Trump was always going to support AUKUS as soon as he had it explained to him what the US was getting out of it. Not just the money for the US shipyards but also purchases of the combat control system, which are going in both the RN and RAN submarines.
It would an even better deal for all three partners if Trump wasn’t POTUS. He WILL fraud the UK, Australia, and the USN given his track record.
I feel the same. Trump is more a businessman than anything else. I honestly believe that his motivation for insisting that America’s allies spend more on defence is that it will generate more money for the US defence industry and possibly even allow the US to cut its own spending.
On a positive note, he will gone before any additional defence investments (excluding SSNs) happen. There is still the risk of MAGA fools running things once he becomes worm food or green house gas.
There maybe something in what you say.
I don't know how Trump could "fraud" anyone. This is someone who folds faster than Superman on laundry day - see the restrictions on de minimis Chinese imports that lasted less than 24 hours. Or the tariffs against Mexico and Canada. He makes a fuss and then backs down, thinking he's made his point and "won", when in reality he could have achieved the same thing by not being so aggressive.
What if their plan to change the presidential terms to no more than 1 consecutive 8 year terms gets up?
It's bluster. The 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution sets existing term limits and any change to that will require two-thirds majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, and ratification by 34 of the 50 states' legislatures. It's not going to happen.
I can't see him defrauding the USN when his side of politics has been consistently talking about increased hulls and improved domestic manufacturing. They want greater capability, not less or the same.
What he says often isn’t what he does. Everything is about him.
www.navylookout.com
Another approach for a solution to the issue of increasing magazine depth for naval vessels in the modern age. Whether this is better or worse than the USN LUSV/MUSV approach will only be known in time (preferrably before they are used in anger). Whether this approach could work as the RAN's LOCSV would be more influenced by the weapon systems fitted. The Dutch are going to use, according to the article, IAI BARAK-ER and the HARAP loitering munitions for the AA and ASu/Land Attack. Neither of these are even in the picture for RAN. The BARAK is being used as it can be integrated with the CMS on the mother frigate which will use the existing stock of SM-2 BlockIIIA (SM-2 BlockIIICU cannot be used without major modification to the CMS according to the article). The canister for the BARAK is supposed to be raised verticle before launch which would likely affect the stability of the vessel in rough seas and heavy weather. Hopefully the 2 containers for the electronics etc shown at the stern will be relocated to a more suitable position in the real implementation of the vessel.Not quite the Large Optimally Crewed Surface Combatants (LOCSC) envisioned in the Enhanced Lethality Surface Combatant Fleet plan for the RAN - the Netherlands is introducing their own Loyal Wingman type project, the Rapidly Increased Firepower Capability (Dutch acronym “TRIFIC”, maybe not so TERRIFIC ?).
They have a useful armament for direction by the accompanying FFG’s sensors. However, although I’m no naval architect, the aft mounted containers do nothing to assist the vessels passage in rough seas.
The 325 ton, 53.3 metre vessels are similar in size to the RAN’s Armidale class patrol boats, but have a compliment of between 8 to 14 depending on the weapons and equipment fit.
I’d be taking one step astern when they call for volunteers to crew the vessels.
It would be a bumpy ride, keeping station with a 6,000 ton De Zeven Provincien class FFG, maybe run along in their wake?
(Posted in the RAN thread given the current Government’s plans for LOCSVs)
In focus: the Netherlands’ Multifunction Support Ship concept | Navy Lookout
I was wondering the same thing.
asiapacificdefencereporter.com
Kym obviously didn't have his morning coffee before writing that article.Apparently final submissions for the fine details aren't in yet.
SEA 3000 bidders in the home straight - APDR
The two bidders – Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems - are believed to be finalising their offers
I seem to recall reading recently that Mogami was coming down for a visit and exercises.