Aardvark144
Active Member
It seems like the Aussie Media has finally woken up on the topic. Multiple Print and Radio now mentioning next week in San Diego.Thanks for the information Aardvark.
It seems like the Aussie Media has finally woken up on the topic. Multiple Print and Radio now mentioning next week in San Diego.Thanks for the information Aardvark.
The rough numbers for a P-270 Moskit work out to a ballistic trajectory covering about 2.5 km. The 'real' numbers would likely be somewhat less if the missile were to break up during the terminal approach as some of the debris would likely have a higher drag coefficient. However, that 2.5 km distance which the missile and/or debris would continue to fly through is greater than the ~1.5 km max effective range of a Mk 15 Phalanx. Also the P-270 is an AShM with a supersonic final approach and not a hypersonic weapon.I would suggest that before the proponents both for and against CIWS and what range they are effective or not effective, that they do the mathematics first, including mass, velocity, altitude and gravity before assuming whether debris will or won't hit the target ship and at what range this will happen. I did the calculation some time back for subsonic missiles, which showed that CIWS was very effective but have not done this for hypersonic missiles. However what range and altitude a hypersonic missiles debris will hit the intended target is at present appears to be speculative and needs to be calculated and not assumed.
Wouldn’t a Phalanx be a better option for drone swarm attack? Eg a nearby fishing fleet launched a swarm of 20kg drones?Yes, the USN has both Phalanx and RAM, but look at the development timelines for both systems, and also look at what is being fitted to vessels designed to serve in the USN. When I go through lists of some of the upcoming or newer classes of vessel in the USN, I do not see the Mk 15 Phalanx being fitted anymore. Going back, it appears that the designs which had lead ship construction in 2000 or later were fitted with RIM-116, but not the Mk 15 Phalanx. Older classes which are still in service or even being built (Arleigh Burke-class DDG for example) were designed to be fitted with the Mk 15 so the USN appears to be keeping it in service, at least for the time being.
With the RAN at times having such long periods between designs, it is quite possible to "miss the boat" in incorporating changes in weapon systems fitout. That might be what happened with the Mk 15 and RIM-116, OTOH that might not. Me being me, I place more importance on the overall weapons fitout for a vessel rather than the CIWS which is really a "Hail Mary" last line of defence. If one is down to using that, several things have already not gone in your favour.
Has been discussed previously and on other sites. The Sun is predominantly a domestic new outlet for the UK. How about we wait until next weekFurther to my earlier post with the claim that 2 Astutes will be pushed into Australian service. Todays The Times newspaper extract says the same. View attachment 50100
No drama mate but this is now coming out of UK and US sources. I have no opinion or barrow to push on the subject.Has been discussed previously and on other sites. The Sun is predominantly a domestic new outlet for the UK. How about we wait until next week
Possibly, though if such a swarm was launched from vectors either outside of a Mk 15 firing arc, or within the firing arc but from multiple vectors a Mk 15 would potentially have issues. For something specific like lightweight drones and EW system might be more effective and efficient. Depending on what type or radar array is fitted, EA might even be an option.Wouldn’t a Phalanx be a better option for drone swarm attack? Eg a nearby fishing fleet launched a swarm of 20kg drones?
Here is another possibility:
Lease the ...........
Astute 6 Agamemnon 2024
Astute 7 Agincourt 2026
........................until such time as the first and second of the new build submarines (with US combat system etc) come online for the RAN, then
Astute 6 Agamemnon and Astute 7 Agincourt go back to re-join the RN
This provides the stop gap needed, as well as the training required for RAN submariners.
It also allows the new RAN build submarines time to become established as a sovereign programme without loss of capability.
MB
I wouldn't completely dismiss the idea but I don't imagine they would be transfered immediately. The HMS Astute itself was intended to serve 25 years which would suggest it would need replacing circa 2035. It might be conceivable that the RN might accelerate the replacement of this sub by a few years. It may also be possible to stretch out the service life of the Astute for a few more years giving Australia some capability out to the late 30s which may be enough time for a domestically built submarine to be completed.This fella is saying he had inside info ex USN that the interim sub solution will be 2 existing or under construction Astutes. Guess we will see next week.
This aspect would have to start straight away. Even if the subs were 10 years into the future.Dr Obbard said the “mid-tier” nuclear professionals required to operate and maintain the boats would need undergraduate or masters-level degrees, and an average 10 years of experience. “These are senior scientists, engineers, technical managers, reactor operators and reactor shift managers. Most of the submarine crew fall into this category,” he said.
Yep, My personal thoughts are that any hypersonic missile would reduce its velocity significantly as its altitude decreased in its terminal dive due to increased drag from the denser atmosphere and that debris would decelerate very quickly to subsonic speeds due to the very high supersonic drag for misshapen objects. Any missile that starts to break up at hypersonic speeds will self destruct very quickly due to the enormous forces involved. the other point to consider is that due to the misshapen nature of the debris, it will not continue on a predictable path and could and would go anywhere, not necessarily hitting the target. Even the warhead if not exploded would in all probability be tumbling with the associated aerodynamic forces decelerating it very quickly and it going on an unpredictable course.The rough numbers for a P-270 Moskit work out to a ballistic trajectory covering about 2.5 km. The 'real' numbers would likely be somewhat less if the missile were to break up during the terminal approach as some of the debris would likely have a higher drag coefficient. However, that 2.5 km distance which the missile and/or debris would continue to fly through is greater than the ~1.5 km max effective range of a Mk 15 Phalanx. Also the P-270 is an AShM with a supersonic final approach and not a hypersonic weapon.
A swarm of drones is no longer in the fantasy space.Wouldn’t a Phalanx be a better option for drone swarm attack? Eg a nearby fishing fleet launched a swarm of 20kg drones?
Until Australia decides tradies are not worth perhaps double what a graduate scientist earns it will be very difficult to keep our graduates in Australia. The money and opportunities are simply far greater overseas than in Australia.I imagine that we don't have a lot of graduating PHD level scientists entering the workforce. Not to mention it takes around 10 years experience to produce experts.
So about 3 to 5 years to get a PHD and another 10 years to become expert.
Gives you an idea how challenging this is going to be.
Do you have a source for this?More and more signs pointing to the Astute's and SSNR. Recruitment has been a consistent problem and having 30% or so less crew is always helpful. Will also assist in expanding the fleet past 8 Vessels if required.
Annoucement will be made on the 13th. Cannot wait!
Nothing official of course. So apologies for the direct inference. Just getting a little over-excited.Do you have a source for this?
Patience grasshopper. Whilst I agree that the Astute Class is looking more likely, the overly rotund lady hasn't warmed up her vocal chords and it ain't over until she's sung.
Australia, financed by farms and mines, run by lawyers and accountants for the benefit of financiers.Until Australia decides tradies are not worth perhaps double what a graduate scientist earns it will be very difficult to keep our graduates in Australia. The money and opportunities are simply far greater overseas than in Australia.
On top of that many young people wouldn’t consider working for the military under any circumstances, from an ethical point of view. There are lots of negatives to working in the military and not a lot of advantages in todays world. We need to make it a far more lucrative and attractive career.