Al Bundy (16-03-20),Uncle Fester (12-03-20)
For anyone interested in the subject of Naval defence, and Defence Procurement in general, this report makes for sobering reading:
As one of the authors remarked at the National Press Club Address today........our new submarines, if we ever get them, "....will be like bringing a Chihuahua to a Rottweiler convention."
Al Bundy (16-03-20),Uncle Fester (12-03-20)
Look Here -> |
So who has the imagination that a aussie sub is going to sneak up on the Chinese man made island and fire a missile into it then slip away so they dont know who fired it ??? get real ,this belongs to Disney world
".......sneak up on the Chinese man made island......"
Your lack of knowledge of the range of submarine-launched ballistic missiles is exceeded only by your lack of knowledge of the overall importance of submarines in naval defence operations.....particularly to a nation totally surrounded by deep oceans.
For your edification:
Submarine-launched ballistic missile
A submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) is a ballistic missile capable of being launched from submarines. Modern variants usually deliver multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs) each of which carries a nuclear warhead and allows a single launched missile to strike several targets. Submarine-launched ballistic missiles operate in a different way from submarine-launched cruise missiles.
Modern submarine-launched ballistic missiles are closely related to intercontinental ballistic missiles, with ranges of over 5,500 kilometres (3,000 nmi), and in many cases SLBMs and ICBMs may be part of the same family of weapons.
Hardly any need to "sneak up", is there.
When you've finished reading this you could try brushing up on a bit of the history of the success of the German U-boats during WW2.
Technologies have changed and advanced since then, and submarines are not as immune to counter-attack as they once were, but the deep ocean is still one of the best and safest places to hide and operate an offensive/defensive platform.....along with outer space, which is rapidly catching up.
Meantime, enjoy your stay in Disney World.
I fear Malcolm Turnbull has repeated Kim Beaselys Collins Class disaster with these submarines. And for the same reason. Political seats in South Australia.
When politicians get involved in such decisions, it's almost inevitably a disaster....
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
Over the years I have mentioned here numerous times the uselessness of the Abbot inspired Sub program and always got flamed for it.
That report fully confirms my observations and the cost blow out is shocking.
Nuclear powered subs would be a different story but without nuclear war heads they remain useless in prohibiting a nuclear proxy war on Australian soil between China and the USA, two countries where I have the least trust currently.
Balance of power is great for those who have that (nuclear)power but we are a joke.
Last edited by Uncle Fester; 12-03-20 at 10:18 AM.
Update: A deletion of features that work well and ain't broke but are deemed outdated in order to add things that are up to date and broken.
Compatibility: A word soon to be deleted from our dictionaries as it is outdated.
Humans: Entities that are not only outdated but broken... AI-self-learning-update-error...terminate...terminate...
Thala Dan (12-03-20)
You can still do a lot of damage with todays non-nuclear warheads.
And they have the added advantage that after a successful attack the victor can occupy the conquered territory without getting toasted.
One of the great tactical advantages of submarines is the element of doubt and surprise they can provide.........a great deterrent if the other side doesn't know "where the bloody hell are you"
On the other hand....nuclear power for submarine propulsion is almost a given these days........I can't believe that we are even contemplating, let alone buying, diesel generators and lead-acid batteries in the 21st century.
Now that is a joke.....and not a very funny one.
Not only batteries, but RETROFITTED nuclear submarines....FFS.
I have always been a fan of subs, but the stupid, stupid, stupid politicians get in the way of a sensible, effective choice. Add to that the lefts religious opposition to nuclear power of any kind, and we are doomed to a substandard solution.
Malcolm Turnbull and Kim Beasely should be outed for gross waste of public money on the grandest of scales, and for identical, political reasons. It's sheer madness.
The fact that there's a highway to hell and a stairway to heaven says a lot about the anticipated traffic flow.
