If all else fails launch the combat wombat and / or the airborne drop bear.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #2,202
Perhaps, but then again it could certainly be justified and might even be needed. I would like to remind forum readers of the mid-air collision incident involving a USN EP-3 Aries SIGNIT aircraft and a PLA-AF fighter on 1 April, 2001 (Hainan Island incident) some 110 km from the island of Hainan, which would be in international airspace over the SCS. The PLA-AF fighter got close enough to strike the much slower, prop USN aeroplane and was lost, whilst the USN aircraft was forced to land on Hainan otherwise the crew would have had to ditch the aircraft in the SCS. It has since come to light that apparently the PRC was able to gain at least some information from examination of the damaged EP-3. The PRC also IIRC required some negotiations and concessions from the early administration of POTUS G.W. Bush to permit the USN crew to be returned to US control.
I would therefore not dismiss the potential for the PRC to make more provocative moves, either to diminish ADF capabilities, force concessions from Australia and/or allies, or gain further insight and information into Australian and allied capabilities.
Ultimately this could be a role for the loyal wingman. Part of the loyal wingman’s function could simply be to block the approach of any hostile aircraft.
The Chinese really couldn’t have much of a comeback if they were to accidentally fly a fighter into an UAV while attempting to harass a patrol aircraft.
The Chinese really couldn’t have much of a comeback if they were to accidentally fly a fighter into an UAV while attempting to harass a patrol aircraft.
What have we said about endless speculation? You and everyone not holding the appropriate security clearance know absolutely nothing about the ADF / RAAF CONOPS and doctrine for the capability yet.
If you wish to continue down this path there will be unpleasant consequences for you. This also goes for anyone else who has an unsatiated need to speculate about the future use of this platform. Awarded 18 demerit points for 2 years.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Defence spending is ‘fundamentally important’: Marles (msn.com)
An interview from the DEFMIN who is currently in Washington, about Defence spending, he has also confirmed the Sub decision is due in Q1 2023 while in Washington.
An interview from the DEFMIN who is currently in Washington, about Defence spending, he has also confirmed the Sub decision is due in Q1 2023 while in Washington.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Caroline Kennedy signals new AUKUS plans day one as US Ambassador to Australia (smh.com.au)
JFKs Daughter Caroline Kennedy has been sworn in as US ambassador to Australia on 25 July and has flagged significant announcements about AUKUS in the coming weeks.
JFKs Daughter Caroline Kennedy has been sworn in as US ambassador to Australia on 25 July and has flagged significant announcements about AUKUS in the coming weeks.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Australia's military structure, preparedness and investments to be reviewed for first time in a decade - ABC News
A review of the ADFs structure, preparedness and investments has been announced by the Albanese Government to be conducted by former DEFMIN(2010-13) Stephen Smith and retired Chief of the Defence Force Air Chief Marshall Angus Houston. It is expected to take about 5 months and go to the National Security Committee no later then March 2023.
A review of the ADFs structure, preparedness and investments has been announced by the Albanese Government to be conducted by former DEFMIN(2010-13) Stephen Smith and retired Chief of the Defence Force Air Chief Marshall Angus Houston. It is expected to take about 5 months and go to the National Security Committee no later then March 2023.
Yes, with a much earlier preliminary report to the minister to inform the decisions around Hunter and nuclear subs.
Houston and Smith were both tolerable in their roles, but neither come to mind as naturally supportive to the subs. Potential "get out of jail clause" coming?
oldsig127
Fairly sure Smith as Def Min cancelled the Seaprite and the original SPH program but reaffirmed KRudds 12 sub program… I had him aiming for a Spanish sub before the libs plan A/B/C I may be out on timing there as there was a few DefMin changes before he started in the role on 2010 I think.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The Sea Sprites were cancelled on 5 Mar 08, 2 years prior to Smith becoming DefMIN, would have been Faulkner. Smith was appointed by Gillard after she ousted Rudd. Why would you have gone anywhere near the Spanish for a Submarine design in 2009? They had no experience in designing and building their own Subs at that time and that inexperience showed up several years later when their design proved to be dangerously overweight. If we where in the market for a 1 for 1 replacement of the Collins now, you might look at the S-81 design but There was no way Australia would have considered any Submarine proposal from Spain in 2014-15 due to the design flaw of the S-80.
