That is an option, Choules is at FBE and if its replaced with two JSS then perhaps both of those are at FBE.The alternative would be to have all the amphibious capability together at FBE?
And…..we also have the only large dry dock until the Henderson dry berth is built.That is an option, Choules is at FBE and if its replaced with two JSS then perhaps both of those are at FBE.
That may change if we start operating more with India and doing more adventurous things in the Indian ocean. Both with India and other nations.
There isn't a whole lot of call for the amphibious capability on the West coast. East coast we have Fiji, Samoa, PNG, New Caledonia, Vanuatu, the amphibious training grounds, townsville, Sabre and Rimpac.
I think you would want the amphibious lift in proximity to the Army.And…..we also have the only large dry dock until the Henderson dry berth is built.
Previously posted in post #30012 and #30351 about 8 days ago. Not much response then, but maybe this timeAn Interesting article here from the war zone on the USN USV firing of a SM6 from a container carried on deck. I see a lot of potential for a concept like this for the RAN, with low numbers of missile equipped frigates or destroyers available to put to sea at any one time, this could provide a boost in strike power.
You could theoretically base these further north to reduce transit times and have them join with other larger ships giving an increase in magazine dept. They could also be dispersed at a range from the targeting ship and even put forward in range. Its some way off clearly but the concept is moving to reality for the USN.
The cost of the vessel itself without System appears to be sub $10m.
Adding modular weapons launchers to the Navy's experimental unmanned vessels will allow the service to explore new distributed warfare concepts.www.thedrive.com
I can see some use for such systems ..... But!!!Previously posted in post #30012 and #30351 about 8 days ago. Not much response then, but maybe this time
I see your point. My question is how do you stop someone pulling along side and boarding it? I cant see this being plausible in an area where a Chinese fishing boat could pull alongside or a helicopter could drop men on board.I can see some use for such systems ..... But!!!
Again it comes down to how they are used and their proximity to the controlling vessels or station. If the USV is designed to support other vessels it is going to have to be within range of the unit(s) to provide effective cover. This means the vessel will require the same range and speed as that unit or group and be able to undertake at sea replenishment if needed. The other issue here is redundancy .... what you save in crew facilities may be chewed up by ensuring the vessel has sufficient redundant systems to keep itself going. It would be a problem if one of these things blacked out and they could not get it going again (trust me this happens on some very sophisticated vessels).
The ghost vessels depicted would struggle to deploy for long periods of time in order to provide anti air cover using SM-6. Where small units may excel is where ae low signature vessels is deployed into a combat area undetected with a specific task or target in mind. Mind you if the group has organic air then this could be achieved with air missiles as well.
It will be interesting to see what operational context is intended for such vessels. Certainly deployable 'drones' with towed array have been suggested.
Speculation PM will announce $90b French submarine deal is dead
But a senior government source told The Australian Financial Review Australia was going to buy nuclear-powered submarines.
It is understood Mr Morrison had tried to speak to French President Emmanuel Macron on Wednesday, another source said.
Mr Morrison is due to travel to Washington next week for talks with Mr Biden, but it was thought that announcing the new submarine tie up with America together with the President would be deemed provocative.
Senior cabinet ministers met in Canberra on Wednesday for a top secret briefing on the shipbuilding program.
MPs and defence personnel have also been told to expect a significant briefing on Thursday.
Naval Group staff have been told to expect an announcement.
Relations between Naval Group and the government have broken down over a series of issues, with the government this year beginning to explore other options for the submarine program.
More to come
Not sure anyone is trying to figure out what it might be? The discussion here really is just to relay what the media - and credible media at that - are reporting.The announcement is 7 hours and 6 minutes away. Let's wait and see what it is rather than trying to figure out what it might be.
The media aren't that credible. They used to be many long years ago but not now. Let's just wait and see oķ. It's not long.Not sure anyone is trying to figure out what it might be? The discussion here really is just to relay what the media - and credible media at that - are reporting.
I appreciate you have a rather negative view of the media, and particularly its coverage of defence related issues. We've discussed that all before.The media aren't that credible. They used to be many long years ago but not now. Let's just wait and see oķ. It's not long.
Politically, I think a partial build in Australia would be essential. I think it would also necessary from a capacity POV as well. Columbia and Dreadnaught will be stretching US and UK resources.I note that reports suggest that Morrison has arranged a call to Macron shortly. It's interesting that 2 reports I've read talk about using US and British nuclear technology, so does this mean finding a way to increase production on the Virginia Class line and buy them? And what would a change to a nuclear powered vessel do to the prospective numbers of subs? Does Electric Boat or HII even have the capacity to build extra subs? Could they realistically be at least partially built in Adelaide? Will be fascinating to watch developments.