What does /k/ think of Australia's new submarines? It seems like the Aussies have really been gearing up lately.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36136628
>France has won a A$50bn (€34bn; £27bn) contract to build 12 submarines for the Australian Navy, beating bids from Japan and Germany.
does the propeller turn the other way since it's australian? what do they do once they cross the equator? my guess is magnets
>>29751745
>tfw Japan is buttmad their submarines went from top contender to being ruled out.
They're paying 50bn for 12 boats when French documents state that ten billion pays for 6 boats. My assumption is that's because the Aussies are planning to build the boats themselves.
Its funny, you either pay a premium and get blamed for overspending in order to improve your defense industry, or pay less and get called out for not supporting local jobs.
>>29751856
All 12 are being built in Australian shipyards
>>29751781
Propeller turns the same way, they just travel the other direction around the globe.
>>29751745
I wonder why modifying a design to go from nuclear to conventional is considered a hurdle, I sure as shit would prefer to go that direction than from conventional to nuclear.
>>29751856
this all stinks of back room lobbying.
spending several times the original amount for "muh jobs". To have a nuclear sub converted to diesel and have american electronics.
Instead of going with the clearly superior Japanese submarines.
>>29752143
nuclear submarines have diesel generators to serve as backups. So all they are doing is deleting the nuclear bits, putting in bigger diesels, and more fuel.
>Japan, which had been a frontrunner in the contest, said the decision was "deeply regrettable".
>Defence Minister Gen Nakatani said Japan would "ask Australia to explain why they didn't pick our design".
I don't know why but that makes me chuckle
>>29752149
It's not even back room lobbying; one of the core ministers in the Liberal Party / government is also a representative for where the place where the ship yard is.
That said,
>Instead of going with the clearly superior Japanese submarines.
How is a sub with 1/3 the range meant to be superior?
>>29752149
Not sure if shitposting but the Jap subs are worse in every way, especially when it comes to range. France has a great blue water design that is already being done for their own military, and downsizing a nuclear sub to a diesel version is far easier than making a bigger sub using an existing design (case in point the disastrous Collins-class)
>>29752165
Im going to Japan on the 12th of May with a friend, i'll ask him myself. Or find out if he has a daughter my age and marry into Japanese upper class ;).
>>29752149
Jokes aside, what >>29752179 said. Japan's subs are great for Japan's location but lack the range that is needed for Australian vessels. Plus while its unpopular if Australia wants to make their own stuff they have to start somewhere. It costs a lot of money to get the industry started, but when its working it can be more beneficial (assuming the product is of similar quality or effectiveness) and cheaper overall to produce locally than to acquire foreign products. It just needs time and money for it to work.
Still, I envy you Aussies, you might be overpaying for subs but us Canucks have to beg for more funds that end up being from other projects from our armed forces (fucking Trudeau wants to take money from F-35 procurement plan to spend on the navy)
>>29752320
Why doesn't Canada buy American submarines?
>>29752339
Because that would mean spending money, which is against Canadian law
>>29752339
Well the US doesn't make diesel-electric subs anymore, so the only option for Canada would be nuclear, and although I know nothing about Canadian politics I suspect that might be a tough pill to swallow. Also, the US hasn't offered Virginia class subs for export to anyone yet. There are great European diesel subs on the market which would be the best choice for Canada, maybe they will even go for the subs in this Australian contract, which look really solid.
The situation is completely different for the two countries though (besides the need for range, Canada has a massive coastline), Canada is right in the middle of NATO and borders the strongest military power on the planet, Australia is stuck on the opposite side of the world with NZ as their only friend and a country with 250 million hostile mudslimes on their doorstep.
>>29752465
let's not forget that NZs navy consists of two speedboats and a fishing trawler either
>>29752343
>>29752339
Our governments both past and present have a habit of claiming that we'll upgrade our armed forces (applies to both Libs and Cons) and when it comes time to pay for the bill skimp out. Plus Trudeau wants to get Canada back into peacekeeping, and submarines don't really factor into patrolling in countries like CAR or DRC.
Plus we got no plans to acquire new submarines despite them being an amazing economy of force and us having too few of them for having a coastline as large as ours.
>>29752465
also the fact that we're right beside the US has people say "why not just piggy back off the US?" all the fucking time. Its as if there's a parasitic mentality, and the same people shit on the US for having such a large military spending. Its ridiculous
>>29752517
I thought Canada's defence budget would be larger than Australia's but last year it was $14b compared to $23b for the Aussies. To be fair they're on a bit of a spending spree recently, these subs + 200 F35s + LHDs + Hobart-class frigates.