Smith was the master of the black arts forever associated with ADFA & Skype. He was also the feckin eejit who gave away 12 C130H's to Indonesia. His period in charge may have was been the lack of progress on the subs and zero MFU procurement (4th Hobart etc), general cut backs despite Rudd's identification of the CCP threat (12 subs etc), and the all time shite C27J procurement.
Houston always struck me as a true gent. I'd be interested to know his true feelings about RAAF helicopters considering his involvement in the transfer to the brown job, tank & truck drivers.
Houston always struck me as a true gent. I'd be interested to know his true feelings about RAAF helicopters considering his involvement in the transfer to the brown job, tank & truck drivers.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
By 2012 the C-130H were over 30yo, would have been expensive to continue to operate and the unit that had operated them since 1978 had replaced them with C-17s. And it was only 5 went to Indonesia.
I stand corrected. I just had a view he didn’t really order anything but cancellations. I think a later post here suggest he walked from the 4th AWD and I have recollection of him being the 1.56% of GDP Def Min. Regardless of the Color of his flag … I really don’t like that they put a former senior party leader pollie near the head of a strategic review. Just stinks and how can anything they come up with, not been seen as biased in the political spectrum.
Actually 9 H's went to Indonesia. 4 were initially donated then Indonesia bought another 5. Cheers. Indonesia receives final C-130H Hercules transport from Australia
This worries me when setting the scene for the defence review we have all the think tankers but no senior ADF leaders …
I would think senior ADF leaders will have separate sessions because they will have classified information and advice that can't be shared with 'think tankers' and academics. Just my thoughts. l could be way off, of course.
Aardvark144
Active Member
It is being reported that there will be an accelerated timeline for delivering the Strategic Review. Anyone aware of the revised timeline? Everything I can source is behind a paywall.
Lolcake
Active Member
Welcome news. I wish they would annouce the subs sooner too.
The head of the Albanese government’s strategic review has outlined an accelerated timeline for delivering its final report, dictated by the darkening circumstances Australia is confronting.
The review has the potential to transform the Australian Defence Force by recommending new capabilities it must acquire, and old capabilities that it could dispense with.
Former defence minister Stephen Smith, who is heading the review with former chief of the Defence Force Angus Houston, told a Perth security conference on Friday that he intends to deliver a big-picture interim report to the government by November 1, and their final report to Defence Minister Richard Marles by February 1.
It had previously been widely assumed that the report would not be delivered until the end of March.
But Mr Marles wants to be in a position by the end of March to make announcements about which nuclear-powered submarine option Australia will pursue and what Defence Force restructuring it will implement arising from the review.
The review will occur in tandem with the government’s review of the subs acquisition being led by Admiral Jonathan Meade. Authors of the two separate reports are expected to consult each other frequently.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says he is “very confident” Former Defence Minister Stephen Smith and Former… Defence Chief Sir Angus Houston are the “right people” to perform the defence strategy review. The review, announced by Mr Albanese, looks to ensure the Australian Defence Force is well positioned to More
“The sense of urgency in the review is helping the quality of submissions and also helping us in our deliberations,” Mr Smith told the Perth conference.
He emphasised that he and Sir Angus were mandated to consider force posture, which means where defence assets should be deployed, as well as the more basic issue of force structure, which refers to which defence platforms should be acquired and developed.
He also said the review would examine defence capability “now and into the future through the lens of the current strategic circumstances”.
This raises the serious possibility that the Australian Defence Force could be transformed, with the possibility that legacy projects of limited relevance to the maritime security challenges Australia faces over the next decade possibly being sidelined in order to free up funds for more relevant and urgent defence acquisitions.
Mr Smith said the review was examining all options and had not ruled anything out.
When the review was first announced, Sir Angus said the strategic circumstances of today were the worst he had seen, or which had ever applied at any time during his lifetime.
The rapid pace of the review, which is all but unprecedented in Defence terms, indicates the Albanese government is keen to make big decisions on Defence Force structure early in its first term, with a view to creating increased military capability over the next few years.
Mr Smith said it would have been open to the government to follow a traditional path for a new government of commissioning a full white paper, which could take 12 or 18 months, and look at capabilities over the next 25 to 30 years. He has often argued that Defence is at its best when it is forced to act quickly.
Stephen Smith is heading the strategic review with former chief of the Defence Force Angus Houston. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Gary Ramage
The government announced the strategic review on August 3, and Mr Smith and Sir Angus have completed several weeks of intense consultations in Canberra, with government agencies as well as outside stakeholders such as defence companies and think tanks.
“It was clear we needed and wanted to undertake consultations in several important parts of the country,” Mr Smith said.
