Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
Apparently the documents were classified "Restricted" which is a low level of security classification.
Corporate RESTRICTED - which has no relationship to ADO and WOG security classification
Ah. So it's not national security type Restricted. In my day all tender documents were Commercial-in-Confidence but only pages containing national security information had a Restricted, or higher, classification.
yep, its a DCNS internal document.
commercial docs managed within Aust are tagged Commercial in Confidence, sometimes tagged Cabinet in Confidence if they have been before the exec.
Generally speaking once a doc is submitted to a higher level (esp electronically) stays at the higher classification even though the content is the same - its a legacy of the function of the data diode.. A higher level doc deemed to be lower has to go back to the owner for reclass
in the example you use, the higher level persists and the embedded lower levels/attachments cannot be released as an extract without authority even though the inherited content stays the same
Launch of Brisbane
Is it just me or is there an complete dearth of information on the launch of NUSHIP Brisbane noting it was reported as happening in December 2016 (which is half gone and I doubt they will launch near Christmas).
The AWD Alliance update (which is crap to be honest) dated 7 December as the launching as December 2016
Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance - Home
Is it just me or is there an complete dearth of information on the launch of NUSHIP Brisbane noting it was reported as happening in December 2016 (which is half gone and I doubt they will launch near Christmas).
The AWD Alliance update (which is crap to be honest) dated 7 December as the launching as December 2016
Air Warfare Destroyer Alliance - Home
Brisbane is being launched this Thursday (15 Dec).
Totally agree with the quality of their PR work. I phoned them to complain about the lack of media info last year, told them it was the worst website I'd ever seen for a major project it's totally anaemic and nothing has changed.
By comparison, the QE (CVA) site is thoroughly informative as is info on most USN builds.
You know the ONLY place I could find that using HMAS, NUSHIP, DDG, AWD and every other possible prefix (or none at all) was at the Pussers Greenies site.
I hope the press are better informed than the great unwashed. What a dismal effort. Assail ................ you are way too kind in you assessment of that web site. :splat
John Newman
The Bunker Group
It's not just the AWD Alliance website, but also both the ASC website and the Techport website too.
Zip, Zero, Nil!!!
Pretty crap to say the least!!
CASG site for all Defence projects is also woeful. The status of many projects is quoted as : "current as at Dec 2014 and will be updated annually".
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I thought I'd have a look at the Navantia site too, nothing there either.
But I did come across this representation of what their Future Frigate version of the AWD hull would look like:
http://www.navantia.es/ckfinder/userfiles/images/sala_pr/Sea 5000 Render 18.jpg
I've seen a couple of images from other angles, but not from this angle.
Clearly shows the two hangar layout (if you only looked at the flight deck/hangar layout you could be excused for thinking it was an FFG7 class frigate!!).
Doesn't look as stealth shaped as Type 26 or FREMM, to my amateur eye (a very unscientific assessment I will agree!).
That what I was thinking. The other thing is that it still has the deck mounted box launchers, which I understand increase RCS. It also appears to have all the VLS up for'ard, when I think they should be split into two separate locations, so as to allow for battle damage to the ships VLS, without significantly reducing the ships fighting capacity.
To be fair
1. Both T26 and FREMM have the VLS forward ..... and less of them in standard configuration
2. The Italian FREMM bears a striking similarity to a lego building with multiple layers ..... I suspect the sloped sides of both Navantia and the Italian version would not be dissimilar (bad launchers included). Agree the T26 appears ahead here
Brisbane launching again
They must have heard us as this was just recently posted .....
https://youtu.be/h8VTAv5BBdI
I have to admit to be completely underwhelmed because:
For petes sake how about a half decent video update ....... and not done by a half baked news channel
:lul:lul:lul
Bloody hopeless ...... rant off
They must have heard us as this was just recently posted .....
https://youtu.be/h8VTAv5BBdI
I have to admit to be completely underwhelmed because:
- The Brisbane III facebook page knew about the lauch date in October so pleanty of time for a decent PR run
- The video is clearly not that recent given the unpainted state of the ship and the scaffolding
- And ......
For petes sake how about a half decent video update ....... and not done by a half baked news channel
:lul:lul:lul
Bloody hopeless ...... rant off
You need to remember that ASC is Government owned, by the department of finance to be exact and the Minister of finance, like his former colleague, the former Minister of defence, is not a fan of ASC and actively gags the company. The government also installed Navantia to run things on the project meaning ASC has even less control and authority than they had before.
Believe it or not this is nothing new, the Government wanted to divest themselves of ASTA in the 80s and would interfere down to preparation of bids etc. for example when the government own facility that had been instructed to bid for work came in at a better price than the tenderer the government wanted to win ASTA were instructed to increase their price. Earlier than that, well aware of the issues with the design of the tail structure on the GAF Nomad the project team designed a T tail version that fixed the problem and improved performance, the minister of the day was asked in parliament if this new version was being worked on and he said no, it didn't exist, resulting the scraping of the almost complete prototype and the destruction of records to cover the minsters backside.
Stuff like this is why I have a pretty low opinion of many politicians and despair at how they run companies that could easily be world leaders if the political classes had more brains, better business acumen and were willing to let the experts do their jobs without politically inspired interference.
Believe it or not this is nothing new, the Government wanted to divest themselves of ASTA in the 80s and would interfere down to preparation of bids etc. for example when the government own facility that had been instructed to bid for work came in at a better price than the tenderer the government wanted to win ASTA were instructed to increase their price. Earlier than that, well aware of the issues with the design of the tail structure on the GAF Nomad the project team designed a T tail version that fixed the problem and improved performance, the minister of the day was asked in parliament if this new version was being worked on and he said no, it didn't exist, resulting the scraping of the almost complete prototype and the destruction of records to cover the minsters backside.
Stuff like this is why I have a pretty low opinion of many politicians and despair at how they run companies that could easily be world leaders if the political classes had more brains, better business acumen and were willing to let the experts do their jobs without politically inspired interference.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
It is because they are lacking in the skill-sets you describe that they are in politics. Could be even worse however. We have a failed drama teacher as PM.:jump
Re Sea Axe design in OPV.
From this video (go to 1:07) I was surprised how wet it looks on deck at speed in even small seas.
https://youtu.be/8nmN2Gm-cEI
From this video (go to 1:07) I was surprised how wet it looks on deck at speed in even small seas.
https://youtu.be/8nmN2Gm-cEI
No flare on the bow and a very thin profile forward and a deeper forefoot are all part of the sea axe design intended to reduce resistance through the water ..... it also means less buoyancy compared the increased volume of a flared bow and also means spray is not deflected away by the flare of the bow.
- Status