RAN carrier program and earlier RAAF expansion

[Admiral Beez]

Australia didn't have to ask England for permission to buy Catalina or to build P&W engines, but UK was Australia's #1 trading partner and they had just been through a devastating trade war with Japan. They certainly weren't going pick another over a batch of flying boats.

That was the problem with the British Empire, resources out of the colonies, finished goods out of the UK. This left the colonies underdeveloped, underinvested and difficult to defend when the home country was threatened. Australia needed to break or renegotiate this arrangement, and should have done so once Britain canceled its alliance with Japan in 1921. Australia should have spent the roaring 20s building up its warship, artillery, tank, truck and aircraft manufacturing capacity.

The RAN was the most prepared of Australia's three arms. But as it was, in Sept 1939 the RAN began the war with a tiny force:

- two County-class heavy cruisers; Australia and Canberra (all UK built)
- three modern Modified Leander-class light cruisers; Hobart, Perth, and Sydney (all UK built)
- the older Town-class cruiser Adelaide (Australian built)
- four sloops, Parramatta, Swan, Warrego, and Yarra (all Australian built)
- five V-class destroyers (all UK built)
- 5,440 personnel

Beside building four sloops, what was Australian shipbuilding doing between the wars? The Cockatoo Island Dockyard laid down HMAS Adelaide in 1915, launched her in 1918.... and then didn't make another warship until HMAS Yarra was laid down in 1934. What was Cockatoo Island doing for those sixteen years between launching Adelaide and beginning Yarra?

EDIT.... let's answer my own question, Cockatoo Island Dockyard - Wikipedia, a total of six ships for the RAN between 1918 and 1938.

HMAS Biloela - Wikipedia laid down 1918, launched 1919
HMAS Mombah - Wikipedia laid down 1920, launched 1921
HMAS Cape Leeuwin - Wikipedia laid down and launched in 1924
HMAS Albatross (1928) - Wikipedia laid down 1926, launched 1928
HMAS Kookaburra - Wikipedia laid down and launched in 1938

The IJN is rapidly expanding, the RN, HMS Hood and Repulse's brief visit aside, has clearly abandoned the Pacific Ocean. It was truly a leap of faith for Canberra to agree to send nearly the entirety of its combat ready forces to North Africa and the MTO in 1940.

 

[SaparotRob]

Perhaps it was hubris on the Commonwealth's part? Perceived superiority and ill placed faith on Singapore, Malaya and Hong Kong to dissuade any Asian adventurism?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Perhaps it was hubris on the Commonwealth's part? Perceived superiority and ill placed faith on Singapore, Malaya and Hong Kong to dissuade any Asian adventurism?

I think the hubris lay in Whitehall, myself, rather than any particular Commonwealth.

 

[SaparotRob]

Just being P.C., Bro'!

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Oh, I thought you were being serious.

 

[nuuumannn]

On another note, wouldn't Australian and Canadian ships have counted as British ships for treaty purposes as they were British dominions rather than sovereign nations?

The Royal Australian Navy was a separate entity from the RN and was fully autonomous. Dunno about the Canadian navy, but in New Zealand, the navy did not become autonomous until 1941 when it became the Royal New Zealand Navy for the first time - ships stationed in New Zealand before then were known as the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy. The likes of the light cruisers Leander and Achilles, both of which were part of the NZ Div had the prefix 'HMS' before 1941.

Australia didn't have to ask England for permission to buy Catalina or to build P&W engines, but UK was Australia's #1 trading partner and they had just been through a devastating trade war with Japan. They certainly weren't going pick another over a batch of flying boats.

Purchasing foreign, i.e. non-British equipment was certainly frowned upon in the dominions. It was New Zealand that bucked the trend first - Prime Minister Peter Fraser was friends with FDR and made a deal where the New Zealand armed forces would be supplied with aircraft diverted from British production batches, initially P-40s and Hudsons. Churchill expressed his disapproval but there was nothing he could do, really. The Australians were less likely to take the same route and also didn't approve of the New Zealand approach - to this day Kiwis are far more liberal than Australians in many things, but it was inevitable that Australia follows suit.

The Cockatoo Island Dockyard

A slight but not inappropriate diversion, here are some piccies that I thought might be of interest to you guys. My uncle used to work at Cockatoo Island; he was involved in overhauling the RAN's Oberon Class submarines. I think he worked on the supply ship HMAS Success, which was built there, before he retired. I remember my auntie saying she went to the official launch of the ship. It's now closed and is a tourist stop and you can visit it by catching the ferry.

This is the front entrance where workers would disembark from their ferries and enter the yard.

DSC_3921

This is a view of where the main machine workshops were, but have been pulled down, a lot of the old buildings still remain, though, as the place is a listed heritage site. Harbour bridge in the distance.

