Really ? Can you link to the Chinese owned port please ?
en.wikipedia.org
www.abc.net.au
www.sbs.com.au
I would dearly love to know how any significant naval taskforce (CV, escorts, amphib transports and SSNs) could make a 5000km journey through shallow archipeligic waters and arrive and put a land force ashore "before we knew it". Seriously, surface combatants are tracked by a multitude of assets the minute they leave harbour. By the 5Eye network and various allies. So in that regard your fears are pretty unfounded.
While I agree that the lease of the port was unusual I can’t understand the angst it has caused.Mate really?
.Port Darwin - Wikipedia
Push to 'nationalise' Darwin Port to end Chinese ownership of strategic asset
A Labor MP becomes the first federal politician to call for the controversial Chinese lease on Darwin Port to be scrapped, so it can be placed back into Australian control.Government rejects federal MP's call to buy back Darwin port from Chinese leaseholder
The deputy chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has called for Australia to buy back control of Darwin's port.
Do as they please is against the rules. But where do rules come into play these days.
I'm not suggesting they are going to do it. All I'm saying is that if there was intent how hard would it be to get people and kit in.
But then why invade when you can buy.
I think that you are barking up the wrong tree and need to get into the shade before you go tropo. The Chinese company has a 99 year lease of the port and if / when the brown smelly stuff hits the high speed rotating object the Commonwealth can nationalise the port if it so desires.Mate really?
.Port Darwin - Wikipedia
Push to 'nationalise' Darwin Port to end Chinese ownership of strategic asset
A Labor MP becomes the first federal politician to call for the controversial Chinese lease on Darwin Port to be scrapped, so it can be placed back into Australian control.Government rejects federal MP's call to buy back Darwin port from Chinese leaseholder
The deputy chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade has called for Australia to buy back control of Darwin's port.
Do as they please is against the rules. But where do rules come into play these days.
I'm not suggesting they are going to do it. All I'm saying is that if there was intent how hard would it be to get people and kit in.
But then why invade when you can buy.
There have been live fires from the LHD's with ASLAV's, what would this be useful for? Maybe to sanitize a beach before a beach landing and using the Frigates 155mm naval rounds for the heavy targets?A moving ship does enlarge the beaton zone of the target
Regards S
I believe the reasons would be "shits and giggles" and "ammo expenditure". Nothing beyond that, certainly not any serious replacement or augmentation of NGS.There have been live fires from the LHD's with ASLAV's, what would this be useful for? Maybe to sanitize a beach before a beach landing and using the Frigates 155mm naval rounds for the heavy targets?
My two bobs worth of thinking anyway
2 Cav deck shoot on HMAS Canberra - CONTACT magazine
Six ASLAVs from the Townsville-based 2nd Cavalry Regiment conducted a live-fire shoot on the flight deck of HMAS Canberra on Sunday, 4 October 2015.www.contactairlandandsea.com
Firing the ASLAVs from the deck of he LHD isn’t supposed to be an operational capability, it is just a way to do some continuation training while embarked to keep skills up, as well as do test fires of the main gun.There have been live fires from the LHD's with ASLAV's, what would this be useful for? Maybe to sanitize a beach before a beach landing and using the Frigates 155mm naval rounds for the heavy targets?
My two bobs worth of thinking anyway
2 Cav deck shoot on HMAS Canberra - CONTACT magazine
Six ASLAVs from the Townsville-based 2nd Cavalry Regiment conducted a live-fire shoot on the flight deck of HMAS Canberra on Sunday, 4 October 2015.www.contactairlandandsea.com
Correct, it was essentially to maintain the equipment, practice firing with no real point but to do a shakedown and shits and giggles, maybe a little bit of wow factor for the crew to take some happy snaps too
The biggest problem is that the M777s are neither fish nor fowl. They (and particularly their ammo) are not light enough to be true mobile guns (it takes a chinook to move them by air, for example), yet because they are so lightly built they are not very robust when used as general purpose towed guns. They are not a bad solution if you want one gun to do everything, but if you are having dedicated SPGs you might as well have dedicated light and mobile guns as well. And that probably means something other than a 155.
Practice firing with no real point? What do you think the purpose of all training is?Correct, it was essentially to maintain the equipment, practice firing with no real point but to do a shakedown and shits and giggles, maybe a little bit of wow factor for the crew to take some happy snaps too
Cheers
I believe RAN frigates have 127 mm guns not 155 mm.There have been live fires from the LHD's with ASLAV's, what would this be useful for? Maybe to sanitize a beach before a beach landing and using the Frigates 155mm naval rounds for the heavy targets?
My two bobs worth of thinking anyway
2 Cav deck shoot on HMAS Canberra - CONTACT magazine
Six ASLAVs from the Townsville-based 2nd Cavalry Regiment conducted a live-fire shoot on the flight deck of HMAS Canberra on Sunday, 4 October 2015.www.contactairlandandsea.com
Are specialized shells in 105 mm similar to what’s available for the M777? If so then maybe the 105’s do have a place.
To practice of course, the way in which they were doing it was of no point, it is not a real life situation and would not be used.
There was a lot of point to it. It allows the crews to practice action drills, turret drills, fire control orders and engagement drills. It also test fires the weapons and turret systems so when they hit the beach they know everything works. It’s really no different to firing at a static AFV FFTS on land other than the target array is not very good. It’s certainly not for ‘shits and giggles’
Yep get all that Raven, so not sure what your point is, so thinking you have taken what I have said the wrong way, my point was it was practice for all the reasons you have listed and the basis behind my initial reply that it was for practice and shakedown IE what you have said !
They will probably and should do it regularly, as Raven points out it does make sense. I imagine the Navy isn't planning to engage a hostile destroyer by moving the ASLAV's up top and firing the 25mms. Well, not in the first instance anyway
. But embarking army, army needs to do army things. Machines that aren't operated, particularly in a marine environment are likely to have issues. Army should be comfortable on deck as they are on land and do as much as they can when they can. The ADF has always used flat decks for things other than flight ops.