Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Weak navy (Read 4725 times)
Taipan
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1091
SouthWest Sydney
Gender: male
Weak navy
Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm
 
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Redmond Neck
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 21977
ACT
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #1 - Feb 8th, 2014 at 2:11pm
 
Hear! Hear!

Come on Tony "Start spending like a drunken Labor sailor!""
Back to top
 

BAN ALL THESE ABO SITES RECOGNITIONS.

ALL AUSTRALIA IS FOR ALL AUSTRALIANS!
 
IP Logged
 
Pantheon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Woke

Posts: 1256
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #2 - Feb 16th, 2014 at 5:55am
 
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


Fully agree..
Back to top
 

[b][center]Socialism had been tried on every continent on earth. In light of its results, it's time to question the motives of its advocates.
 
IP Logged
 
Cofgod
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 693
Bolton, Great Britain
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #3 - Mar 26th, 2014 at 3:02am
 
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


You can buy the Vanguard-class when they are replaced by new nuclear-armed submarines next decade.

You'll have to make some nukes first, though.  Each Vanguard sub is armed with 16 nuclear missiles.

Each missile is designed to carry up to 12 nuclear warheads.

Each warhead is about 8 times the power of the Hiroshima atomic bomb.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Mar 26th, 2014 at 3:10am by Cofgod »  
 
IP Logged
 
imcrookonit
Ex Member
*



Re: Weak navy
Reply #4 - Apr 5th, 2014 at 8:22am
 
Wheres the money coming from?.      Sad
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Weak navy
Reply #5 - Apr 23rd, 2014 at 8:20pm
 
[edit][/edit][quote author=samthecat link=1391831311/4#4 date=1396650166]Wheres the money coming from?.      :( [/quote]
Um, let us check the ol' cupboard out..... good 'n point imcrookonit innit  ;) ;)

The copper promoting nbnless Australian voter can't start whingeing now innit!!!  :-[
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 24th, 2014 at 12:47am by BatteriesNotIncluded »  

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
ian
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 9451
Re: Weak navy
Reply #6 - Apr 23rd, 2014 at 8:33pm
 
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.

Against who?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Cofgod
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 693
Bolton, Great Britain
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #7 - May 19th, 2014 at 2:44am
 
HMS ARTFUL IS LAUNCHED

The Royal Navy's third of seven Astute-class submarines has slipped out of her dry dock where she was built in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria.

The 318ft long, 7,400 tonne nuclear-powered attack submarine HMS Artful has cost taxpayers more than £1billion but, along with her six sisters (Astute, Ambush, Audacious, Anson, Agamemnon, Ajax), sets a new standard in weapons load and stealth.

Armed with both Spearfish heavy torpedoes and Tomahawk cruise missiles, Artful's design marks a shift away from a Cold War focus on anti-submarine warfare to a concept of 'Maritime Contributions to Joint Operations'.

Her Tomahawk cruise missiles are claimed to have an accuracy of just a few metres over a range of within 1,240 miles, giving Artful the ability to support ground forces anywhere in the world.

More than 39,000 acoustic tiles mask the vessel's sonar signature, meaning that, despite her large size, she slips through the seas with less noise than a baby dolphin.

To help them remain stealthy, rather than periscopes each Astute-class submarine is to be fitted with two optronics masts which only need to break the surface of the water for a few seconds to give a 360 degree view on high-definition screens in the ops room.

Her sonar is said to be so powerful it can detect ships leaving harbour in New York City from a listening point below the waters of the English Channel, 3,000 nautical miles away.

In 2012, during simulated battles with the US Navy's latest Virginia-class submarine (the USS New Mexico), it was reported that the Americans were "taken aback" by the capabilities of Artful's sister ship, Astute. Royal Navy Commander Ian Breckenridge was quoted saying: "Our sonar is fantastic and I have never before experienced holding a submarine at the range we were holding USS New Mexico. The Americans were utterly taken aback, blown away with what they were seeing."

How this technology - Sonar 2076, which is also fitted to the Royal Navy's Swiftsure-class and Trafalgar-class submarines -  works is something of a Royal Navy secret, but it is said to have 13,000 hydrophones, many times the number fitted in previous Royal Navy systems and more than any other submarine sonar in the world.

Swiftsure and Trafalgar Update manager, Captain Ian Hughes said, "A good analogy for the performance of Sonar 2076 is that if the submarine was in Winchester it would be able to track a double decker bus going round Trafalgar Square" (a distance of 60 miles).

