Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Navy & Maritime
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

ExPB14_JAS-39_Gripen.jpg

ExPB14_Mirage2000.jpg

6_EXPB14_20140729_088_3_RSAF_F16s.jpg

5_EXPB14_20140729_143_3_RSAF_F-15SGs.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

This is a discussion on Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by ThePuss ABC News Story on the arrival Navy's newest ship ready for action - ABC News (Australian ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 36 votes, 4.14 average.
Old December 22nd, 2011   #7501
Defense Professional / Analyst
Brigadier General
alexsa's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,693
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePuss View Post
great press but..................... reality check. for an Australian warshp, yes she is big. As a merchant ship the panamax box boats and aframax tankers in Botany are bigger (by quite a tonnage and size margin) but they are just not visible to the general public in an awareness sense.
alexsa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2011   #7502
Senior Member
Brigadier General
StevoJH's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Coffs Harbour, NSW
Posts: 1,643
Threads:
Is the Captain of HMAS Choules an American import?
StevoJH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2011
ThePuss
This message has been deleted by gf0012-aust. Reason: double posting :/
Old December 22nd, 2011   #7503
Defense Professional / Analyst
Master Sergeant
ThePuss's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 305
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevoJH View Post
Is the Captain of HMAS Choules an American import?
A Cunck, but has been in OZ for quite a while
ThePuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 22nd, 2011   #7504
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
icelord's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 1,217
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevoJH View Post
Is the Captain of HMAS Choules an American import?
Previous CO of Sirius and Recruit school(way back when i went through)
There are a few Canadians around the fleet, PWOs find it easy to jump across, do a course here inbetween.
The majority of overseas personnel remains Ex-RN, who are scattered around. With our LHDs, the first AVN are all former RN who will be instructors and alike, to train us in a lot of their procedures for moving Aircraft around.
I met a Yank in the NZ Air force(who fly for the navy) who moved to NZ because in the US they dont fly as much after 35. He would rather move country then stop flying, which was impressive. but he did go from Seahawks to Seaspirtes...thats a downgrade.
icelord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2011
Bruce Perry
This message has been deleted by gf0012-aust. Reason: spammer
Old December 28th, 2011   #7505
Defense Enthusiast
Chief Warrant Officer
SASWanabe's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 497
Threads:
U-boats may be on navy's shopping list

Quote:
HDW has released details of a concept design, designated the Type 216, for a long-range conventional submarine.

Experts say the design, based on the successful Type 214, is specifically targeted at Sea 1000 - Defence's future submarine program.
yes! upscale a Euro sub, it worked so well on the Collins when Kockums did it.

also for anyone interested in a bit of a laugh:

Nuclear subs an option

Push for nuclear submarines gaining momentum
SASWanabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 28th, 2011   #7506
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,472
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SASWanabe View Post
U-boats may be on navy's shopping list



yes! upscale a Euro sub, it worked so well on the Collins when Kockums did it.

also for anyone interested in a bit of a laugh:

Nuclear subs an option

Push for nuclear submarines gaining momentum
Its not as if the Collins has impressed anyone. How many submarines has Australia built, and how many submarines has HDW built? Several hundred compared to six. At the present time the Type 214 is by far the largest selling export submarine built worldwide. The mistake Australia may have made in the past was to go with a Swedish sub instead of a German sub.
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7507
Deaf talker?
General
Todjaeger's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New England
Posts: 3,074
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Its not as if the Collins has impressed anyone. How many submarines has Australia built, and how many submarines has HDW built? Several hundred compared to six. At the present time the Type 214 is by far the largest selling export submarine built worldwide. The mistake Australia may have made in the past was to go with a Swedish sub instead of a German sub.
Umm... Actually, the Collins-class has managed to impress a number of people AFAIK.

Remember, the USN within the last decade has/had basically leased a Swedish conventional sub for use as an OpFor. Something caused the USN to realize that against well handled conventional subs US ships were vulnerable in some circumstances.

/rant on

For whatever reason most people, including some posters here on DT apparently, only seem to remember the beatup pieces which have been appearing for years in regular Australian news outlets. For some reason those same people cannot remember any of the successes which have been claimed albeit quietly, with the Collins programme. What I find bothersome though, is that people here on DT who seem to remember the beatup pieces can never seem to remember the shyte quality and total ignorance exhibited in defence reporting as done by those same regular Australian news outlets. It is one thing for the average person to not realize that a particular journo does not know what they are talking about when they call something like a LAV or APC a 'tank'. However, for those who should know better, why should they give any more credence to what a journo reports on when they are slamming a particular programme or piece of kit, when the journo or media outlet has previously demonstrated ignorance of the topic? Why do people believe a 'bad' report when the person/people doing the reporting likely have no understanding of the information which they are in turn reporting to the public is 'bad'?

/rant off
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
Todjaeger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7508
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
the road runner's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 757
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Its not as if the Collins has impressed anyone. How many submarines has Australia built, and how many submarines has HDW built? Several hundred compared to six. At the present time the Type 214 is by far the largest selling export submarine built worldwide. The mistake Australia may have made in the past was to go with a Swedish sub instead of a German sub.
After reading a few posts here i was under the impression if we do buy an off the shelf 214 we will still have to spend alot of coin to get the acoustics right for Australian waters?

When you compare a 1600 ton sub to a 3000 ton sub ,were comparing apples with oranges here.How many 3000 ton subs has HDW built?