>>29752606
That's 1.8% of Australia's GDP and 0.9% of Canada's btw
>>29752606
we got 10 billion in procurement funds frozen because our procurement process is absolutely fucked. Got to talk to our defense minister a few times and he says that it can be released if the new equipment procurement contracts are finalized. Biggest issue isn't budget per se, but how long it takes to find and buy the new stuff we need. Even our new arctic patrol vessels construction are delayed because different ship builders want the contract
>>29752494
And their air force hasn't had a combat aircraft for over a decade.
>>29752165
Possibly because "why didn't you pick our design" is amusingly direct compared to what you'd expect (something like "We'd like to inquire as to the reasons our design was not selected") which expresses the same message but tries to be more evasive and passive.
>>29752960
>>29752165
Our previous government got really far with the negotiations for the Japanese contract, I would be mad too for being cockblocked by DCNS. Picking the Jap design probably would have made the Chinese go ballistic though
Probably bribes, wasnt there a story on this before on dcns?
>>29753007
>I would be mad too for being cockblocked by DCNS
DCNS has far more experience than the japs.
>>29752165
And as a follow up we would like to ask
"Why won't Senpai notice us?"
>>29753235
At least the Soryu is a diesel boat to begin with.
>>29753482
So is the Shortfin.
>>29751876
Nope. They are going to ship Aussies to France to build the first one, then ship the vegemite eaters home to build the rest.
>>29752517
Liberals like Trudeau do not believe that Canada is a sovereign country.
A puppet state doesn't need a military
>>29752606
>200 F35s
???
>>29752606
>200 F35s
???>>29753007
>Picking the Jap design probably would have made the Chinese go ballistic though
The Chinese would have likely not said a word. Just they didn't today. They don't care about that. They care about Japan selling weapons to countries right next to China.
>>29753949
and the fact that Japan is starting to become buddy buddy with the Philippines. The one thing they don't want is Japan to become involved in the SCS situation.
Since the us government is not involved, there will be no cost overruns like the F35.
Australian unions will be involved so thee will be strikes when the project is far enough along that changing to an all French sub is not an option.
The French will not sell Australia the rights to the weapons so we are stuck with a sole source supplier.
The flag locker can only hold one white flag.
It will have the best galley afloat with a walk in wine cellar.
The coffee will only be available in two ounce cups.
There will be little plastic labels in English over the laser etched French writing.
The day after the last sub is delivered, the company will fold and there will be no through life support
>>29751745
At least they will be able to reverse fast.
>>29751856
Retard.
They paid 10 billion EUROs for 6 boats. The Australian dollar is worth far less than the Euro. The A$50b also covers the life of the program.
>>29752606
72 F-35s (maybe another 28 in a few years), 2 LHDs, 3 Hobart class destroyers.
Also things like MQ-4C Tritons, P-8 Poseidons, a dozen EA-18G Growlers, C-27J Spartans, extra C-17s and KC-30A MRTTs, likely some MQ-9 Reapers. Also new frigates in the coming years.
>>29752143
No propellor - Barracuda has a pumpjet drive.
> cannot say that out loud without turning into bad Sean Connery scottish-russian accent
>>29752465
>tfw you are the helm's deep of asia
>>29752165
"Prease exprain"
>>29754028
>The day after the last sub is delivered, the company will fold and there will be no through life support
Doesn't really matter, the electronics will be Thales who Australia deals with every day
I like it.
Did TKMS and MHI release any CG or other imagery?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHZUJe3N99c
>>29752339
The US only makes Gucci subs.
>>29754551
>Gucci
>>29754512
>responding seriously to a 1/10 shitpost
>>29751745
>French
>technology
le sure dat
>>29751745
it looks strange. even for an FAMAS
>>29752891
I saw an NH90 fly over with a 105mm howitzer being air lifted. That's got to count for something
Pretty happy they picked DCNS.
The Frogs have amazing submarine technology and not to mention a good industrial ToT.
>>29752164
>>29752143
well it's not exactly that simple, I'm no expert but I guess you have to literally redesign 1/3 of the boat.
The reactor housing and all the cooling bits, all the nuclear isolation, all things connected to mantaining a nuclear reactor, new fuel tanks, new exhaust design...
>>29754733
So what? That's their fucking job.
>>29754736
So what? Read the quotes
>I wonder why modifying a design to go from nuclear to conventional is considered a hurdle
Because it is a hurdle. It's not like just swapping an engine.
>>29754733
>The reactor housing and all the cooling bits, all the nuclear isolation, all things connected to mantaining a nuclear reactor, new fuel tanks, new exhaust design...
Granted but people have been installing engines into ships and subs for a fuck of a long time, I'm betting it's an easier process to delete the extra shit required for a nuclear reactor and install a diesel genset system.
>It's not like just swapping an engine.
No, it's taking a complex system, removing it and installing an engine.
>>29754742
No it isn't a hurdle when you're a serious company like DCNS. If they proposed that design, they certainly thought that can be done without any major issue. I would be more worried about Australian workers IMO.
This might be of interest to some of you.
Interview with Gerard Autret, head architect on the Shortfin Barracuda.
http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/designing-the-shortfin-barracuda-block-1a/
>>29751745
>australias new subs
>not getting Gotland class subs.
>all that money wasted on subs
>>29754789
Saab Kockums offered a bigger A26, didn't make the short list. I'd wager it was concern at that recent tenure with TKMS that sunk their proposal.
>>29754814
China, please.
I'm surprised this is France's ever biggest defence deal.
One hell of a contract Australia put out.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2016/04/26/france-dcns-submarine-australia-shipbuilding-hollande/83562234/
why even use a sub? isnt australia mostly based onto sand ?
>>29754969
Its for the emu war: electric boogaloo.
>>29754614
>Best European aircraft
>Best Frigates
>Most Advanced Tank
...etc
Nice B8, M8
>>29754127
The book is bretty good, famalam
>>29754969
girt by sea cunt
>>29751745
60 bruces and sheilas in a tincan not even 100m long...
why was this chosen again?
>>29755243
And that's why TKMI and MHS lost.
Promotional videos are the key to success. Life even.
Type 209 of Indonesia is superior to whatever French shit Australia buys
>>29755604
Collins is 77m and basically 60 crew so this is going to business class
>>29755769
>crewed by indonesians
>>29755769
>indonesia
Good one
>made in Australia
Straya can barely make car pparts.
>>29755604
It's blokes you fucking spastic
>>29755769
it looks fucking shitty and poorly made. wtf
>>29755769
>Type 209 of Indonesia
Indonesia designs submarines now ?
Keep snackbarring muhamad
>>29755769
>Naked propeller.
Into the trash it goes. Pump jet is king of the sea.
>>29755191
literally why the French offer was chosen over Krupp's they will be shipping teams over to Australia to build every single sub here, the Germans offered 1 sub off the shelf and the Japs 2 off the shelf with 1 up for negotiation.
The Jap offer was never very strong to begin with, they tried pretty hard though but wouldn't concede.
>>29756832
Pump jets only make sense in nuclear subs that spend considerable amounts of time at double digit speeds. Below that, like in diesel subs, pump jets provide no benefit. The increased drag they produce is even a hindrance.
>>29755769
>>29756747
>Type 209
>Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft
German
>Chang Bogo-class submarine
a variant of the Type 209
builders : DSME (German) & HDW (South Korea)
>>29756993
Cruise speed is double digits
>>29757001
whoops
>DSME (German) & HDW (South Korea)
DSME (South Korea) & HDW (German)
>>29757016
not on diesel subs
>>29757026
I've read it's cruise speed proposed at either 10 or 12 knots, I guess we'll see when it's done
>>29757026
>>29757079
Just checked too, the sub it's replacing the Collins is 10kt cruise both snorkeling and surfaced.
>>29755212
as a french i say that's true but i don't know about the leclerc i haven't read many things about it, but there's one thing we can't deny
FELIN was a fucking failure at launch, the only thing that actually launched well aobut it is the MOLLE vest that is some sort of CIRAS and that's it
>heavy as fuck scope that make your FAMAS weight just like a M249
>bulky as fuck equipement
>too much electronic and batteries weight much more than anticipated
>camoflage still in prototype phase
>custom helmet require special snowflakes rail attachement instead of bolt and screws
>cost way too fucking much for what it is
same thing with GIGN, the new equipement pictures show something nice but during 5 years you'll see the guys using the same fucking vest they got during the paris terrorist attack
>>29757170
Yes. And at these speeds pump jets provide no benefit. Nuke subs do 25+ knots. There they make sense.
>>29757257
at cruise?
>>29755212
>Best european aircraft
>No BVR
>Best frigates
>Only has a small PESA, only 16 SAMs, 76mm gun, 1 helo
>Most advanced tank
>Leopard 2A7 would like a word
France has some good stuff, but those things you mentioned sure as fuck ain't it.
>>29757309
bests will generally go to Britain or Germany, France however makes some very solid export gear
>>29755212
>French FREMM
>Best
Pick one. It's not even the best FREMM version, let alone best in the world. Italy has a much better ship under the same name.
>>29757212
The new camo pattern has been given up on years ago already after some industrial spying scandal. The army is going keep the CE camo (with less black) forever.
The rails on the helmet are not special snowflake : they are picatinny. It's a good thing, it allows much more mounting options and that's why all the SFs in the world are using similar helmets.
As for the rest, weight and battery life was obviously going to be a problem. They tried to push all that new technology too early. In the end, no one is using the FELIN optics but everyone loves the new thermal binoculars, the eotechs, the new uniform, the Tigre armor, new shoes...
All in all it's a good thing for an infantry that was stuck in the 70-80's.
>>29757331
Yeah, absolutely. They do good equipment. Some REALLY good equipment.
Just the "best best best" is nothing but hilarious nationalism.
>>29757389
Indeed, although claiming that Britain or Germany might be the best at anything as well is just as stupid.
>>29757427
All depends on the scope of what's being discussed, really.
>>29752626
Aren't Canada and Australia NATO?
I thought one of the stipulations of NATO was spending 3% of GDP on nations military. Am I wrong?
>>29757458
Canada yes, Australia no.
and its 2% of GDP. But since the end of the cold war countries have been reluctant to maintain 2%. Only recently have defense budgets finally started to climb.
>>29757291
There is no such thing as cruise speed in nuclear subs as they have virtually unlimited fuel. The speed chosen by nuke subs is entirely subject to operational considerations (own and surrounding noise, transit time, current depth and water column below keel, tactical situation etc)
>>29757504
The 2% threshold is something rather new. It's a bit misleading to talk about "maintaining" it. It was only decided at the Wales summit that the 2% threshold is to be achieved by all members within 10 years time.
>>29751745
why the fuck does australia need submarines?
last I checked emus cannot even swim
>>29757508
>as they have virtually unlimited fuel
except no they don't, if they went at 100% all the time, they would run out of fuel long before the service life of the sub is over, or the scheduled refueling date
But thats over decades of use
>>29757504
Interesting. I'd always assumed they were because they sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Any reasons they are not in NATO?
>>29757554
way to miss a point
>>29757595
try to spell out NATO
>>29757595
Anon
the reason why is because nato stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
>>29756086
hownew.ru
>>29757309
>No BVR
stop with this meme
>>29757742
>meme
It's not a meme if it'a factually true, anon.
>>29757544
Well I might have phrased it badly, but I was talking more about maintaining a steady budget. The end of the cold war saw massive defense budget cuts for a lot of states.
Reminder that tonight at 9 (eastern time), the Science channel is airing an episode of Impossible Engineering about the Virginia Class.
>>29757623
>>29757653
OK, I feel a bit stupid.
But with increase in globalization and what not you think we'd consider a more inclusive organization.
I guess it doesn't matter they are a proven Ally.
>>29760680
>image.jpg
"The French are much less picky about who they sell weapons to. Don't get me wrong, the French build some of the best stuff in the world, but they are also willing to sell to lots of nations that Germany and Japan won't. The Japanese are particularly squirrelly about this, they don't sell to anyone, this was really their first attempt to do so. Also, a lot of American stuff is too big and capable to be used effectively by other militaries. Mid tier militaries have no real need for Burke destroyers or Virginia class subs, but French frigates and diesel subs are right up their alley. Russia and China mainly sell to countries that want cheap over quality. Frace sits in a sweet spot in the global arms trade. "
>>29757508
There's always an operational cruise speed in maritime equipment, if it's not dictated by fuel load it will be dictated by maintenance requirements, there will be a speed of maximum efficiency and this will be cruise speed. What I don't know is if this is in fact over 20kts in nuke subs but I really fucking doubt that.
>>29751745
No subs or frigates for zee Germans, wonder if they'll have any luck with the Army?
>>29752716
The process is fucked, but the Cons tried to buy shit and liberal bureaucrats actually stopped it. Now Trudeau is just slashing spending outright.
>>29766274
Pretty sure nothing was ever blocked.
>>29766294
http://www.canadianmanufacturing.com/procurement/bureaucrats-torpedoed-two-harper-era-defence-acquisitions-documents-166843/
>>29766309
Interesting, I stand corrected m8.
What's going on with your Fighter and Frigate replacements?
>>29754545
>"Elite Club of nations"
I'm 12 years old and what is this
(Or so they thought I was)
>>29766383
>>29766383
Let your thread die faggot.
>>29766482
Oh lordy, I even got 2 clicks... Wew Lad!
Lol people thinking foreign subs can compare to us subs...
>>29766495
Fuck off ya dirty seppo, nobody wants your faggoty input
>>29755604
It's bigger then the Collins.
>>29758053
http://cafdispatch.blogspot.com/2016/04/dassault-rafale-ranks-no-4-in-terms-of.html
>>29755865
>yfw I'm Australian
>>29764501
What kind of equipment does the Aus Army need replaced currently?
>>29751856
Imagine what would happen if Australia had bought submarines from both countries?
What a strange image that would be.
French and Japanese subs, piloted by Australians.
>>29767877
Gavin's and LAV's are both being replaced under LAND 400, I really like the Boxer/Puma combo personally.
Tiger ARH are also being replaced instead of a MLU and will need to fly off our LHD's so Viper's might be likely, depends what's happening at the time.
Reapers, Little Birds, new SAMs and some type of land based AShM are all on the list, few more Abrams too.
>>29752517
I don't understand that peacekeeping line the Canadian government gives it's own people. The last time they sent their own soldiers on a peacekeeping mission it ended in the largest genocide since World War 2. It only works if they're given enough supplies and weapons to fight any potential baddies.
>>29768159
For some reason I love the camo we put on our M1a1s, cheers Ameribros
Australia should've bought Amur class subs
>>29768254
Afghanistan?
>scuse my ignorance of Canadian deployments
>>29768334
Why's that, they've got less range than the existing Collins class.
>>29768382
i mean like actual peacekeeping, AFG was more combat operations
>>29766645
>Random blog
Yeah, sure.
Maximum range of it's A2A missiles is 50km.
It does not have BVR. AIM-120D is hitting out to 180km for fucks sake. THAT is BVR.
>>29768159
>Gavin's and LAV's are both being replaced under LAND 400, I really like the Boxer/Puma combo personally.
How realistic is that? I seem to recall you guys also wanted to replace your artillery. The Germans had high hopes to be able to supply you with the PzH 2000. But nothing came of it.
>>29768479
CV90/AMV is probably significantly cheaper and in the past more likely to win but we're slowly getting out of the cheapskate mentality so who knows.
We're looking at something like HIMARS instead apparently.
>>29768670
>We're looking at something like HIMARS instead apparently.
Is that the legitimate continuation of the Land 17 program? Or something entirely different? Wasn't Land 17 cancelled altogether?
>>29768409
Not >>29766645 but,
>A beyond-visual-range missile (BVR) is an air-to-air missile (BVRAAM) that is capable of engaging at ranges of 20 nmi (37 km) or beyond.
The MICA range being greater than 37km we can conclude that the Rafale does have BVR.
Undeniably worse than other fighters of its generation but still BVR.
As a sidenote, it should normally improve in the future with the introduction of the Meteor (planned for 2018), though with some limitations.
>>29768749
Looks like LAND 17 has so far procured 35 M777A2 with more (19) on order and is still on going in regards to maintenance and repair services.
The HIMARS or something similar were alluded to in the white paper and a few other places, seems a fair way off and a different program all together.
>>29768409
>It does not have BVR. AIM-120D is hitting out to 180km for fucks sake. THAT is BVR.
>AIM-120D
>180km
this is what murri/k/ans actually believe.
It's more like 80km max with a very very low PK at these distances anon. See that serbian Mig 29 which dodged 4 AIM120 in a row at these distances.
The Mica EM and IR (commutable guidance heads) aren't on the same league in terms of endurance, for sure, approaching a max of 60 to 70km. However they're also much lighter, with a greater initial AND terminal impulse and manoeuverability, allowing them to be fired "over the shoulder" thanks to the PIF-PAF vectorial controls, featuring 4 vectoring blades inside the exhaust, as well as additionnal exhausts near the missile's center of gravity for added terminal agility on a distant highly manoeuverable target.
For the very long distances, the METEOR, featuring an autodirector developped on the basis of the MICA's AD4 doppler is about to be issued and already integrated. Also, a MLU version for the MICA, involving a more powerful, double stage rocket booster, is currently being designed and should make its debut near 2025.
To sum it up, you're compairing oranges and apples. Which, as always, makes zero sense.
On the topic of operational capabilites for the Air Forces, where the US got the AIM 120B/C/D and AIM 9X, the french got the METEOR and MICA IR.
Greater range for the MBDA's products in both cases.
>>29752494
Hey now, they have a few Zodiacs too.
>>29751745
>What does /k/ think of Australia's new submarines? It seems like the Aussies have really been gearing up lately.
It all will be for nothing, once the Emu Empire decides to crush the human survivors from the last Great Emu War.
>>29768806
It's a fucking SRAAM. Even the Aim-9 can get out to aroundd 35km, and it isn't regarded as a logn range missile.
MICA being called a BVRAAM is literally nothing more than "Well it -technically- goes out of sight so we're totally a long range fighter guyz!"
> See that serbian Mig 29 which dodged 4 AIM120 in a row at these distances.
You mean the one that got BTFO by the very first missile?
"The four F-16AMs headed out toward the threat, working to detect the MiGs on their own radars. Subsequently, one of the MiGs was picked up by all four F-16s. When within range, our flight leader fired one AMRAAM against the MiG. It was an instant hit, after a flight of 30 seconds."
http://beqiraj.de/post/Operation-Allied-Force-How-Dutch-F-16AMs-shot-down-a-Mig-29
>It's more like 80km max with a very very low PK at these distances anon
>This is what Frogs actually believe
AIM-120D is more like double that.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/mica-specs.htm
It's 50km for MICA. If you're trying to stretch out to remaining flight after that, then you're being willingly inconsistent by trying to say the opposite about the vastly better AIM-120.
MICA is not a long range "BVR" missile. It's an SRAAM that happens to be able to go a little further than some like IRIS-T. AIM-132 is an SRAAM (It's in the fucking name) and you don't hear people screaming on about how that makes you some huge BVR fighter.
I know it hurts that the Rafale has shitty BVR right now. At least when the gimped version of the Meteor comes on it'll be able to shoot further. Except then it'll only have a one way datalink, compared to AIM-120's two-way one.
>>29769541
Not the above poster here, from what I understand there is a significant difference between missile range "as advertised" and missile range in actual condition against maneuvering targets. Max effective range of AIM-120D is certainly nowhere near the 180km mark, nor is the Mica in the 70km. What would you say the effective range would be? In lack of any further knowledge my guesstimate is roughly half these numbers.
Moreover, anyone can give me hinsight on how much two-ways datalinks improves PK over one way links? Surely as long as the plane can still feed reactualized data to the missile (and the missile is not too dumb in managing its fuel resources, which doesn't seem the case for any of the modern ones) until it can cquire the target itself it doesn't drop too much, does it?
>>29751745
>It seems like the Aussies have really been gearing up lately.
12 subs
9 frigates
12 patrol ships
2 refuelling ships
and the 2 spanish helo carriers
Similar projects in the army and airforce.
124 billions € investment for the next ten years.
Looks like they want to be ready for ww3, or want to get away from Washington and take a dominant role in the region.
French arms dealers are pretty euphoric right now, btw.
>>29757508
>There is no such thing as cruise speed in nuclear subs as they have virtually unlimited fuel.
>what is mechanical wear and maintenance requirements.
>>29769709
"In terms of weaponry, the Rafale is severely limited at long ranges in the air-to-air arena by having to rely entirely on the MICA which is not credible beyond 20km due to being essentially a short range missile adapted for short-mid range work. Until the Meteor enters frontline service with Rafale operators, the aircraft lacks long range air-to-air punch, certainly compared to the proven and effective AIM-120C AMRAAM"
https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon-versus-rafale-the-final-word/
As written by Justin Bronk, a Research Analyst from RUSI. Note that MICA is not even regarded on a level with the AIM-120C, let alone AIM-120D.
>Moreover, anyone can give me hinsight on how much two-ways datalinks improves PK over one way links?
It's not about kinetics for datalink. It's about information. A two-way datalinked missile feed information back to the pilot on what he's seeing, what he's shooting at, what else is out there, how they're moving, what they're armed with from radar contact. It allows the pilot to switch targets, to identify and abort, to turn away and keep a link with it without losing contact.
Thats the big one. A one-way datalink aircraft fires, turns and then has to keep their own radar facing the target to maintain information about it.
A two way datalink aircraft fires, turns and can immediately move away again without needing to further close. Vastly improving the range they can continue to operate from and avoiding unwanted details. In a stealth aircraft like F-35, this is HUGE.
>>29768159
>Gavin
It's not called a gavin. The only person who calls it a fucking gavin is a mentally disabled man with a fixation on the M113. His name is Mike Sparks, and he's considered a joke by everybody who's ever spent five minutes researching armored warfare.
Please don't stroke his ego or spread that name.
>>29770545
General Gavin literally invented the M113 tho
>>29770680
I didn't know that he worked for Food Machinery Corporation and singlehandedly designed it.
Mike Sparks detected.
>>29770720
Oh nevermind Gavin was a negro lover, fuckem
Why didn't they just buy some viginia class subs?
>>29770809
This desu
I honestly can't see any reason for not going nuclear.
>>29768159
>that pic
>french in Iraq
No
>>29768264
Well that would make the long grassers behave in Darwin...
>>29772216
No local infrastructure and zero domestic industry experience for nuclear power and uranium refinement.
>>29772216
Nuclear is more expensive thatn diesel to build & to operate
like
substantially more expensive
Thats for the US who has decades of practice doing it, too
>>29772216
>>29772888
diesel electrics are also significantly more quiet than nuclear powered
>>29770545
we schould be making battle boxes and you know it.
your just affraid of the gavin
>>29770809
the US wont sell its primo submarine to anyone. Not even our closest allies.
>>29772921
You know, after working on nuke subs, I'm beginning to doubt this claim. Acoustic analysis and operational capability, without going into too much detail, has been developed rather well since the advent of nuclear submarines. In all likelihood, there's very little possibility that modern nuclear submarines aren't at least as quiet in diesels.
The thing is, most of you won't even know, so take that into consideration before getting butt hurt and being sure that diesels are more quiet than nuclear.
>>29773573
well that's dumb
>>29773573
Thank you based BUK
>>29751745
>We get another ship contract
Time to keep the submarines indefinitively after australia invade new zealand.
>>29754324
"Because WW2"
>>29760774
Between the ANZUS treaty and whatever piece of parchment there is between between Australia and the UK the Aussies would have more than enough help without Nato.
Not like the Polish or most other Nato countries would/could send more than a token force that does nothing but stay in the back and wave the flag.
>>29773853
Australia would receive help from the Frogs much more quickly in fact.
>>29772623
They were in Irak in 1991...
>>29773641
Push come to shove, both running submerged or submerged statically one is driving extra machinery, you cannot completely silence this, it's not a matter of whether it's diesel or any other sort of genset because that powerplant is out of the equation in this instance. Whether or not this equates to measurable external noise is another matter.
>>29753920
>Trudeau
I consider myself pretty liberal in most matters, but something really bothers me about him. Like there's something just "off" about him. I really don't like his smug attitude and the way he panders to third-wave essjaydub types either.
>>29773641
>You know, after working on nuke subs
Wasn't it nintendo? And wasn't it your father that worked there?
>there's very little possibility that modern nuclear submarines aren't at least as quiet in diesels.
Batteries and fuel cells don't make any noise. Generating electricity with a nuclear reactor does, because it has moving parts.
>>29775328
He's less of a leader and more of a pop star.
Pretty much like his dad. Yes it is genuinely worrying.
>>29769281
>AIM-120D
>Serbian
>AIM-120D that was first tested in 2008
>>29776875
He's just a puppet
>>29751745
They're expecting something. China has called Australia's military buildup "provocative", whilst quietly shitting out destroyers. I would say China is the main motivation for Australia's buildup, though not the only one.
What is interesting is Australia's increased focus on anti-submarine capabilities, particularly airborne and underwater.
>>29777406
>Sneaky Japanese dogs
>>29757595
Because were nowhere near the North Atlantic, and the ANZUS treaty is still a thing.
>>29777406
Indonesia is the other threat. New frigates will have an ASW focus as well.
>>29772832
Other then the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor....
Idiot. Australia has plenty of technical expertise to run nuclear powerstations.
We dont because of the politics. The Lucas Heights reactor is heavily canpaigned against and that reactor produces all the nuclear medicine materials for the region.
>>29777528
>plenty of technical expertice
Stop lying please, you have 1 (one) research reactor and 0 (zero) industry, that's pretty much nothing. Expertise is a solid experience in both military and civil nuclear tech. Not to mention Australia will basically follow whatever the US say and they don't want you to go nuclear.
>>29777577
>Australia will basically follow whatever the US say
lol burgers. Payne shut the secdefs attempt to base B-52s in Darwin the fuck down and our entire new fleet of combatants and aux are non-us.
>>29769799
>A two way datalink aircraft fires, turns and can immediately move away again without needing to further close. Vastly improving the range they can continue to operate from and avoiding unwanted details. In a stealth aircraft like F-35, this is HUGE.
Except the datalink in itself isn't stealth since it's an emission. The same as link 16.
Follow the trail, find the plane.
also
>https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon-versus-rafale-the-final-word/
>relevant source
Oh my god you're such a fag. Please go back to F-16.net, waaf, and keypub, with the JOUST faggots and shitposters plz.
>>29773706
>the US wont sell its primo submarine to anyone. Not even our closest allies.
>well that's dumb
Yes yes goyim that's dumb, you should lobby the congress so poor israel can have virgina subs then sell the blueprints to China.
Good goy.
>well that's dumb
Please reconsider your statement.
>>29772921
I'd imagine that the quietness edge has eroded significantly, and that a modern USN SSN like a Virginia or a Seawolf is easily as undetectable as any of the newer European SSK's.
Now, while SSK's are a threat, they're much more of a local, green water threat due to their lack of speed and legs.
A true nuclear-powered hunter-killer, however, is the sort of thing that keeps Navy planners up in cold sweats at night. Unlimited range, as quiet as most diesel boats, and able to hit flank speeds that are faster than a Nimitz, an SSN can not only sneak around undetected, but can also run down and out-endure its prey while zipping effortlessly as-needed between far-flung hot zones in a blue water battle in a way that can only be matched by flying assets.
The part of The Hunt For Red October where the Alfa gets a mission update about coordinates that are hundreds of miles away and is still on its target within hours was Clancy's way of showing just how terrifying a nuclear fast attack sub is to have on your tail.
They can basically wage stealth blitzkrieg against the skimmers when needed, which is something no other naval asset can do.
>>29778322
Nuclear subs simply cannot be as quiet as conventional subs that use their batteries or fuel cells because the electricity generation with a nuclear reactor always needs moving parts. Batteries and fuel cells don't.
>>29753949
they already said a word, look into the news a bit, it wasn't subtle.
