Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

iambuzzard

Well-Known Member
I think that’s where cdi can help out -with maintenance. The potential Newcastle hub too would make alot of sense.
bae cut over 150 recently and pusser01 said they may be leaving the site next year.

Pics - Naval News
The pics seem a bit tight. You could barely fit between the hulls.
 

Going Boeing

Well-Known Member
Or fire Mk 48 adcaps
ADCAP was the upgrade to the Mk48 that was done in the 1980’s - the latest deployed version of the heavyweight submarine-launched torpedo is the MK 48 Mod 7 Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS). Jointly produced by the RAN, U.S. Navy and Lockheed Martin, it features upgraded all-digital sonar, enhanced target discrimination, and software updates for emerging combat requirements.
 

Lofty_DBF

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
ADCAP was the upgrade to the Mk48 that was done in the 1980’s - the latest deployed version of the heavyweight submarine-launched torpedo is the MK 48 Mod 7 Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS). Jointly produced by the RAN, U.S. Navy and Lockheed Martin, it features upgraded all-digital sonar, enhanced target discrimination, and software updates for emerging combat requirements.
I'm not sure where you got your information from regarding the ADCAP upgrade it wasn't done in the 1980's like you mentioned.
It's still an ADCAP the cbass is a further upgrade to the Mk 48 with further upgrades planned.

Cbass
 

Going Boeing

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure where you got your information from regarding the ADCAP upgrade it wasn't done in the 1980's like you mentioned.
It's still an ADCAP the cbass is a further upgrade to the Mk 48 with further upgrades planned.

Cbass
You’re probably right that they are still ADCAP’s, but a number of articles that I have read use the terminology associated with more recent modifications. This Wikipedia article indicates that ADCAP was developed circa 1987.
IMG_9848.jpeg
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
I have understood the Virginia class block is able to take a deployable manned submersible on its deck where divers can employ from , Is it fesible for the Ghost Shark to be deployed from the deck of the submarine ,I would ask this because of the low speed of the Ghost Shark and keeping the manned submarine out of shallow waters
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
It’s called the SEAL Delivery Vehicle and the answer is somewhere between “maybe” and “probably”. The issue would be the forces exerted by the flow of water past the object if the submarine was at high speed; and conversely, the noise generated by such hydrodynamic flow (which would have the potential to interact with the structure of the submarine and its propulsion) at low speed. The container the 688s use is designed to minimise these effects. Whether the Virginias can carry it I’m not sure - certainly in the case of the VPMs that might occupy the area where the 688s position the SDV.
 

iambuzzard

Well-Known Member
It’s called the SEAL Delivery Vehicle and the answer is somewhere between “maybe” and “probably”. The issue would be the forces exerted by the flow of water past the object if the submarine was at high speed; and conversely, the noise generated by such hydrodynamic flow (which would have the potential to interact with the structure of the submarine and its propulsion) at low speed. The container the 688s use is designed to minimise these effects. Whether the Virginias can carry it I’m not sure - certainly in the case of the VPMs that might occupy the area where the 688s position the SDV.
I believe ours won't have the VPMs. I think it's Block V onwards.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
I believe ours won't have the VPMs. I think it's Block V onwards.
THis article from 2023 suggests a number of the Virginia class submarines were able to carry the S,D.V , interesting to note that the R.N also operates similar if not same models
 
Top