As for Collins, its to much of a political football,but i for one would build a Collins 2,as we know the thing like the back of our hand.Australia's problem is we had never built a sub before,but we have now,we should build on this capability.
The Collins has done well in war games with other country's so it must not be a complete dog!The US have praised it.

Hatch man signing off!
the road runner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7509
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 14,626
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Its not as if the Collins has impressed anyone.
good grief, I assume you are referring to the mass media reports - as opposed to those on exercise in other navies who have been signularly impressed.

we've been over this nonsense so many times its not funny.

one of the things I repeatedly got from USN colleagues was the dismay about how hostile the local media was and how clueless the general public were, but how damned good they considered them to be, That wasn't people blowing smoke either, as they were senior enough to not a give a $hit whether they needed to be polite or civil to some bloke from Oz - and from a navy which they nicknamed the RAN the "US 7 and a 1/2 Fleet"

The reason why the US leased Gotland was because it was the mini-me version of the 471 but with AIP, so they wanted to see what it would be like against a different adversary, this was after repeatedly getting their hat handed to them in proscribed boxes where the defender has the advantage.

under different govts we could have sold on aspects of Collins tech to various countries who have recognised how good they are when on the job.

I expect more sensible analysis out of a forum like this than I do from idiots on youtube or those who write spam letters to various editors.

I'll let the industry def profs point out in their own worlds what has been achieved when compared to various other sub programs - and from countries where they build subs for a historical living.

the woulda coulda shoulda comments on going with a larger gernan sub would have been counterbalanced by the australian company that would have been prime. Having worked with the CEO of that company on various mech engineering projects both in Oz and overseas over the years - all I can say is we dodged a bullet.
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7510
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Abraham Gubler's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,162
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SASWanabe View Post
yes! upscale a Euro sub, it worked so well on the Collins when Kockums did it.

also for anyone interested in a bit of a laugh:

Nuclear subs an option

Push for nuclear submarines gaining momentum
Calling the ADA a "key" defence group is a bit rich. They may get plenty of play in the media desperate for defence commentators but have had no discernable impact in Canberra on defence issues. Since they are pushing for a nuclear submarine I can't see their track record changing for the better.

Also as to HDW offering the Type 216 compared to the Type 214 it kind of sinks the OTS Euro sub option being pushed around the place if OTS Euro sub builders are offering a different solution... Maybe they know something the pundits don't? Anyway all good stories for the slowest, least noticed week of the news year.
Abraham Gubler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7511
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Abraham Gubler's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,162
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sea Toby View Post
Its not as if the Collins has impressed anyone. How many submarines has Australia built, and how many submarines has HDW built? Several hundred compared to six. At the present time the Type 214 is by far the largest selling export submarine built worldwide. The mistake Australia may have made in the past was to go with a Swedish sub instead of a German sub.
The problems with the Collins build would most likely have been replicated if the design agent was German rather than Swedish. Since the German offering was deficient in its ability to support the required level of combat system then there would have been bigger long term problems built into the design. Also the Swedish offer used more advanced ship design and build technology (CAD, etc) which made transferring technology easier.

I remain at a loss as to why you keep hanging around and posting in all the Australian themed threads when you constantly display how little you know about the subject matter. Are you really this thick or do you just enjoy trolling?
Abraham Gubler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7512
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 190
Threads:
I realise that one of the biggest issues in this project will be the integration of the combat system with the chosen platform.
Is the HDW Type 216 - which might meet the specs for range and endurance - a serous contender, given that the combat system may possibly be an iteration of the existing Collins system?

MB
Milne Bay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7513
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant Colonel
aussienscale's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Northern Rivers, NSW
Posts: 1,213
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abraham Gubler View Post
Also as to HDW offering the Type 216 compared to the Type 214 it kind of sinks the OTS Euro sub option being pushed around the place if OTS Euro sub builders are offering a different solution... Maybe they know something the pundits don't?
Take note of that comment ! It speaks volumes of where we really are and the level of crap in the current media. If the builder of the "best" (and I use that loosely) conventional submarine feel that they have to offer and un-proven, un-built and un-tested platform as an offer to their "proven" platform, they know their systems do not stand up to what is required.

Toby, seriously ? Do I need to say more ?
aussienscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7514
Defense Aficionado
Major General
Sea Toby's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,472
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aussienscale View Post
Take note of that comment ! It speaks volumes of where we really are and the level of crap in the current media. If the builder of the "best" (and I use that loosely) conventional submarine feel that they have to offer and un-proven, un-built and un-tested platform as an offer to their "proven" platform, they know their systems do not stand up to what is required.

Toby, seriously ? Do I need to say more ?
Why do you believe the HDW Type 216 design won't do the job when it hasn't been revealed yet? I hear from my US naval submariner friends that they are impressed with the German Type 214 submarines they have seen. Finally, any new Australian designed submarine is unproven, unbuilt, and untested as well. When it comes to the bottom line, it appears buying a submarine from a source with much more submarine knowledge and expertise for a fourth of the price may be a better option. A video of the German Type 212 which have not been exported.

Type 212 Most Advanced Submarine.mp4 - YouTube
Sea Toby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old December 29th, 2011   #7515
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 5,507
Threads:
I'm a little surprised that nobody seems to have noticed the lifting of the Japanese arms export ban the day before yesterday. The implications for Australia's future submarine programme are obvious. Japan has exactly the sort of submarines Australia wants, & co-development of a submarine with Australia is exactly the sort of programme that should pass the remaining (& still pretty stiff) Japanese restrictions.

So, when will the Australian government start talking to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries about an Australianised Sōryū derivative?
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:30 PM.