DSC_3911

One of the docks where the submarines were berthed to be worked on. I have a book that could tell us which ships were built in this particular dock, but it's away at the moment.

DSC_3902

This was used as an anti-aircraft gun platform in WW2. Note the Aboriginal flag painted on the centre stem.

DSC_3907

These are brochures on the launching of HMAS Success, to this date the biggest ship built in Australia, a displacement of around 18,200 t. HMAS Success (OR 304) - Wikipedia

DSC_3908

The slip where Success was built.

DSC_3893

Enjoying this thread, carry on...

 

[Graeme]

Nice shots Grant. I used to work at Garden Island Dockyard.

It was New Zealand that bucked the trend first - Prime Minister Peter Fraser was friends with FDR and made a deal where the New Zealand armed forces would be supplied with aircraft diverted from British production batches, initially P-40s and Hudsons.

I know Roosevelt and Curtin never really hit it off and at one point Roosevelt even suggested Curtin get his wall eye fixed.

But with Lend-Lease - I thought Australia received P-40s before New Zealand? Otherwise known as the "Kitthawk"....

 

[Graeme]

I would be very careful in trying to figure out if an Australian or Canadian company could actually produce certain items vrs assemble them from parts kits in the 20s and 30s.

Hi SR.
I spotted this today - dunno if it means we were incapable of creating aluminium sheeting without that British 'machinery'...

...but I do know we certainly had trouble making safe tin-cans...

 

[Graeme]

total bull dust as is his claim that no one in Australia knew that Japan had an advanced aircraft industry.

Clearly we were gullible and misinformed....

 

[Graeme]

If Canada can begin a fighter program in 1938, I don't see why Australia has to wait until late 1941.

Hi Admiral.
Just thread drift on the subject of the Hurricane - I read today Hawker was offered the chance to build in Australia - but declined. They were even offered the 10% GMH holding in CAC - but declined.

 

[Graeme]

I learned to drive a stick on a late '60's VW beetle. That's all I got.

I learnt on a 1969 Peugeot 404.

Peugeot 404 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Admiral Beez]

On another note, wouldn't Australian and Canadian ships have counted as British ships for treaty purposes as they were British dominions rather than sovereign nations?

It's a fair point, and the main reason HMAS Australia had to be scrapped less than eight and half years after entering service. I would have liked to have seen how the battlecruiser would have been updated between the wars.... or converted into the RAN's first carrier.

Under the naval treaties when is the earliest Australia can consider aircraft carriers? My thinking is the RAN could formally/publicly begin its carrier program in/about 1937 (with informal plans starting in 1935 when HMS Ark Royal is laid down)

 

[Admiral Beez]

Hi Admiral.
Just thread drift on the subject of the Hurricane - I read today Hawker was offered the chance to build in Australia - but declined. They were even offered the 10% GMH holding in CAC - but declined.

Nice. Getting the RR or Packard engines may be tricky.

 

[SaparotRob]

I learnt on a 1969 Peugeot 404.

Peugeot 404 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You win.

 

[don4331]

The Royal Australian Navy was a separate entity from the RN and was fully autonomous. Dunno about the Canadian navy, but in New Zealand, the navy did not become autonomous until 1941 when it became the Royal New Zealand Navy for the first time - ships stationed in New Zealand before then were known as the New Zealand Division of the Royal Navy. The likes of the light cruisers Leander and Achilles, both of which were part of the NZ Div had the prefix 'HMS' before 1941.

Royal Australian Navy (RAN) and Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) might have been separate entities from Royal Navy, but WNT, LNT '30 and LNT '36 were all signed that the restriction applied as a single entity to:
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and all parts of the British Empire which are not separate members of the League of Nations, of the Dominion of Canada, of the Commonwealth of Australia, of the Dominion of New Zealand, of the Union of South Africa, and of India.

So, no building a 72,000 ton BB in Australia before Sept. '39 (after war is declared). However, as LNT '36 removed the total tonnage limits, Australian was free to assist RN with ship deemed most important - what RN needed was destroyers to combat submarine warfare. So, that's what Australia and Canada started building. Australia was 2-5 years ahead of Canada in ship construction at start of war.

Note: Canada had issue during war that the individuals who are supposed to be building their destroyers kept getting called away to repair damaged ships that could be put back in service quicker.

 

[Admiral Beez]

WNT, LNT '30 and LNT '36 were all signed that the restriction applied as a single entity to: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and all parts of the British Empire which are not separate members of the League of Nations, of the Dominion of Canada, of the Commonwealth of Australia, of the Dominion of New Zealand, of the Union of South Africa, and of India. So, no building a 72,000 ton BB in Australia before Sept. '39 (after war is declared)....

Should have hidden HMAS Australia in mothballs on Macquarie Island or somewhere remote....