>>29754742
And doubling the size of a regular diesel isnt a fucking hurdle then?
changing the reactor stuff is far easier then doubling the size of a regular diesel.
>>29756993
you clearly know very little about flow dynamics,
Pump jets work best at lower speeds, they become less efficient as speed increases due to increased drag, but they will cavitate less so they will be quieter over any speed
>>29778231
>Except the datalink in itself isn't stealth since it's an emission.
The AIM-120's emission isn't, but the aircraft's emissions are produced by the radar. If you're using an AESA and the missile isn't directly between you and the enemy, it can be quite stealthy.
>>29778387
That's what the US Navy wants you to think.
The reality is that the much, much higher budgets for nuclear subs pays for all sorts of stuff that they never talk about, and that your average post-1980s US SSN or SSBN is loaded with just as much highly classified low-observable technology as a B-2 or F-22.
Stuff ranging from acoustic isolation "rafts" that all machinery is mounted on to natural circulation reactors that can provide over 80% of their thermal output without any of the coolant pumps needing to be run, to passive and active noise cancellation systems.
There's a reason why no photos of a US Navy SSN or SSBN's propulsion spaces have EVER been released.
>>29778547
Everything becomes less efficient at higher speed due to increased drag. That's a null statement.
The shroud of pump jets, however, adds further drag on top of that, which is only useful if you're regularly going at higher speeds. And, yes, here you are right, it's used because it reduces cavitation. But at speeds which are normal for diesel subs and with the power restrictions of diesel subs, pump jets are worse than propellers. Not to mention: at normal diesel sub speeds, which is something like 6 knots, modern Western propeller designs don't cavitate at all.
>>29778562
>"you're statement about the physical reality is wrong because of secret stuff you and I don't know about"
Are you for real?
>acoustic isolation "rafts" that all machinery is mounted on
This is WWII technology, dude.
>to natural circulation reactors that can provide over 80% of their thermal output without any of the coolant pumps needing to be run
We all know about natural circulation. But it's not just the coolant pumps that are a source of noise in nuclear subs. A nuclear reactor doesn't generate electricity on its own. A nuclear reactor is just a heat source, nothing more. The heat of the nuclear fission reaction is used to heat up water until it evaporates to steam. The steam is then used to rotate a steam turbine. The shaft of the steam turbine is connected to an electrical generator. And THAT's where the electricity in a nuclear sub comes from. This means even with natural circulation you still can't get around the fact that you need hot and pressurized water vapor moving at high speeds through a giant hunk of metal moving at high rpm. That's fucking noisy. Always. It simply doesn't compare to batteries or fuel cells.
>active noise cancellation systems.
We know these things from headphones in aircraft. They don't work very well and their effect is highly directional, which is no problem in headphones because of the small distance between the drivers and the ear drum. But in an underwater environment it means you need to know in advance where the listener is. Or else you might do more harm than good.
>>29779075
> at normal diesel sub speeds, which is something like 6 knots
For whom?
>>29778231
>BTFO by an actual source instead of his "it's real guyz honest!" approach
>Gets angry and starts calling people a fag
Thanks for playing.
>>29779618
a diesel sub
>>29779075
Oh my god- then why don't you rush down to DCNS right now and tell them what they're doing is wrong?? Clearly they need to hear from your font of wisdom
>>29782779
The new sub isn't even fully specified yet. It remains to be seen how much they'll keep and how much they change.
>being underwater in a giant metal penis with 60 other men thats sole purpose is to fire intercontinental metal penises that will cause the extinction of our race
Yeah I kinda get why people don't like subs now
>>29783005
We are a species
Using "race' in that way is a leftist thing.
And no, nukes do not cause the end of our species
>>29751745
why the fuck WOULDN'T you want a nuclear powered sub?
t. doesntknowdickaboutsubs
>>29778387
>>29779276
Yes, but what you fail to realize is that machinery is not actually the limiting acoustic concern anymore. There are far more obscure things that make more noise (than you would expect) than a power plant. For someone who accuses someone else of having a dad that works at Nintendo, you're a little bit too sure that you know your shit.
>>29751745
> No Nuclear
It's like you don't even want to be a super power.
>>29783056
>>29783465
Setting up the necessary infrastructure for nuclear subs isn't cheap and is politically risky. The US doesn't have to worry about this because they've already got their nuclear infrastructure set up decades ago.
>>29778387
>>29779276
Also, you do realize that diesels as well as nuclear subs still have to have gearing or some sort of motor for the prop/propulsor, right?
>>29783056
Expense, lack of infrastructure to support it, inability to visit ports with some allies, and Australia has the unique requirements of operating at fuck huge ranges but in coastal shallow waters - two things that are usually mutually exclusive in sub use. So what they want is a nuclear sub with a diesel powerplant - which is pretty much what they're getting.