She was officially named last September by Amanda, Lady Zambellas, wife of the Royal Navy’s First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir George Zambellas.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=TYkgTwXAVzA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2631814/Taking-Royal-Navy-21st-Century-The-Britains-1billion-Astute-class-submarines-finally-takes-water.html#ixzz3254pSxYS

...
...
Artful, the third highly-complex Astute class submarine designed and built by BAE Systems for the Royal Navy, appears outside her huge Devonshire Dock Hall birthplace in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria for the first time

...
Hunter: Her sonar is so powerful it can detect ships from 3,000 nautical miles away - equivalent to the distance between the English Channel and New York. This technology astounded the Americans in 2012 when HMS Artful's sister ship, HMS Astute, held back new USN submarine USS New Mexico during simulated battles

...
Natural habitat: Artful got her toes wet for the first time yesterday, 24 hours after emerging from the Devonshire Dock Hall in Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria



Back to top
« Last Edit: May 19th, 2014 at 3:03am by Cofgod »  
 
IP Logged
 
The Mole
Gold Member
*****
Offline


http://www.ozpolitic
.co/album/forum-atta
chments/y

Posts: 1499
Gender: female
Re: Weak navy
Reply #8 - May 19th, 2014 at 10:29am
 
ian wrote on Apr 23rd, 2014 at 8:33pm:
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.

Against who?



Take your pick, and its not about who atm, its who in he future, but I have alway wondered how we were going to begin to defend ourselves if any threat were posed to this country .Not saying I agree that defence is number one priority atm but it is very important..

I love subs. Smiley
Back to top
 

"Why Johnny Ringo, you look like someone just walked over your grave"
 
IP Logged
 
OldnCrusty
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #9 - Jun 9th, 2014 at 9:59am
 
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


Which is why we have close and powerful friends  Wink.

Subs are an important element of our defense but even 12 nukes subs could not protect us absolutely. We need a balanced force and close and powerful friends.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Taipan
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1091
SouthWest Sydney
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #10 - Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:34am
 
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 9:59am:
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


Which is why we have close and powerful friends  Wink.

Subs are an important element of our defense but even 12 nukes subs could not protect us absolutely. We need a balanced force and close and powerful friends.


With the coastline we have we need a KickArse navy with carriers and nuclear subs, the LOT!!

Don't settle for second best.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
OldnCrusty
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 855
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #11 - Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:57am
 
Taipan wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:34am:
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 9:59am:
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


Which is why we have close and powerful friends  Wink.

Subs are an important element of our defense but even 12 nukes subs could not protect us absolutely. We need a balanced force and close and powerful friends.


With the coastline we have we need a KickArse navy with carriers and nuclear subs, the LOT!!

Don't settle for second best.


If you want to 'sink them in the moat' you can use land based aircraft, missiles, over the horizon radar and drones just as effectively, if not more so.

And land based defense assets are a lot harder to sink than sea based defense assets  Grin.

(I'm not arguing against a strong Navy but arguing for a balanced force. Wink)
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Vuk11
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #12 - Jun 9th, 2014 at 12:01pm
 
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:57am:
And land based defense assets are a lot harder to sink than sea based defense assets  Grin.

(I'm not arguing against a strong Navy but arguing for a balanced force. Wink)


I think every other country has the right idea when it comes to cheap effective defence through the use of Mobile missile platforms.....have you seen some of those super-sonic anti-ship missiles that Russia and China are selling to the world? Hell even Indonesia has a couple, India and Iran as well.
Back to top
 

808252099.jpg (28 KB | 104 )
808252099.jpg
 
IP Logged
 
Taipan
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1091
SouthWest Sydney
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #13 - Jun 10th, 2014 at 6:57pm
 
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:57am:
Taipan wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:34am:
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 9:59am:
Taipan wrote on Feb 8th, 2014 at 1:48pm:
I just want to say that 12 frigates and a couple of subs is no way to protect an entire continent.

WE need NUCLEAR POWERED, NUCLEAR CAPABLE submarines, like the English vanguards.


Which is why we have close and powerful friends  Wink.

Subs are an important element of our defense but even 12 nukes subs could not protect us absolutely. We need a balanced force and close and powerful friends.


With the coastline we have we need a KickArse navy with carriers and nuclear subs, the LOT!!

Don't settle for second best.


If you want to 'sink them in the moat' you can use land based aircraft, missiles, over the horizon radar and drones just as effectively, if not more so.

And land based defense assets are a lot harder to sink than sea based defense assets  Grin.

(I'm not arguing against a strong Navy but arguing for a balanced force. Wink)


Not if you have the co-ordinates! Its easier to hit a stationary target isn't it?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male
Re: Weak navy
Reply #14 - Jun 10th, 2014 at 7:01pm
 
Vuk11 wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 12:01pm:
OldnCrusty wrote on Jun 9th, 2014 at 10:57am:
And land based defense assets are a lot harder to sink than sea based defense assets  Grin.

(I'm not arguing against a strong Navy but arguing for a balanced force. Wink)


I think every other country has the right idea when it comes to cheap effective defence through the use of Mobile missile platforms.....have you seen some of those super-sonic anti-ship missiles that Russia and China are selling to the world? Hell even Indonesia has a couple, India and Iran as well.



We have had mobile missle platforms (ship & aircraft) that have have been launching super sonic anti ship missles for about 3 decade now. And a very effective platform it is too.




Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 11th, 2014 at 5:21am by BigOl64 »  
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print