 

[Reluctant Poster]

If you start too early you wind up with outdated designs and tooling/machinery.
RAF didn't switch to all metal aircraft until the late 1920s, all metal referring to the structure/framework. Still fabric covered.
Kestrel was RR first cast block engine. It was first run in 1926 and first production was in 1927. Any prior RR V-12 used separate cylinders.
How soon to the colonies jump on the newest engine? or do they wait a bit and see how it turns out?

What was the population of Australia compared to Japan? roughly 1/10th?
Canada was about 11.5 million in 1941 or about 1.5 times Australia. Canada could get machine tools, materials (sheet steel, piping etc) from the US by truck or much more commonly rail.

A lot of times companies opened up "factories" in some countries to get around taxes/tariffs. Ford was good at this and opened up over 20 factories around the world before WW II.
However in some cases the "factory" was pretty much an assembly shop building cars/trucks from imported parts kits. Like in Europe there was Ford of Germany, Ford of England, Ford of France and a few others including Ford of Belgium. They weren't selling enough Fords in Europe to justify that number of full factories. But if Belgium demanded a high import tax/tariff on a complete car/truck then setting up a small assembly shop to "build" cars/trucks from imported kits might justify it's expense as the lower priced "Belgian" Fords would sell in higher numbers. What percentage of the car/truck could be imported and how much could be made locally might vary from country to country.
In the 1960s and 70s Japanese Pick-ups were quite popular in the US due to low price. There was something like a 20% import duty (?) on Japanese cars at the time but the pick-ups were shipped in without the pick up beds (complete drivable chassis) and were classified as parts at 10% or under. Factories in the US built beds for the Japanese Pick ups and the Beds were fitted in the US after the chassis arrived.

I would be very careful in trying to figure out if an Australian or Canadian company could actually produce certain items vrs assemble them from parts kits in the 20s and 30s.

Australia presents some differing abilities in 1940-42. With their low production Sentinel tank they made the largest cast hull to date (other cast hulls were made up of several pieces bolted together) anywhere in the world but had to use three Cadillac car engines on a common crankcase. Given the blueprints for the transmission used in the M3 Grant tank (and Sherman) they had to change from a synchronized gear set to unsynchronized due to a lack of gear cutting equipment/machinery. Perhaps such machinery was being used for aircraft engines?

I think you are describing the duties on Japanese light trucks due to the "Chicken Tax"

How the Cost of Chicken Transformed the U.S. Auto Industry

A Cold War-era conflict over the price of chicken resulted in the Chicken Tax, which has a major impact on the U.S. auto industry to this day.

www.thoughtco.com

It is still going on. From Forbes:

If You Aren't Worried About A Trade War, You Don't Know About The Chicken Tax

If you are an actual business leader, and not a real estate speculator pretending to be one, you probably know that trade wars are neither “good” nor “easy to win.” In fact, history proves just the opposite. So, it’s probably a good time to ask yourself what this means for your company.

www.forbes.com

"Ford faced a bigger challenge. While it produced some of the best light trucks in the world, it produced them in places such as Thailand and Turkey. Importing them to the United States would have made them too expensive to compete.
So, Ford took a page from the Japanese playbook.
It started importing small commercial vans from Turkey as passenger vehicles, equipping them with rear seats, seatbelts and windows, then removing this equipment after the vehicles were landed in the United States and reconverting them to commercial vehicles.
It was a costly kabuki dance, but still cheaper than paying the chicken tax. At least for Ford."

 

[Shortround6]

It's a fair point, and the main reason HMAS Australia had to be scrapped less than eight and half years after entering service. I would have liked to have seen how the battlecruiser would have been updated between the wars.... or converted into the RAN's first carrier.

+

 

[Admiral Beez]

"Ford faced a bigger challenge. While it produced some of the best light trucks in the world, it produced them in places such as Thailand and Turkey.

In 2019 I visited the former Ford factory in Singapore where Percival surrendered. I just finished reading this fascinating book, and it includes a section on transport. Turns out the British colonials in India-Burma preferred American car brands over British ones, notably Chevrolets and Fords.

Four places I visited on that trip with WW2 connections....

Former Ford Factory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Battle Box - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Fort Siloso - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

St Andrew's Cathedral, Singapore - Wikipedia

At the latter I attended a wonderful Anglican service, including a sermon where the rector told us how the Japanese had burst in the doors and murdered all the wounded soldiers, their nurses and doctors in this very spot. It must have been terrifying.

 

[MiTasol]

I think you are describing the duties on Japanese light trucks due to the "Chicken Tax"

How the Cost of Chicken Transformed the U.S. Auto Industry

A Cold War-era conflict over the price of chicken resulted in the Chicken Tax, which has a major impact on the U.S. auto industry to this day.

www.thoughtco.com

That thoughtco article is interesting but has one flaw.
The VW Amarok is not, and was not, made in Australia.
Possibly written by someone who thinks Austria and Australia are the same country