t68
Well-Known Member
UCLASS requires cats & traps
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
t68
Well-Known Member
That was the original intent for the replacement of the Super Hornet, either more JSF or UCAV of some discription
t68
Well-Known Member
My sentiment also 100%
Did anyone else see the Defence Minister David Johnson on the ABC last night? He said he would not trust Submarine Corp to build a canoe, and went on about how far behind they are with the AWD's construction. But everyone else is aware that is mainly due to political interference. What exactly are the government playing at? Could it be they are preparing the public before announcing an overseas build of the new subs? I would not trust them out of sight on a dark night.
t68
Well-Known Member
Methinks its Johnson playing politic, he wants to screwed over ASc because it's SA based, he wants a offshore build so they can move sub maintenance to WA and grandstand in his home state
politics
24hrs before the head of the sub project was being praised about the work done to turn things around to current availability rates. he was given a model fire truck as a "token" gift to symbolise his wok firefighting the project
any govt would be cute by half in just blaming ASC - I suspect that one of the reasons that Lab has not gone in hard is because they know that they made a fist of things - and the fact that Conroy as shadow is next to useless anyway..
unfort subs are still a political football
Joe Black
Active Member
Or maybe Johnson is just firing a warning shot across the bow to both ASC and which-ever sub builders proposing building subs in ASC yard. It is if you promise to deliver on cost and timefame, you better well be doing that or else...
Johnson doesn't need to do that publicly - there are numerous mechanisms in place already where that can be (and is) done - and the Minister as well as ASC well know the lie of the land
Last edited:
Maybe I'm naïve but I believe his frustration with the uneducated crap on submarines being handballed around the Senate got the better of him and he was referring to past ASC shipbuilding performance and the AWD mess he inherited and he let fly.
My developing view is that he seems to understand defence procurement better than many that came before.
I do think that all MOD's are subject to the paradigms within which their respective governments work.
It seems obvious to me that this federal gov't wants a strong defence force and has made much needed decisions towards turning things around in that direction.
But there are budget constraints, and value for money spent is uppermost in their minds.
The AWD is waaaayyyyy over budget - and even though we all seem to understand how that happened, the minister wants to spread the message that this can't be repeated ... so there was that piece of political hyperbole.
FWIW, and in spite of the minister's outburst, I think he is genuinely trying to do a good job with this portfolio, and has bent himself to the task of understanding its myriad of complexities and issues better than most of his immediate predecessors.
Faulkner might have done a good job if he had an opportunity, but he was in the wrong party for that to happen.
MB
t68
Well-Known Member
Get Abbout to do a deal with Jackie Lambie she's pro defence and Abbout can get his legislation passed!!!
nfloorl:
I am kind of surprised that he let fly like that as he has been slow and steady up until now.
It also flew in the face of internal commentary about status of sub remediation etc which had happened within the same 24hr window
I still reckon that the way that we dealt with senate estimates in the past was the best model. ie we used to do a dummy run and practice with "pretend senators" playing hostile participants
it meant that when the real estimates kicked in we were already prepared and braced to deal with difficult senators. we spent a week to a fortnight doing dress rehearsals. We ran to the script which also meant that we were able to bypass difficult senators trying to get some glory.
For an example of how pompous some of the current lot are, look no further than estimates run on the ABC last week. The majority of the senators asking questions were clueless and just parroting something that had been written for them - it was pretty apparent that they didn't even understand some of what they were asking. and then you had some who were obnoxious (like Ludlum) and need to grow up and start acting ;like a senator rather than some smarmy schoolboy.
xenophon might be an aspiring machiavelli, but at least he gives an appearance of not being a total dumb arse.
I was listening to the Senate on radio and I literally wanted to cut my ears off, especially when that buffoon Conroy opened his mouth, what total hypocrites the questioners were.
Joe Black
Active Member
After reading this report, I am fully convinced we should go for an open tender and get the best design and do a tech transfer and build at least half the number of boats in Australia...
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...mics_ctte/naval_shipbuilding/part2/report.pdf
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary...mics_ctte/naval_shipbuilding/part2/report.pdf
Quick question if you know, Guessing I am right, is he the same David Baddams who ejected from A4G 885 with an engine failure on launch from Melbourne in 1980
Cheers
SpazSinbad
Active Member
Dave has the honour of the LAST A4G 'catapult' from HMAS Melbourne. It was a COLD catapult meaning not enough energy imparted for various reasons (catapult malfunction). He attempted to stop with the brakes (wearing them down to metal) and with 'EJECT EJECT EJECT' from Little F in his ears Dave did so just as A4G 885 reached the bow. Dave said the 'chair lifting' was rough (we can see the pilot/seat combo rotating left on the way up via rocket) and then he splashed down near the sinking A4G to have the parachute become entangled with the tail. He went down briefly but then became untangled to surface and to be picked up by the rescue crewman via SAR Helo (Pedro).
The story of that young helo pilot is in the latest TOUCHDOWN RAN Safety Magazine as I recall (perhaps now superseded?). I'll get a link. Also Dave's story has been told many times at various places online - links can be provided.
After this second A4G loss off the catapult on their last cruise (Indian Ocean) all A4G ops ceased. Most of VF-805 crew disembarked to fly home otherwise with a few left onboard to crane/lighter off in Jervis Bay when MELBOURNE returned to Oz. Apart from touch and go deck landings later - that was that.
There is video online of what happened: (there are links to standalone files only at moment - I'll post the video on Youtube soon) OOPS my hasty error. Video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Hj-RRBm6QA
Dave talking from a SHAR:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AVQTdrbTBA
"...successful ejection off the catapault by Sblt David Baddams of VF805 Squadron. 885 crashed 21/10/80, off HMAS Melbourne 200km SW of Columbo, Sri Lanka due to catapult and premature hold back failure. Aslt David Baddams ejected safely, picked up by RAN helicopter with minor injuries."
1.6Mb PDF TOUCHDOWN: https://www.navy.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/Touchdown_Aug2014_revision1.pdf
Last edited:
unfort its not as simple as that.
its the combination of tech, common capability issues, interoperability, alliance issues, mutual sharing issues (theres some tech that australia won't share, even with principal allies) etc etc.......
- Status