He was already scheduled to speak at the Indian Ocean Defence and Security Conference in Perth, which is supported by the West Australian government.
He and Sir Angus visited HMAS Stirling in Fleet Base West in Perth as well as the Henderson defence precinct. They will visit defence and ship-building facilities in Adelaide as well as making a series of consultative visits to military bases in northern Queensland, Darwin and northwest Western Australia.
These bases include Darwin and RAAF Tyndal in the Northern Territory, the so called “bare bases” of Curtin and Learmonth in Western Australia as well as RAAF Scherger in northern Queensland.
Defence facilities in northern Australia were a key subject of a review carried out a decade ago, and Mr Smith and Sir Angus want to examine the extent of improvements of changes made to them in the past decade.
Mr Smith told the conference that one feature of the review would be to examine “with forensic intensity” the situation of the nation’s energy infrastructure in the northern parts of Western Australia, as this is now “critical infrastructure” for Australia.
here you go guys:
The head of the Albanese government’s strategic review has outlined an accelerated timeline for delivering its final report, dictated by the darkening circumstances Australia is confronting.
The review has the potential to transform the Australian Defence Force by recommending new capabilities it must acquire, and old capabilities that it could dispense with.
Former defence minister Stephen Smith, who is heading the review with former chief of the Defence Force Angus Houston, told a Perth security conference on Friday that he intends to deliver a big-picture interim report to the government by November 1, and their final report to Defence Minister Richard Marles by February 1.
It had previously been widely assumed that the report would not be delivered until the end of March.
But Mr Marles wants to be in a position by the end of March to make announcements about which nuclear-powered submarine option Australia will pursue and what Defence Force restructuring it will implement arising from the review.
The review will occur in tandem with the government’s review of the subs acquisition being led by Admiral Jonathan Meade. Authors of the two separate reports are expected to consult each other frequently.
“The sense of urgency in the review is helping the quality of submissions and also helping us in our deliberations,” Mr Smith told the Perth conference.
He emphasised that he and Sir Angus were mandated to consider force posture, which means where defence assets should be deployed, as well as the more basic issue of force structure, which refers to which defence platforms should be acquired and developed.
He also said the review would examine defence capability “now and into the future through the lens of the current strategic circumstances”.
This raises the serious possibility that the Australian Defence Force could be transformed, with the possibility that legacy projects of limited relevance to the maritime security challenges Australia faces over the next decade possibly being sidelined in order to free up funds for more relevant and urgent defence acquisitions.
Mr Smith said the review was examining all options and had not ruled anything out.
When the review was first announced, Sir Angus said the strategic circumstances of today were the worst he had seen, or which had ever applied at any time during his lifetime.
The rapid pace of the review, which is all but unprecedented in Defence terms, indicates the Albanese government is keen to make big decisions on Defence Force structure early in its first term, with a view to creating increased military capability over the next few years.
Mr Smith said it would have been open to the government to follow a traditional path for a new government of commissioning a full white paper, which could take 12 or 18 months, and look at capabilities over the next 25 to 30 years. He has often argued that Defence is at its best when it is forced to act quickly.
Stephen Smith is heading the strategic review with former chief of the Defence Force Angus Houston. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Gary RamageThe government announced the strategic review on August 3, and Mr Smith and Sir Angus have completed several weeks of intense consultations in Canberra, with government agencies as well as outside stakeholders such as defence companies and think tanks.
“It was clear we needed and wanted to undertake consultations in several important parts of the country,” Mr Smith said.
He was already scheduled to speak at the Indian Ocean Defence and Security Conference in Perth, which is supported by the West Australian government.
He and Sir Angus visited HMAS Stirling in Fleet Base West in Perth as well as the Henderson defence precinct. They will visit defence and ship-building facilities in Adelaide as well as making a series of consultative visits to military bases in northern Queensland, Darwin and northwest Western Australia.
These bases include Darwin and RAAF Tyndal in the Northern Territory, the so called “bare bases” of Curtin and Learmonth in Western Australia as well as RAAF Scherger in northern Queensland.
Defence facilities in northern Australia were a key subject of a review carried out a decade ago, and Mr Smith and Sir Angus want to examine the extent of improvements of changes made to them in the past decade.
Mr Smith told the conference that one feature of the review would be to examine “with forensic intensity” the situation of the nation’s energy infrastructure in the northern parts of Western Australia, as this is now “critical infrastructure” for Australia.
here you go guys: