What the f**k is Australia thinking with buying making these?

>>32651898
Probably planning for round two against the emus.

Did this little bitch nigger just censor fucking expletives? On 4chan?

What's this shit?

>>32651898
Communism, kill yourself. They provide air protection to any task group.

That said, the 90s is over and the Indonesians are realigning with the Aussies against the Chicoms.

And for reference with regards to AWD, the British only have six, the French four, the Japanese six, etc.

File: 1483757007200.webm (3MB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 960x540px

>>32651898
p r i s o n i s l a n d

Australia needs 30-40 small diesel subs to deny the enemy freedom of the seas and maybe 8 small frigates that's it.

>>32651898
it may not seem like much, but it supplements the USN, so good on them. Another layer to any future NATO or coalition actions

File: 16991844430_ba55044fa7_o.jpg (2MB, 3888x2588px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3888x2588px

>>32651898
dude it doesnt matter if the roos dont need them

shipbuilding is both an art and a science

warship even more so

keep doing it even if just to stay in practice. it is a critical skill for an independent nation to have.

plus us burgers love the roos.

picture unrelated to post content

>>32652106
Indonesia stopped all military cooperation with Australia and threw a hissy fit after finding references to West Papuan independence in Australian military training information.


Things can go downhill fast

>>32652385
The Indonesian military actually just did that to shitpost the Indonesian government AND the strayan 'we wuz refugees, PC NOW!' government so they can do waht they want without either breathing down their necks...

If y'all take a look at how Indonesian politics work, it's literally just various groups shitposting one another along with the rest of the world...

>>32651898
DELET THIS THREAD, SPAIN NEEDS ALL THAT MONEY.

File: 15493470_1219497071422355_5926709814962873357_o.jpg (251KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 2048x1365px

>>32654615

>>32651898

They're fleet guarding/escort assets.

Try reading the Australian defence white paper, that will explain why.

File: 20161124ran8560098_004.jpg (1MB, 3600x2400px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3600x2400px

>>32654629

File: Badger C.jpg (219KB, 1768x965px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1768x965px

the point is to protect that cute little heli-carrier from anti-ship missiles

a baby carrier protected by Frigates with one missile launching arms and outdated missiles is a Chink Badger pilot's wet dream

>>32652385
not all, just special forces training one and it will resume in matter of months
just purge all liberal commies and leftist media retards
and beware of chicoms shilling on the net

File: armada_IMG_2348.jpg (193KB, 960x638px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 960x638px

>>32654823
This tbqh

>>32652106
It's ridiculous that Britain and France only have 10 AA ships between them. They're supposed to be blue water navies and they're top 6 economies. Britain especially should have more after seeing how important AAW is in the Falklands

>>32654920
America will provide it for them, so the rest just abuse their alliances.

>>32654920

It's just that the timing was bad, the economic crash was right as those decisions were being made. Not everyone gets to ignore their budget problems.

Arguably the Type 26 could be made an ad-lib AWD give she's got dedicated space for 48 CAMMs and an extra 24 Mk41 for something like SM-6, so give it CEC and you've got a pretty capable floating VLS magazine.

>>32652290
>Australia needs 30-40 small diesel subs

Whoa up there, small population and we have trouble filling 6 full sized subs with our available degenerates, chronic mastrubators and assorted insane naval personnel that need to be kept away from others.

>>32654972
britain still meets its 2% gdp nato goal.

>>32654920
>Britain especially should have more after seeing how important AAW is in the Falklands

given the current state of the argentinian military a few type 23s and a single type 45 woould be more than adequate

>>32655236
>a few type 23s and a type 45 would be enough
For Argentina now yeah. But at the time Argentina had equipment as good as ours in many areas.

>>32652355
This. I work for a very old ship building company and I can't imagine trying to pick it all up from scratch. Just because ships have been made for centuries people tend to think it's not a very hard/complex operation. For all those people advocating canceling the Ford class, if they think it's expensive now, wait until the only shipyard with experience doing it has lost all of it's experienced workers.

>>32655267

Which is why I also remain slightly sceptical of China's navy capability and not in a disparaging way i.e. "lol chinkshit", but for any nation from going to green water to blue isn't an easy process when it comes to complex warships with complex problems that even the most experienced struggle with (US & UK).

>>32655283
Same. Especially in the amount of time they get it done. Government/Navy regulations do slow us down a bit, same with not working at full capacity to save money, and I'm sure China doesn't have those problems (thinking about the safety of a Chinese shipyard terrifies me). But for them to crank out their first full size carrier in what, two years? There has to be some fuckery that went into the design/construction.

File: HMAS_Stuart_FFH_153.jpg (1MB, 3008x2000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3008x2000px

>>32651898
Buy more of these

>>32655603

Updated or stock design?

File: 20161114ran8538476_012.jpg (1MB, 4576x3244px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4576x3244px

>>32655603
They're old now and too small for what we need.

File: HMAS BALLARAT ESSM.jpg (1MB, 3023x3778px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3023x3778px

>>32655681

>>32651921
underrated post

File: foto-3469535_561x316.jpg (54KB, 561x316px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 561x316px

Spanis frigates are incredible fuck, great desing and AEGIS system, and the new desing the F110 its going to be even better...

File: 1484219421770.jpg (78KB, 338x305px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 338x305px

>>32651898
>f**king

>tfw comparing the RCN and the RAN
Aussiebros please help us with ship procurement.

Why does Australia keep buying from Spain?

File: IvarHuitfeldt.jpg (299KB, 925x617px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 925x617px

>>32656329
Pardon me?

>>32656619

the Spanish are too lazy to build the ships so buying spanish means the aussie goverment can give australian yards the work

meanwhile the British will want every ship you buy from them be build on the Clyde

americans will sell australia more busted old Perry class ships but I can't see them letting a Burke be build abroad

>>32654920
The end of mandatory conscription was the end of the french navy.

On a sidenote, the Lafayette-class still have a giant block of empty space if they want to install Aster VLS cells on it.

>>32651921
lost

>>32656767
>the Lafayette-class still have a giant block of empty space if they want to install Aster VLS cells on it.

Which they'll never get as their replacement isn't that far away.

>>32654915
d-aww
look at its widdle ramp!

>>32651898
Australia is paying for their defense in banter and shit posting. We won't let you fall Australia.

File: 1449062014731.jpg (66KB, 457x480px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 457x480px

>>32651898
>f**k
What the fuck is wrong with you?

Boards get the threads they deserve. Instead of ignore the BB thread everyone posts in it and actually ignores the good navy thread.

>>32655374
>>32655283
Their carrier is literally just an hollow aluminium shell, literally like a tin can filled with damp rice to weigh it down.if yoy look closely at the 'windows' on the ship they are clearly just cling film held together with tape

>>32657801

Show me

>>32654629
Is that a sonar radome on the bow?

>>32651898

If Stralia' can get enough ships to eat the bullet for when China chimps out, it would go a great length preserving the USN. China's navy is rated to sink one full carrier group before it fails, so spamming it with every Anglo navy will ensure that they would be unable to completely destroy any one navy's carrier group(s).

>>32658145
what? why would we be fighting the chinks directly?

>>32651921

> AA destroyers
> Flightless Birds

Not looking good for the Aussies.

>>32655267
Can you elaborate a bit on that? I always imagined that industry knowledge being lost stopped being a thing once we had high literacy rates. What is done that can't be written down?

>>32658443
Not him but, it's one thing being able to read how to do something, it's another thing entirely to have actually done that thing before.

>>32651898

Oz has plenty of smaller craft for border duties

These are premium AA destroyers to shoot down planes, drones, missiles, and whatnot, at long range.

>>32655633
>>32655681
ThyssenKrupp proposed a update for the Meko concept for 2017/2018

>>32651921
fpbp

>>32658443
>>32658602
A lot of what this guy said. Imagine how long it takes you to read the instructions and put together a TV stand. A lot longer than if you knew all the steps and tricks before hand. That's kind of how shipbuilding works, except its a 100,000 ton vessel with miles of electrical wiring, data cables, and piping systems (not to mention a nuclear propulsion system that has to run for 25 years). And it all has to be assembled in the exact order while being insync with 20 other production departments and projects. I'm an engineer so I mostly write the technical documents that the tradesmen work to and solve any problems that occur during the work. But those tradesmen are damn good at their jobs and it takes particular skills you only learn at the shipyard. Welding a submarine hull is much different than your typical welding. There's a reason we have our own apprentice school (college) that many of our trades come from.

I'm sorry if I haven't clarified things very well, but I'm finding it hard to put into words. If you ever get the chance to go see a shipyard, do it, it's fascinating. Our pay is actually a bit lower than other comparable private companies, but it's just so awesome to be able to walk out of the office and walk onto a Virginia class sub hull section that's being assembled. Or walk around inside the JFK reactor vessel. I fucking love my job.

>>32654438
Spain isn't building them.

File: 1405707835800.jpg (65KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 1024x576px

>>32658443
>>32658602
>>32660315

This, to further the point I'll quote a fella who got a guided tour around the HMS Queen Elizabeth.

https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/29931241/#q29936313

>As a note, they took us underneath her when in drydock, so I've walked beneath the ship. That was freaky, 65,000-71,000 tonnes of steel just above your head held up on beams is disconcerting, especially when you get to the middle and have to hunker down a little. The engineer was very proud of this though. As many of you know, she was build in whats become humourously known as "lego blocks", big chunks that slid together. They had two massive sections of over 16,000 tons each covering every deck to slide together width ways to fit every wall on the inside together perfectly for every join. He told me that they actually missed their mark, then grinned as he told us by "how much".

>By 1.9mm.

