Might have already been posted (and is a little off topic for this thread but pertinent to the present discussion), but I found this to be a good read: A Startlingly Simple Theory About the Missing Malaysia Airlines Jet | Autopia | Wired.com
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Interesting read and sometimes the simplest explanations are the closest to the facts of the event. Nice find Bonza.
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
The posters at pprune.org really want it to be an accident rather than deliberate, action, especially if it involves the pilot. Posts there point out the following events which would seem to make the accident scenario as described unlikely. .
- it ignores the ACARS message indicating WP was altered prior to 1:07
- ACARS would have sent some emergency messages indicating major problems
- the nearest safe location to land was likely Vietnam, and if in trouble it is easier to keep going forward rather than turn.
- why the funny arcing course afterwards.
There were a few more points that I have missed.
In any case I'm afraid this one has most likely been done deliberately. A short time ago Fox news had a retired USAF general, Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney who basically said the plane was in Pakistan and he expected some announcement in 24-48 hours. Seemed quite certain about it. Funnily enough Mr Murdoch himself tweeted a few days ago it was in Pakistan. Reading too much into the tea leaves perhaps...
- it ignores the ACARS message indicating WP was altered prior to 1:07
- ACARS would have sent some emergency messages indicating major problems
- the nearest safe location to land was likely Vietnam, and if in trouble it is easier to keep going forward rather than turn.
- why the funny arcing course afterwards.
There were a few more points that I have missed.
In any case I'm afraid this one has most likely been done deliberately. A short time ago Fox news had a retired USAF general, Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney who basically said the plane was in Pakistan and he expected some announcement in 24-48 hours. Seemed quite certain about it. Funnily enough Mr Murdoch himself tweeted a few days ago it was in Pakistan. Reading too much into the tea leaves perhaps...
That's exactly what you need for chasing down SIEVs up the top end. http://www.damen.com/~/media/nl/Documents/Products/Datasheets/OT/OPV/2400/555700OPV 2400DS.ashx It's a 2 page pdf file.
protoplasm
Active Member
How much? and tongue in cheek, why are we only buying 1?
To hell with the tongue in cheek, replace the ACPB's with these, seem to have all that's needed for EEZ integrity and capable of being combat capable far off shore in second tier ops.
I haven't looked any further than these posts here but will read further.
Questions: are they commercial build?, how much?, are they modular build? can we fill the "valley of death"? what are the licence arrangements? etc etc
Jezza
Member
Jezza
Member
Nice to have around ten of those patrolling the ocean
Aust Govt contracting DMS to manage the acquisition of a single ship to be built in Vietnam and used as an aviation training ship. Far too much common sense to actually build a dozen locally to cover off border protection and the training needs of the RAN. Imagine having one of these at Cerberus, another at JB and another at FBE as training vessels and actually supplying fully trained personnel to crews in Darwin and Cairns.
The excuse not to get them will be they are too expensive to build locally and we cant build our combatants in Vietnam. The cost of building these locally will be nothing compared to the costs of having to rebuild the ship building industry from scratch again if we don't.
The excuse not to get them will be they are too expensive to build locally and we cant build our combatants in Vietnam. The cost of building these locally will be nothing compared to the costs of having to rebuild the ship building industry from scratch again if we don't.
t68
Well-Known Member
Has there been any official announcement from the minister sounds like a april fools joke come early to me if that brochure that someone posted early is right why only buy one seems like a waste.modify the plans to HMNZS Otatgo least they have been built here before or a modified container ship like HMS Argus double as a hospital ship and make use of it around the South Pacfic Islands as a good will vessel.
Just doesn't sound right
meatshield
Active Member
Ditto..
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
The first ship might be a test. If it goes OK they may plan to build more. The ship would seem to fit in with the OCV tender and would fill an OPV role well, be suitable for MCM etc. Austal wouldn't be happy.
Anyone have any idea on cost?
Are they in use by any navies at present?
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
It does seem to have come completely out of left field. But Janes is a pretty reputable source, and they quote a named individual speaking on a given date at a known event. Google confirms that the person exists, and holds the position named in the article.
Perhaps it is like the RNZAF's recent trainer acquisition - the US Embassy in Wellington's Twitter feed had photos of the heads of Beechcraft and NZ Min Defence signing the purchase agreement almost a week before the official announcement was made.
Agree the 90m vessel is quite capable as an OPV and has a mission deck below the flight deck.
t68
Well-Known Member
Agree the type of vessel is badly needed, but the defence minister came out not long ago and said no more money in the kitty for new ships mixed signals going on
Report of Dutch NH90 corrosion during shipboard deployment.
Dutch maritime NH90s suffer corrosion - 3/19/2014 - Flight Global
Dutch maritime NH90s suffer corrosion - 3/19/2014 - Flight Global
The RNZN could find a use for five or so of them if funding was made available. They'd be a lot better than the Protector Class OPVs.
- Status