AUKUS
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by tartare
.
But how you'd get half a sub down here, or up there... maybe I'm reading it too literally.
But how you'd get half a sub down here, or up there... maybe I'm reading it too literally.
http://www.seapixonline.com/NSImages...17-10-2012.jpg
That maybe impractical because they dont want to float the section so they might make into 3-4 bits, reactor, 1-2 engineering sections and the propulsor and just use a crane to load and unload from a bulk carrier. Now that I think about sections is the way easier than a lift ship
Evertonian
Join Date: May 2000
Location: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Posts: 11,486
Originally Posted by tartare
The way I read the latest story was it was being suggested that Oz would build the entire front half, the US the entire back half, and then they'd be mated.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gibraltar
Posts: 2,395
HMS Astute has just arrived in Perth. What a coincidence. Expect to see an announcement of her being based there in the not too distant future or even transferred to the RAN
Last edited by Navaleye; 29th Oct 2021 at 11:24.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 291
Originally Posted by golder
Fair enough, he has an election early next year and has to play to his domestic audience.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: USA
Posts: 0
Originally Posted by golder
Fair enough, he has an election early next year and has to play to his domestic audience. However, he must realise that France needs the US,UK and AU far more in the Pacific, than they need France.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 291
Originally Posted by Navaleye
HMS Astute has just arrived in Perth. What a coincidence. Expect to see an announcement of her being based there in the not too distant future or even transferred to the RAN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,713
Originally Posted by Navaleye
HMS Astute has just arrived in Perth. What a coincidence. Expect to see an announcement of her being based there in the not too distant future or even transferred to the RAN
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,713
Originally Posted by rattman
One of the jobs is the escort of carriers, if/ when POW is based in Oman can see its escort spending its spare time in australia
*Coordinated ASW is the phrase you want. On which note, I wonder if any ASW related programmes are part of AUKUS? RAN ASW helicopters have taken part in UK/NATO exercises.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic
Not sure how you use a submarine as an escort*, but you do have a point.
*Coordinated ASW is the phrase you want. On which note, I wonder if any ASW related programmes are part of AUKUS? RAN ASW helicopters have taken part in UK/NATO exercises.
*Coordinated ASW is the phrase you want. On which note, I wonder if any ASW related programmes are part of AUKUS? RAN ASW helicopters have taken part in UK/NATO exercises.
as to the ASW australia has been focusing on it, with the new M-60R's and 14 posiedens
Last edited by rattman; 29th Oct 2021 at 21:02.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Devon
Posts: 2,713
Not so much escort as consort. Saying the carrier has escorts suggests that the other warships in a task group just defend the carrier, and that the carrier is passive. Submarines and frigates (in RN terminology) work in conjunction with the ASW helicopters. Continuously operating ASW helicopters around the clock requires a big deck with multiple aircraft.
Likewise a carrier's fighters are frequently controlled by an AAW destroyer.
All of this provides a defence over a large area, and the carrier may be used to protect things like amphibious forces or seaborne logistics - which was the main role of US and UK carriers during the Cold War, and is coming back to the fore in a new era of great power competition.
There must be a better term than 'escort'.
Likewise a carrier's fighters are frequently controlled by an AAW destroyer.
All of this provides a defence over a large area, and the carrier may be used to protect things like amphibious forces or seaborne logistics - which was the main role of US and UK carriers during the Cold War, and is coming back to the fore in a new era of great power competition.
There must be a better term than 'escort'.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by WE Branch Fanatic
There must be a better term than 'escort'.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,988
Originally Posted by rattman
as to the ASW australia has been focusing on it, with the new M-60R's and 14 posiedens
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 30th Oct 2021 at 02:26.
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Oz
Posts: 71
Article in the New York Times today expressing doubt over the whole project. Starting to look like too much submarine. No way are they going to be built in Adelaide. That is fantasy land.Hope this is not a fiasco in the making. Did everybody have their grownup pants on when they signed up for it ??
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by Alt Flieger
. Starting to look like too much submarine. No way are they going to be built in Adelaide. That is fantasy land.Hope this is not a fiasco in the making
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,088
Originally Posted by tartare
Guess it's just interpretation.
The way I read the latest story was it was being suggested that Oz would build the entire front half, the US the entire back half, and then they'd be mated.
Both the Virginia and Astute boats are assembled in modules after all, so I suppose it's technically possible.
The way I read the latest story was it was being suggested that Oz would build the entire front half, the US the entire back half, and then they'd be mated.
Both the Virginia and Astute boats are assembled in modules after all, so I suppose it's technically possible.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 655
Originally Posted by henra
Wow.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Submarines are built is sections and assembled together. Same way planes are built and even many ships are buiilt as blocks
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 291
Originally Posted by rattman
Submarines are built is sections and assembled together.
The UK builds SSN & SSBN in a small town in NE England. I fail to see why so many hold the Australians to be incapable of replicating these facilities. True, the reactors and some other internal systems will have to be imported, but the rest is just marine engineering. What's the problem?
