarged, flexiblepatrol boat fleet capable of operating in severe seastates.• Advocates the retention in a Reserve Fleet of Navalvessels of potential value in defence emergency.• Supports the maintenance of a strong Naval Reserveto help crew vessels and aircraft in reserve, or takenup for service, and for specialised tasks in time ofdefence emergency.• Supports the maintenance of a strong AustralianNavy Cadets organisation.The League:Calls for a bipartisan political approach to nationaldefence with a commitment to a steady long-term build-upin our national defence capability including the requiredindustrial infrastructure.While recognising current economic problems andbudgetary constraints, believes that, given leadership bysuccessive governments, Australia can defend itself in thelonger term within acceptable financial, economic andmanpower parameters.32 VOL. 67 NO. 2 THE NAVY

‘Instant Navy’. The heavy lift ship MARIAleaving Fremantle with 10 Austal builtpatrol boats for the Yemani Navy. (Austal)NUSHIP ARMIDALE at sea. (RAN)

First images of the new Harpoon fitment to the RAN’s Anzac class frigates.HMAS WARRAMUNGA was the first Anzac to undergo the fit out whileat HMAS STIRLING in WA. The positioning is reminiscent of theRN’s Type 21 frigates before being sold to Pakistan.Twilight for the F-14 Tomcat after more than 30 years of service. (USN)

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines