Yes the last paragraph is very interesting
.https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/
Pyne flags missile defence
Just what does a middle power look like?
Regards S
Last edited:
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
.https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/
Pyne flags missile defence
Just what does a middle power look like?
Regards S
the 2nd to last para is the kicker...
I'd suggest that there's a degree of concern with how the US is going to play on the world stage for the near future - and the lack of foreign policy consistency and coherence is making all their friends and allies think about a Plan B on more self sufficiency ......
Gen Leahy (Retd) will be more than happy if that's the case.
I'd suggest that there's a degree of concern with how the US is going to play on the world stage for the near future - and the lack of foreign policy consistency and coherence is making all their friends and allies think about a Plan B on more self sufficiency ......
Gen Leahy (Retd) will be more than happy if that's the case.
On the same page as the Janes announcement on Missile defence there was an article reporting Sean Costello resignation as CEO DCNS Australia.
Should we be reading anything of importance into this?
Well the PR exercise has begun then:
Choules sails for cyclone support | Navy Daily
Choules set sail today, does this add more weight to Canberra being broken ?
Cheers
Choules sails for cyclone support | Navy Daily
Choules set sail today, does this add more weight to Canberra being broken ?
Cheers
Haven't heard. IMO his appointment was a classic example of why ex politicians, snr staffers and senior sirs should be unable to apply for industry positions (wait for at least 12 months minimum) where their prior privilege provides an advantage and fails the pub test
probably higher state of readiness. RAN would have been getting ready as soon as the BOM data was looking ordinary
ditto for RAAF and Army
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/pyne-flags-missile-defence-system/
BMD has been flagged for a while, Rudds white paper if not earlier.
It was never really that clear what that would translate into SM-6 or SM-3 type capability.
It seems that SM-3 might be the longer term goal. If we are talking North Korea, then that would be appropriate.Of course Pyne is not the defense minister, he is the defense industry minister.
I do find Pynes comments regarding domestic capability very interesting. It didn't seem as if he was refering to the OPV.
Interesting.
t68
Well-Known Member
It easy to talk it up for domestic consumption, but it's the old saying
Money talks and bullshit walks
Can't see him emulating the UK or the US
Costello seems to change employers every couple years. Don't know his thoughts on it specifically but a senior manager once told me its worth your while to change jobs before your signature appears on too much real stuff that can go pear shaped.
True. But there are a couple of projects that Australia might latch onto. It will be interesting to see if that happens.
Given the current environment, we may have to have some domestic capability, as some of our key partners go into the politically unreliable category. Currently we are completely dependent on turn key systems in a lot of areas.
Update on intro-to-service helo training ship Sycamore, from Aust. Defence Business Review.
Nicely ticking along.
Nicely ticking along.
For whole article go here Multirole Aviation Training Vessel on track for HATS
t68
Well-Known Member
Yep it would be nice to have that capabilty, but unless we can export I don't really think we have the economies of scale to back a lot up, I'm really surprise that cea tech are doing well.
If say Australia was to adopt say local production of NSM/JSM replacing the Harpoon. That could mean of the order of ~500 missiles if you look at surface launched (>150+), sub launched (>100), air launched(>200) and land based applications (>50). The NSM is waiting for its big non european customer and Australia might just be that. Its enough to have a production line, and for Australia we should be more self reliant and the NSM is the type of weapon we should be making, it fits so well with out forces and our needs.
We have an agreement with Japan to be able to supply munitions.It would certainly be something they are considering purchasing (ideal for the F-35). While historically Japan has locally manufactured locally, as part of a wider strategic objective, it may make sense to partner with Australia. Also Japan historically has locally made US weapons, the NSM being Norwegian could be problematic. Who else can also supply other partners in Asia, something that would still be problematic for Japan to supply arms directly herself.
Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand would be other obvious interested parties. Possibly the UK, I don't think there would be any impossible barriers there. Recent events in the US would have other nations trying to diversify their munitions supply. Australia is a strong and stable regional power many countries may seek to strengthen ties with and counter balance other recent events. South Korea might also be interested.
Australia and Norway could then jointly develop and evolve the missile and work to further integrate it on various platforms. (F-18/F-18SH for example which would open it up to every F-18 operator thinking about SH or F-35)
You start to hit a bit of critical mass. All very theoretical, but possible. There is certainly opportunity that trades on the strengths of Australia.
Propulsion problems with both Canberra and Adelaide now reported by ABC.
Navy's largest ships unable to join Cyclone Debbie emergency response amid engine troubles - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Unlucky for RAN (taken with the initial but unrelated troubles with HMAS Choules) especially the timing with cyclone in Queensland.
t68
Well-Known Member
That's local production which I'm all for, but for self reliance I thought you were talking something like the Nulka program Australian designed and built, with the only downside is the internals which I'm assuming is the guidance etc is from overseas. I know that from experience the transportation side of things years ago the US would import into RAAF Richmond and we would transport under armed escort then return with built examples to go back to the US.
So if things go pear shaped we may have local production but that could easily stop if the parts can't get thru, but I understand what you mean local production is not always self reliant.
Sad that we don't design more of our own equipment. Particularly since overseas sourced designs are often not entirely suitable and require lots of re-design anyway.
A good case in point would be the new frigates.
We are looking at three European designs none of which really match our requirements. American designs are better ... but too expensive.
What Australia needs in a new frigate is something bigger than what is being offered by Europe but not necessarily as well equipped as an American ship.
Same with our subs. I would have liked to have seen us just continue to develop the Collins class. We have learned all these hard lessons when building these boats but rather than simply continue to evolve that design we have chosen to throw it all away and start again with the French.
Another example is the OPV. OPVs are reasonably simple ships and yet even those are being designed in Europe.
I doubt the Japanese have problems with procuring weapons systems from other sources than the US. They have licenses for Oerlikon 35mm and Rheinmetall 120mm guns for example.
But they really like indigenious products or at least licenses.
Right now they have several AShMs in service and in development (although not a handy one like the JSM/NSM) so I doubt they'd buy a foreign design. But if they do they would most probably try to get a license from Kongsberg themselves.
But they really like indigenious products or at least licenses.
Right now they have several AShMs in service and in development (although not a handy one like the JSM/NSM) so I doubt they'd buy a foreign design. But if they do they would most probably try to get a license from Kongsberg themselves.
t68
Well-Known Member
Well we were on our way at one point to having a clean sheet design for the sub's if not for political funding issues. Our main problems seems to be the lack of investment by AusGov one sides started getting it going in the right direction then the other side takes it away that's our biggest problem.
- Status