Oh I fear its too late you have been suckered into believe that there will be conflict then we will need submarines JUST IN CASE what a dimwitted out look to have on life! why would any one want to start a war that has no basis in fact , world peace if only broken by stupidity and if you cant live peacefully with your neighbours then theres something wrong in your head , we dont need national fighting machines , we need a world wide police to keep the maniacs in check !!!! get rid of religion then wars are gone with the wind then ask your self who is going to start a war then . Getting rid of those type of thoughts is the civilised way to look at life , An open book for all countries and there is no need for spies and secret intelligence world as it achieves absolutely nothing we are brainwashed to believe that a submarine is going to stop a war because "it looks fearsome " horseshit I say , a waste of taxpayers funds to pamper the egos of the bitchy bastards I dont give a continental for its capabilities nuclear or diesel sooner or later it has to come up for air . so why a ballistic missile fired from 5000km away so what ?Is that going to keep you safe no way Hosea the it comes down to the size of your toys and the brainwashing begins all over again , Any way my penis is bigger than yours so there .
Good, bad, useless, effective, whatever, .... I just can't get past the Price of the effing things!
Wouldn't it be cheaper just to develop a killer satellite capable of shooting down death ray Laser Beams? :0)
Sure as shit couldn't cost any more or take any longer to be ready and would seem to have a better chance of being worth while and actually be useful.
I dont see the problem........................
Apart from the most important point of looking after BIG BUSINESS in SA, it is our responsibility to help sustain employment and defense capabilities of the French Naval Group as we all know that we Australians are too 'kin stupid to build anything ourselves
Is it true the Malcolm Turdbull has a chateau in the french countryside ??
The penis mention was a snipe at mines bigger than yours and it cost more so its better attitude Arent they stupid ? who wants to kill others anyway . Guns were meant for feeding yourself so if you going to kill it you must eat it then !!!!! the world will be put to right
Perspective, other South Eastern Asian countries economies are increasing and there fore their defense budgets will do too!
2 things stopped Indonesia from going to war with Australia during East Timor independence
F111s, capable of knocking out Indonesian communications and a war ready (Collins) sub sitting in Darwin harbour. According to the article i read it did not have to be in the area to act as a deterrent, just be close by
Any ways, the conventional version of the Frog subs in comparison to their nuclear counterparts are a joke and also an unknown, great deterrent
There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Madness"
Cheers, enf........haven't come across a monologue like that since about Woodstock days.
Still desperately trying to un-visualise the penis reference though
Another interesting report on the subject:
Can Australia afford nuclear propelled submarines? Can we afford not to?
Australian Strategic Policy Institute
Mind you,they are bloody expensive:
The Navy's New Nuclear Missile Submarines Are Probably Going to Cost More Than $128 Billion
The U.S. Navy may have to ask Congress to boost funding in fiscal 2021 to buy the first in its new 12-ship fleet of nuclear-armed submarines because of unreliable cost estimates, according to congressional auditors.
The service’s current procurement cost estimate and design goal are suspect and require updates before those dollars are approved, the Government Accountability Office said in a report issued Monday.
The Columbia-class program is estimated at $128 billion including research and development, with $115 billion for procurement. That makes it the Pentagon’s third-costliest system.
You'll have to excuse me now.......gotta duck off and play some war games with my toy soldiers.
How China Could Win a War Against America: Kill The Satellites
Beijing knows that Washington deeply relies on its satellites and other high-tech communications.
China will soon be able to destroy every satellite in space, a senior U.S. military official has said.
In addition to the Chinese shooting down an obsolete weather satellite in 2007, The U.S. and India have also subsequently done the same.
It is suspected that Russia has the same capability, but they ain't sayin'.
It would be cheaper and smarter to build a nice new base in NT for the yanks and allow them to base a couple of their subs here.....
Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk
free doughnuts to attract them suggests Broome as a likely candidate , harbour is deep enough , they could do with a boost
lsemmens (13-03-20)
Bookmarks