Plural!? IIRC there is only one south american nation with a (CTOL) carrier…
That nation though is home to the worlds largest producer of iron ore, so China is quite interested in getting cosy with the government there. Especially since relations with Oz under our “sinophile” PM don’t seem to have worked quite as they may have hoped. We’ve pursued a national agenda, who would have guessed?
Dan
Realistically, IF the IRG got involved I’d expect them to fly into Lebanon, pick up some small boats and small arms and accompany the flotilla as it came south form Turkey. Of course its a massive IF and most likely as has been already suggested its just words.
Dan
Mr Shin is the civil investigator who of course as member of investigation assembly, had the right to access the sunken corvette. Do you feel anything that written in Shin’s letter being an act of “spreading rumors” as accused by his homeland’s authority? Why the relevant authority is so panic about somebody who dares to ask some questions according to his profession and based on proven matters? The unfortunate fate of Mr Shin itself is not worth pondering?
Now of course I know nothing about Mr Shin but there a couple of reasons I can think why a South Korean national might not want to see all this lain at the NK’s door. There are those who make a fair bit of money out of business dealings in the special business area up North that stand to lose out while as I understand it reunion with separted family is another hot issue on peninsula that would also be jeopardised. It is possible that either the gentleman himself or folks behind him may have some vested interests here. Not saying he does just that its something to consider, especially since this is the same thing you are quite happy to believe about the US and SK govts.
If Mr Shin was talking torpedo attack, of course it may carry less weight, however, what he concerns about, the scenario of “Aground”, is every gram relevant to his expertise. He dares to list his doubts based on objective observations to challenge the authority, you can’t just keep flashing how expert the same authority is to waive the concerns.
Well sure he would seem to be quallified to talk about civil marine engineering and he has probably seen the end result of a few groundings in his time but has he ever seen the results of a torpedo attack? If not then how can he objectively say it was one and not the other?
Finally, It should be always a good practice to respect other navy’s professionalism, The crew on board the Corvette are not civilians, they are trained professionals with exclusive expertise on ASW as it’s one of the main task of a patrol vessel. Consider the strong current up to 6 knot and shallow water (lowest to be 6-7meters), a 1.7 ton heavy torpedo can’t keep in a depth and slow speed to avoid detection. It’s impossible the sonar can’t detect the heavy torpedo close in range and closer to surface. And the comment that the ship already broken into 2 but still being report as “grounded” because of panic is particular disturbing to the innocent professional servicemen some of whom even died of this tragedy. So the real truth is important for settling the souls.
An incorrect report in a situation such as this does not have to be indicative of panic or a blot on the record of those involved. The crew new they were in restricted waters and that a grounding was a risk. When the incident occured it would be the most likely culprit and in the abscence of other data that is what was relayed. Subsequent investigation uncovered something else, something that was obviously condsider unlikely or significantly less likely than a grounding, namely a deliberate attack by the North. It is of course quite possible that just like you say the SK’s alos thought it was not possible for a NK submarine to be in those waters and critical ASW staff were tasked elsewhere thereby leaving the vessel vulnerable. (I have not read the public report so if such an eventuality has been canvased and debunked then my apologies). Incidently if the water truly only a few meters deep then she would not have had to settle very far after the attack to actually be aground.
Dan
Congress feels differently.
Question is who’s correct. Looking at past records for either side is not very helpful on that score 🙂
Dan
Of course I’m only suggesting ASROC if you are particularly wedded to a common launcher. If instead you’d rather have the best weapon then just deal with having a separate Ikara system.
Dan
Aft – built with multifunction twin arm with smartloader (Exocet, Ikara, Sea Dart) not Seaslug
Those are three very different missiles, particularly Ikara. Think ASROC would have been much cheaper to accquire and integrate than developing a common launcher including Ikara. Unless of course there was a system and in that case I’ll stand up and stop talking out of my ****:)
Dan
hmm apparently **** is a naughty word, so where you see the *’s subtitute a four letter for your posterior that starts with a.
Except Material Availability is not the limiting factor of the Australian Submarine Fleet. Its crewing availability.
Well when the number of operational boats gets down to one then material availability is an issue.
Dan
Nukes against pointed sticks seems a bit one-sided…
Through the 70’s and 80’s the RSA was surrounded by a number of newly independent hostile black republics that were supported by the Soviets with aid, weapons and Cuban mercenary forces. Not quite pointed sticks.
Dan
Nukes against pointed sticks seems a bit one-sided…
Through the 70’s and 80’s the RSA was surrounded by a number of newly independent hostile black republics that were supported by the Soviets with aid, weapons and Cuban mercenary forces. Not quite pointed sticks.
Dan
It would have been the first time that sort of comment has been made. But this is about the 20th time I’ve heard a joke about the carriers being sold to another country….
And making fun of the budget troubles that affect our men and women in uniform isn’t funny either.
When it comes to the state of the UK Defence Budget you can laugh or you can cry. All cried out so laugh it is. Similar story for the US DoD budget.
Dan
Finally an X vs Y thread that is worth reading.
Dan
Has a comparison of these two aircraft already been done? If so can anybody direct me to the thread?
My understanding is that the Super Hornet is cheaper,
has two engines instead of one,
has a larger warload.
has some LO characteristics, but limited compared with the F35.
They are both of similar speed,
Super Hornet has slightly better range.
Super Hornet is currently in production and service, F35 still years away.
I know that the F35 has better radars etc.
Correct me if I am wrong on any of these points.
Feeling bored are we? Come on mate your a regular poster re Australian procurement issues and in that context SH’s, F-35s and all the alternatives have been discussed ad nauseum. If you can’t rememebr threads you’ve already participated in (and even started) then just use the search feature.
Dan
What do you mean, “next gen”? Such a missile already exists, and has been in service for several years with the AdlA – the Mica IR. Lock on after launch, datalink, a true BVR IR-guided missile.
Asraam has the range to qualify as a marginally BVR IR AAM, and also has LOAL & a datalink – and has been in service with the RAAF & RAF for years.
This isn’t “next-gen”, it’s live, operational, current generation.
Okay well Garry was talking specifically about Russian missiles so for them if this come about it will be next gen. Please chill a little. This thread has maintained a pretty civil tone so far. When compared to the Su-30 one above its chalk and cheese. Post your information and leave the attitude somewhere else.
Dan
The F-35 is similar to the F-111 or a bit like the Rafale, however usually the main variant is always the air froce variant therefore the naval variants always are purchased in smaller numbers.
Fighters like the F-4-U Corsari of the A-4 wered esigned as naval aircraft however later the showed that using land based was okay, for example the F-15 has an arresting hook sign of a possible navalization but the Su-27B has no arresting hook niether the Su-30, most of the Su-27 flankers are land based and just a few dozens have been of the naval variant, the A-4 is the opposite it was first and for most a a naval aircraft, same the F-4-U Corsair.
Many purely land based military aircraft have arrester hooks. Its for emergency landings. The hook and the associated structures are nowhere near as strong as on arrested recovery naval aircraft. The hooks presence has no bearing on suitability for naval conversion.
Dan
There is so much cherry picking of facts in these discussions. It seems most of the contributors wouldn’t know what a balanced consideration is if it bit them on the backside. And heaven forbid anyone should admit to a lack of information. Missing appropriate substantiated and revelvant fact to support deeply held emotional belief in your particular favourite then just make it up or steal some other fact which may not actually fit the context but can be massaged to suit your purposes. Throw in a few insults too. Maybe the other guy will see red and make a stupid reply so you can rubbish his reply rather than have to bother to do any further backing up of your own.
Seiously people if you want a proper response to these sort of questions then take to time to define the context and set a scenario for people to build their responses around. If you just happen to like seeing children pissing al over each other then get a job as a kindergarten teacher.
Dan