Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

Reptilia

Well-Known Member
Bofors MK4 mounted on/within a 20ft container with the loader inside would be good(if it can take the weight)
The upgraded Mogami may have space for a 20ft container either side of the exhaust, right in the centre of the ship.
Container could be moved from ship to ship when needed.
 

Attachments

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Missile compartment would not need to be replaced, it would be no different to the 6 or 7-cell all-up round canisters on any Virginia VPT/VPM tube or Ohio SSGN tube, they’re exactly the same diameter and TLAM is far shorter than Trident-II
O/T There is little information comparing the common missile compartment for the Columbia/Dreadnought SSBNs versus the VPM. The CMC has quad packs, 3 for Dreadnought and 4 for Columbia. Designed to accommodate D5 missiles. No idea what modifications would be required for the quad tubes to accept other missiles. Further discussion should be on the AUKUS thread.
 

Antipode

Member
One can only respect naming ships after notable individuals or geographic points. But old school names are hands-down cooler.

By Collins dictionary, in Australian informal speech, a "bolter" can be:

1. An outsider in a contest or race. (That would be Japan).

2. (Historic) An escaped convict or bushranger.

"Bolter class" does have a mean ring to it. Others in the class could be Fencer, Promise, Riposte, Smart, Sufficient. Frigates tended to somehow playful names.

Cheers
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
Maybe not. Whilst they may disagree with their purchase, to see something as impressive as they are named in 'their' honor will satsify something vastly more important to either, that being ego and legacy, which is a good way to keep them quiet(er) and in context a brilliant idea IMO.
Yes …. maybe name a dunny block.
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
More seriously on naming, Australia has a history of avoiding using people, for good reason. I think (tell me if I'm wrong) we only ever deviated from this for the Collins submarines.

I believe that ship name choices are part of our fundamental military licence to operate. We must always be seen to act and protect the community, not individuals.

Naming after people is hazardous, as it can become polarising, either views that somebody else was more deserving, it's too bias to a particular group, or that person is associated with a problematic view or action.

Politicians are a terrible choice, as regardless of who it is, part of the community will always have an automatic aversion to the name and it instantly becomes divisive.

Using places is far less volatile, and it links broad communities, rather than individuals, to the defence force. Choosing a city, river, mountain, harbour or other notable geographic feature is rarely ever controversial.

It might be boring, but that is not the requirement.
Have we had a mountain class? Komi, buller, battle freer, bogong,Townsend, twynam Zeil, Hotham, meharry, woodroffe, ossa, fed peak and so on
!
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
I don't think NSM is a difficult fit. Physically or system wise. Or Politically. I think they will come with Japanese munitions. From there, it will be a conversation about is NSM or Type 17 best fit and how much do we want to spend and how much do we want to pay to swap over. Type 17 is capable and similar size to NSM. It may be in everyone's interest for Mogami's to be able to fire both types. NSM may be more stealthy, more flexible, Type 17 more range, and more traditional. It may be useful to have a mixed load out. Less reliant on one supply chain, and also different capabilities.


Japanese sites indicate Type 07 ASROC style munitions may be the main loadout for japanese ships. Which may explain the seaRAM. I'm not sure that's true, some sites indicate there is no plans for SM fitment.
I’d think with the surveillance capabilities the PLAN has these days, the ship that has the longest range missile with the deepest magazine probably wins. Looks what’s come out re the India Pakistan air skirmish. Indian AF Rafael pilots who were given intel that PL15 missiles had a 100 mile range were shot down from 130 miles. There’s is no getting under the guns these days.
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
It has to be - Abel Tasman was a shit of a human being who murdered at least one crew member, he triggered a violent confrontation with our NZ allies and he was a Dutch land owner in the Dutch East Indies - with all the slavery issues that brings with it (from a colonising power that wasn't the nicest to it's native residents...)

There is no way we could name a modern combatant after that individual, surely?

And before I hear anything about woke modern views - the murder verdict is from a 1649 Dutch court...
I think if we did a deep dive into many explorers from the 1500-1800 we would find some brutal history. But equally if you looked into just about any society during that period both newly discovered and supposedly civilised, we would find violence and brutality as a way of life that is hard to comprehend now. It would probably be hard to find anyone notable from history who didn’t have some association that would get them cancelled these days.

autres temps, autres mœurs
 
Top