The Fifth Column Forum
Not logged in [Login - Register]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  ..  33    35  
Author: Subject: RAN part 2
unicorn
Member





Posts: 1078
Registered: 11-5-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: Resignedly Sceptical

[*] posted on 27-2-2020 at 02:07 PM


I wish I could trust Naval Group, but I can't and I don't.



It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed,
the lips acquire stains,
the stains become a warning.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 27-2-2020 at 02:13 PM


Ditto
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 2-3-2020 at 07:29 PM


Australia introduces ‘tailor-made’ sustainment model for new OPVs

Jon Grevatt, Bangkok - Jane's Defence Weekly

02 March 2020

WHY do I get a feeling this is going to be a very sophisticated and very expensive piece of JUNK system?! These are OPV's, not super-duper Air Defence Destroyers...……..KISS method all the way!

The Australian Department of Defence (DoD) has issued a tender to procure sustainment services for the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN’s) new Arafura-class offshore patrol vessels (OPVs).

The DoD said on 28 February that the model used to sustain the OPVs would be “innovative” and tailored to meet the requirements of the OPVs, the first two of which are being constructed by national shipbuilder ASC in South Australia.

Australia’s Minister for Defence Industry Melissa Price said the new tender was the “first part of a tailored sustainment plan” for the OPVs.

The request for tender – published by the Australian government’s tender service on 28 February – outlines the procurement of “Capability Life Cycle Manager” (CLCM) services to support and sustain the Arafura-class OPVs.

(123 of 410 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 3-3-2020 at 09:35 AM


Australian DoD receives third and final Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyer

Julian Kerr, Adelaide - Jane's Defence Weekly

02 March 2020


The Australian DoD received Sydney, the third and final AWD on order for the RAN, in a ceremony held in Adelaide on 28 February. Source: Commonwealth of Australia

The Australian Department of Defence (DoD) took delivery of the Royal Australian Navy's (RAN's) third and final Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyer (AWD), the future HMAS Sydney (pennant number 42), at the Osborne naval shipyard in Adelaide on 28 February.

The acceptance ceremony, which was attended by Defence Minister Linda Reynolds and Chief of Navy Vice Admiral Michael Noonan, marked the conclusion of the AUD9 billion (USD6 billion) AWD construction programme to replace six Adelaide-class (US Oliver Hazard Perry design) guided-missile frigates, the last of which was decommissioned in October 2019, with the 7,000 tonne Aegis-equipped AWDs.

The third Hobart-class destroyer is expected to be commissioned in Sydney on 20 May and undertake work-up activities until the end of the year in preparation for up to six months of US Navy Combat System Ship Qualification (CSSQT) trials.

These will include firings over the Pacific Test Range off San Diego of the destroyer's RIM-66 SM-2 Block 3B and RIM-162 Evolved SeaSparrow Missiles (ESSMs) air-defence missiles.

Successful completion of the US CSSQT should clear the way for final operational capability (FOC) for all three AWDs to be declared simultaneously by Vice Adm Noonan.

First-of-class HMAS Hobart was commissioned in 2017 while the second, HMAS Brisbane , was commissioned the following year: each more than two years behind the original schedule, which itself was re-baselined three times.

Delivery of Sydney was several months earlier than previously re-scheduled following a decision to modify the storage of Mk 54 anti-submarine torpedoes and AGM-114N Hellfire air-to-surface missiles for the ship's MH-60R multirole naval helicopter as part of the construction process rather than after its completion.

Reynolds confirmed that the 13-year AWD programme had involved challenges but described Sydney as "one of the world's most capable naval vessels", providing credible deterrence, scalable response options, and the ability to withstand counter coercion.

(328 of 456 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 3-3-2020 at 02:16 PM


Disgraceful effort from multiple Governments that we only have 3 of these...



In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ARH
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 1033
Registered: 10-5-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 3-3-2020 at 03:22 PM


What's worse is the fact we paid $3 billion a piece for them! The USN will be getting something remarkably similar for their next gen frigates at half that price.



Repent!

The darkest hour of Humanity is upon us. The world
shall meet it's end and we shall be submerged into a
new dark age. Repent your sins, for the apocalypse,
and the end, is extremely f@#king nigh!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DEW
Member





Posts: 241
Registered: 11-11-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 3-3-2020 at 04:39 PM


Quote: Originally posted by ARH  
What's worse is the fact we paid $3 billion a piece for them! The USN will be getting something remarkably similar for their next gen frigates at half that price.


Not suggesting for a moment that our 3 ship build was an efficient program but the actual cost of the first build of FFG-X is estimated at about A$2 billion. Remember, that is with all their in place infrastructure, trained workforce, in-house design, in-country systems integration and probably without a full Aegis suite. The program will go on to build these by the dozen.

We should never build any class of ship in Australia with less than 6 units. There is simply no scope to amortise the front end costs. I believe, in rough numbers, the $9 billion 1-2-3 ship Hobart class build breaks down something like $4 billion - $3 billion - $2 billion. If we had built the 5 ships that we need, the program costs would have looked more respectable and we wouldn't be dicking around building 2 OPVs in South Aus.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 4-3-2020 at 12:36 AM


Quote: Originally posted by ARH  
What's worse is the fact we paid $3 billion a piece for them! The USN will be getting something remarkably similar for their next gen frigates at half that price.


The FFG-X will be similar on a superficial level, but it won’t have a full AEGIS installation, a proper 127mm gun, a full 48 cell strike length VLS and so on.

That doesn’t change the fact that we managed to somehow overpay and simultaneously under-invest in our AWD fleet though...






In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
unicorn
Member





Posts: 1078
Registered: 11-5-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: Resignedly Sceptical

[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 08:21 AM


We could have had 5 Burkes for the money, FAR more capable with twice the helicopters and twice the VLS and spent the time saved in rolling out the Arafuras and Hunters and Attacks far more swiftly.



It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed,
the lips acquire stains,
the stains become a warning.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 08:50 AM


The fact we "only" have a 40mm cannon as the main gun on the Arafunas, continues to pain me greatly!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 12:56 PM


Quote: Originally posted by bug2  
The fact we "only" have a 40mm cannon as the main gun on the Arafunas, continues to pain me greatly!


I think it will be a starting point. Just as the 4x Typhoons and nothing else, are on the LHD’s.

I don’t care what the intended ‘role’ of the Arafura’s are. If we are ever in a war, and an enemy commander spots an 1800t grey painted naval vessel with a ‘big gun’ on the front of the ship, it will look like a frigate to them... What we ‘intended’ will be of absolutely no consequence to them...

It will be attacked and because it is so ill-equipped, will be destroyed.

At this point, I don’t even care about the types of systems, but if we are going to buy 1800t ships, paint them grey and fly the RAN flag off them, then they should have as an absolute bare minimum:

Hard kill very short and short ranged overlapping air self defence capability. (Some sort of gun and missile combo. Indicative capability is a 57mm Bofors Mk 3 gun and RAM).

Soft kill air defences. (Nulka / EWSP capability at present).

Torpedo countermeasures. (Decoy / active systems).

A reasonable gun and / or missile capability with which to reach out and hit those that would want to hit us. (Indicative systems - 57mm gun with ALAMO ammunition, plus Spike NLOS or greater ~ NSM).

Helicopter / UAV capability, either permanent with a hangar or semi-permanent as we do with Choules.

An appropriate C4ISREW and combat management system.

Modular space for alternative mission scenarios including RHiB’s / UUV’s, CDT / Specwarries capability, remote mine warfare work, etc.

That should be the bare minimum fitout for a naval vessel. If anything we call a naval ship doesn’t need this, then IMHO it shouldn’t be given to the navy and should be run by BPC.




In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 01:25 PM


ABSO-BLOODY-LUTELY!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
DEW
Member





Posts: 241
Registered: 11-11-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 02:03 PM


Quote: Originally posted by ADMK2  

…That should be the bare minimum fitout for a naval vessel. If anything we call a naval ship doesn’t need this, then IMHO it shouldn’t be given to the navy and should be run by BPC.


It seems clear to me that all of this is down to internal Navy politics. It was stated repeatedly during the selection process and on announcement of the successful bid, that the principle purpose and role of these vessels was "constabulary". To paraphrase senior navy, "these new vessels will continue the task of the Armidale class, but do it better". Period. Stop. End of message.

I think government is happy to take this advice and the economy that goes with it. There is almost certainly some internal politicking going on here. Some group not wanting an area getting too capable, too able to intrude into their presumed area of responsibility or capability. We like to think of the Navy (and other branches) as a homogeneous organisation all working in unity to the same end, but then there are people, seniority, careers and entrenched organisational structures involved. Anyway it is quite clear that the restricted selection and fitout of these vessels was intentional and by design.

IMHO the navy, being the size that it is, cannot afford the crew or the hull numbers devoted almost exclusively to a "constabulary" role. :(
View user's profile View All Posts By User
unicorn
Member





Posts: 1078
Registered: 11-5-2017
Member Is Offline

Mood: Resignedly Sceptical

[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 02:13 PM


Navy chose the least capable of the three contenders, so that if the ALP had got in at the last election they couldn't cancel the Hunters by pointing at the Arafura class and say 'but you've got these new frigates...'

IMHO they are not warships, instead they should be painted white with a Green and Gold GT racing stripe and operated by an Australian Coast Guard


Nemesis 08.jpg - 67kB




It is by will alone I set my mind in motion.
It is by the juice of sapho that thoughts acquire speed,
the lips acquire stains,
the stains become a warning.
It is by will alone I set my mind in motion
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ARH
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 1033
Registered: 10-5-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 03:22 PM


Quote: Originally posted by unicorn  
Navy chose the least capable of the three contenders, so that if the ALP had got in at the last election they couldn't cancel the Hunters by pointing at the Arafura class and say 'but you've got these new frigates...'

IMHO they are not warships, instead they should be painted white with a Green and Gold GT racing stripe and operated by an Australian Coast Guard




IMO this point is critical.

The new OPV's will be able to do what is needed from them, and do it to a much higher standard than how the task has been performed in the past, and will be able to do nothing else.

If the OPV's started to look like a frigate, they will start to be tasked as a frigate, and then they would end up being the frigate replacement.

That is aside from the fact if the OPV's were uparmed, the money would end up coming out of existing programs, and that extra cost would probably end up nearly doubling the price of each ship.




Repent!

The darkest hour of Humanity is upon us. The world
shall meet it's end and we shall be submerged into a
new dark age. Repent your sins, for the apocalypse,
and the end, is extremely f@#king nigh!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 09:29 PM


Quote: Originally posted by ARH  
Quote: Originally posted by unicorn  
Navy chose the least capable of the three contenders, so that if the ALP had got in at the last election they couldn't cancel the Hunters by pointing at the Arafura class and say 'but you've got these new frigates...'

IMHO they are not warships, instead they should be painted white with a Green and Gold GT racing stripe and operated by an Australian Coast Guard




IMO this point is critical.

The new OPV's will be able to do what is needed from them, and do it to a much higher standard than how the task has been performed in the past, and will be able to do nothing else.

If the OPV's started to look like a frigate, they will start to be tasked as a frigate, and then they would end up being the frigate replacement.

That is aside from the fact if the OPV's were uparmed, the money would end up coming out of existing programs, and that extra cost would probably end up nearly doubling the price of each ship.


Well let’s face it, it’s not as if there isn’t a ton of ‘fat’ in our naval programs...




In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ARH
Super Administrator
*********




Posts: 1033
Registered: 10-5-2017
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 5-3-2020 at 11:24 PM


Quote:
Well let’s face it, it’s not as if there isn’t a ton of ‘fat’ in our naval programs...


Granted, but it isn't like procurement is going to be managed any smarter any time soon, or either side of government is going to give up on the cost of local ship building, despite the complete assinine economics of it all.

Given that context, not giving the government the opening to save money by replacing frigates with an enhanced weapons package for the OPV is a smart option.

I'd consider it one of the few times the RAN has actually thought ahead and intelligently gamed the system for once.




Repent!

The darkest hour of Humanity is upon us. The world
shall meet it's end and we shall be submerged into a
new dark age. Repent your sins, for the apocalypse,
and the end, is extremely f@#king nigh!
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 10-3-2020 at 08:59 AM


Schiebel’s new S2 engine for Camcopter S-100 UAV completes acceptance tests for RAN

Gabriel Dominguez, London - Jane's Defence Weekly

09 March 2020


Schiebel announced on 9 March that its newly designed S2 heavy fuel engine for the Camcopter S-100 UAV (seen here) has successfully completed acceptance tests for the RAN. Source: Schiebel

Austrian company Schiebel announced on 9 March that its newly designed S2 heavy fuel engine for the Camcopter S-100 vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) had successfully completed acceptance tests for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN).

“A comprehensive series of test flight activities demonstrated both the endurance, and maximum take-off weight [MTOW] – with multiple payloads – providing the evidence and assurance that the Camcopter S-100 fulfils the requirements of the RAN,” said the company in a statement.

Schiebel said the new S2 engine, which has been developed as a next-generation replacement for the current propulsion unit, increases the overall capability of the Camcopter S-100 system. The new lightweight heavy fuel engine is initially cleared for JP-5 (F-44) and Jet-A1 fuels with other fuel types set to be approved in future, it added.

The enhancements offered by the S2 engine, said Schiebel, will “enable the RAN to continue to expand their test and evaluation programme, examining advanced vertical takeoff and landing UAS capabilities” ahead of the Australian Department of Defence's Sea 129 Phase 5 programme, which seeks to equip the RAN’s future Arafura and Hunter warship classes with embarked UAS capabilities.

The latest announcement comes almost a year after Schiebel confirmed that it was developing the S2 engine for its Camcopter S-100 after its initial choice of heavy fuel engine had failed to meet the endurance requirements set by the RAN.

Andrew Watson, general manager at Schiebel Pacific, had told Jane’s in April 2019 that two JP-5-powered S-100 Camcopter UAVs contracted by the RAN as lead customer in December 2016 had been replaced by two aviation gasoline (avgas)-powered S-100s after the former failed to meet the RAN’s endurance requirement of six hours with a 20 kg payload.

(315 of 924 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 11-3-2020 at 08:44 PM


Australia marks first-ever submarine port call in Brunei

Ridzwan Rahmat, Singapore - Jane's Navy International

10 March 2020

In a bid to foster deeper defence relations with countries across Southeast Asia, the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) has made its first-ever submarine port call in Brunei.

The vessel that conducted the port call was HMAS Dechaineux (76) and it docked at Brunei’s Muara Commercial Wharf on 7 March. With the docking, the Collins-class diesel-electric boat (SSK) has also become the first-ever naval submarine to berth in Brunei.

No further details on Dechaineux ’s activities were provided by the Brunei’s Ministry of Defence, but Jane’s understands that the vessel was primarily involved with the hosting of visits by Royal Brunei Armed Forces officials and dignitaries.

(130 of 241 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 08:49 AM


Report proposes involving Saab Kockums in Australia’s Future Submarine programme

Julian Kerr, Sydney - Jane's Defence Weekly

11 March 2020

The capability, cost and scheduling of Australia’s AUD80 billion (USD47.2 billion) Future Submarine programme have been criticised in a report by consultancy firm Insight Economics that proposes the introduction of a ‘Plan B’ involving Saab’s Kockums naval business area.

The report, which was prepared for Sydney-based businessman Gary Johnston and backed by an expert reference group, suggests Canberra should commission Saab’s Kockums, which designed the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN’s) current fleet of six Collins-class submarines, to develop a preliminary design study (PDS) for an evolved version of the class.

Introducing a parallel pathway would create valuable competitive pressure as well as recognise that evolving a new submarine from an existing successful platform is the approach followed by all other countries that build and operate submarines, the report notes.

(153 of 694 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 05:30 PM


Sure, let’s throw even more money at designing an alternative in parallel, great plan...



In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 09:34 PM


Who is "Sydney-based businessman Gary Johnston"...……...the guy that asked for the sub report?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 09:36 PM


Australia further validates high-end warfighting capabilities in major naval drills

Ridzwan Rahmat, Singapore - Jane's Navy International

11 March 2020


HMAS Canberra seen here while it was berthed at Changi Naval Base, Singapore in 2019. The ship played an instrumental role at FCP20. Source: Jane’s/Ridzwan Rahmat

Key Points

- The Royal Australian Navy has concluded a fleet activity that further validates its high-end warfighting capabilities
- The activity was conducted as the service continues to transition towards task group-centred operations

The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) has further validated its ability to conduct mid-intensity, high-end warfighting operations with the completion of Fleet Certification Period 2020 (FCP20) on 6 March.

The naval drills were conducted over three weeks off the coasts of Victoria and Tasmania, and tested the service’s ability to conduct warfighting operations that are centred around its Canberra-class amphibious assault ships.

The amphibious vessel that was deployed for FCP20 was first-of-class HMAS Canberra . It joined the Anzac-class frigates HMAS Stuart and HMAS Arunta , replenishment oiler HMAS Sirius , mine-countermeasure vessels HMAS Huon and HMAS Diamantina , and Collins-class submarines, HMAS Collins and HMAS Farncomb .

A Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) P-8A aircraft, a United States Navy (USN) P-8, and a Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) P-3 also took part in FCP20.

Exercises that were conducted as part of the drills included anti-submarine, and anti-air scenarios.

The service’s first-of-class air warfare destroyer (AWD), HMAS Hobart , also joined the task group to provide air-defence support operations. It was the first time that an AWD had participated in a Fleet Certification Period activity.

In comments carried by RAN official publication Navy Daily on 11 March, Commodore Flotillas, Commodore Michael Harris, described the completion of FCP20 as proof that the RAN can deploy in whatever capacity required of it from the Australian government.

“The exercise continues [the] navy’s shift from predominantly single-ship operations over the past few decades to a complex and dynamic warfighting capability based around the fleet’s amphibious ships, in this case HMAS Canberra, ” said Cdre Harris.

(318 of 357 words)
View user's profile View All Posts By User
ADMK2
Member





Posts: 1120
Registered: 11-5-2017
Location: Brisvegas
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 10:04 PM


Don’t forget this ‘astonishing’ piece of news, that apparently warrants a Ministerial level release... In other news, it’s a big defence deal apparently, that a 25 year old ship, ‘successfully’ fired a missile it’s had in-service for 20 odd years...

HMAS Arunta tests missile system after upgrade
12 March 2020
Following a 20-month upgrade, Royal Australian Navy warship HMAS Arunta has fired its first Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) off the coast of Western Australia.

The ESSM is a surface-to-air weapon that uses radar homing guidance to counter fast-moving anti-ship missiles, forming part of Arunta’s air defence capability.

The Anzac Class Frigate is the first of her class to undergo the Anzac Midlife Capability Assurance Program (AMCAP) upgrade at Henderson, Western Australia as part of Australia’s Warship Asset Management Agreement (WAMA) Alliance.

Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds CSC said the missile firing is an important part of testing the ship’s upgraded capabilities.

“This successful missile firing demonstrates the success of the AMCAP upgrade, which enhances the frigate’s self-protection, communications, and command and control capability,” Minister Reynolds said.

“It’s also testament to the WAMA Alliance, a partnership between the Australian Government, BAE Systems, SAAB Australia and Naval Ship Management Australia.

“AMCAP is part of this Government’s $1.2 billion ANZAC Class sustainment program with Australian Defence Industry, which directly employs more than 140 workers while providing ongoing opportunities for small businesses in Henderson.”

Homeported at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia, Arunta is a long-range frigate capable of air defence, surface and undersea warfare, surveillance, reconnaissance and interdiction.

She is one of seven Anzac Class Frigates progressively undergoing AMCAP upgrades, with HMAS Warramunga’s upgrade currently underway.

“These upgrades will ensure the frigates remain one of the most advanced in the world, until the Hunter Class frigates enter service,” Minister Reynolds said.

Imagery and vision will be available at: https://images.defence.gov.au/S20201094
Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds CSC
Senator the Hon Linda Reynolds CSC
Minister for Defence
Media contacts
Nicky Hamer (Minister Reynolds’ Office): +61 437 989 927

Defence Media (02) 6127 1999, media@defence.gov.au
Biography | Media releases | Speeches | Statements | Transcripts
More releases
Defence encourages women to consider a career in cyber
11 March 2020
First Australian submarine visit to Brunei




In a low speed post-merge manoeuvring fight, with a high off-boresight 4th generation missile and Helmet Mounted Display, the Super Hornet will be a very difficult opponent for any current Russian fighter, even the Su-27/30
View user's profile View All Posts By User
bug2
Member





Posts: 20927
Registered: 13-8-2017
Location: Perth
Member Is Offline


[*] posted on 12-3-2020 at 10:32 PM


This guy Johnston seems to be some rich dude who likes to jab away at anything that takes his fancy. His website is here, called Submarines for Australia (!):

https://submarinesforaustralia.com.au/reports/submarines-for...
View user's profile View All Posts By User
 Pages:  1  ..  33    35  

  Go To Top

Powered by XMB 1.9.11
XMB Forum Software © 2001-2017 The XMB Group
[Queries: 16] [PHP: 71.0% - SQL: 29.0%]