>The solution took less than 15 minutes, from their first attempt.

>The ACA are god tier engineers up there in Rosyth. They really are.

That's not something you could ad-lip.

>>32658034

Yes, pretty common.

>>32660494
That's another freaky part. All the sections waiting to be lifted into place and assembled are set just about head height, so you end up walking underneath them. If it ever slipped you'd be squashed in an instant. And then you notice that they're resting atop blocks of wood. You get used to it after a while though.

>>32660623

Hey buddy. Any recently unpublished developments in regards to QE?

>>32660695
No idea mate. I'm a nuclear engineer for NNS. If there's any collaboration and discussion between our carrier projects, it's not happening in our department. I obviously can't go into any specifics, but the JFK is coming along quite smoothly.

>>32660956

Ah, sorry fella I mistook you for the other fella who had the guide tour around the QE.

But I am aware of a few collaboration between the Ford and QE project, which that anon talks about in his series of posts.

>>32660399
They are getting a whack of money for them though. Design work and IP on a $6 billion dollar contract, plus whatever profits.

>>32661056
No problem, that's one of the casualties of an anonymous image board. Can be easy to lose track of who's saying what. I'm sure there is a lot of collaboration given how close our countries are, we just wouldn't see any of it since the QE isn't nuclear powered. Shame, but I understand why. It's too much of a headache for two ships and what they need. I would love to have a tour of a QE someday, interested in how the ship will look compared to the Ford.

I hope I'm correct in assuming you're British.

File: Swordfish - QE Passenger Boat.png (1MB, 950x712px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 950x712px

>>32660494

Huh, someone remembered me posting that. Thats freaky.

>>32660695

Since the Royal Navy started taking over compartments inside in prep for the sail to Portsmouth in a couple months (fucking HYPE) the news has kinda shut down. The military classified walls came slamming down the moment military grade kit started getting added.

However one thing I do know that got very little reporting is that the QE's ferry to shore has been finished. Pic related. Named Swordfish.

They've got Artisan fitted to it now, which is pretty cool given that was originally expected to be done in Portsmouth. Saved a few weeks there.

HMS Prince of Wales is coming along nicely. They are working something like 6-7 months ahead of schedule on that one, owing to lessons learned on the already on schedule (build wise) QE.

>>32661256

She's going to be work of marvel for what you can do without nuclear power.

But yes, you've assumed correctly. I am British.

>>32661279

Nice to see you.

I remember your posts because their useful material for when I plan to create a video series on QE - I've been scouring across the web for information, from ARRSE to pprune.

On the freaky note, just think that collectively 4chan doesn't forget things.

But I'm glad that all goes well, you know much on PoW being mothballed rumour?

>>32661138
Wow it's fucking nothing.

>>32657801
I'd like to see a battlefield game where there's an intense campaign to sink the Chinese carrier before it reaches the Hawaiian islands or something, then at the end you bump into it with your boat and the thing bursts into rice and aluminum

>>32655252
some of the argentinian equipment was british, hell the main reason the sea dart didnt do so well was because the argies had working copies of the system on their own type 41 destroyers and knew its capabilities, hence low level bombing runs

>>32661415
>But I'm glad that all goes well, you know much on PoW being mothballed rumour?
SDR2015 said to keep the PoW in active service as the maintenance cost of keeping it active and useful was not that much higher than mothballs and the flexibility would be worth it

>>32661532

Aye, but a mass rumour started spreading around that she was actually going to be mothballed.

>>32661415
That she is, it's bad too many people automatically discount it because of
>muh ramp
>muh conventional power

Can't wait to see a Ford/QE photo op

>>32661549
yeah, budgets are gonna get hit by brexit, but frankly it wouldnt make much sense to cut the PoW

other issue with navy cuts was the cut in planned buy of the type 26 from 13 to 8 although the blow is softened by the planned buy of 8 type 31 frigates to replace the 5 cut type 26s although the type 31s are less capable in ASW they are on paper still pretty capable with the same AA and surface attack capbilities

>>32661580

Her first ops will likely be along side the Fifth Fleet, so I'm not sure how the rotation will work. Who will the Ford be joining?

Also, I've got to be off now. Early shift and all that. Hopefully this thread stays alive until I wake up.

>>32661634

Who is the inside favourite for the Type 31? BMT or BAE?

So they're also getting Mk41 and the CAMM launchers? Seems a bit much for a light frigate.

>>32651921
Aussies will probably lose again.

>"The machine-gunners' dreams of point blank fire into serried masses of Emus were soon dissipated. The Emu command had evidently ordered guerrilla tactics, and its unwieldy army soon split up into innumerable small units that made use of the military equipment uneconomic. A crestfallen field force therefore withdrew from the combat area after about a month."

>>32658251
lol dead

>>32658145
How do you get these ratings? Seems like interesting facts I would like to learn instead of guessing if my snapple lied to me or not.

>>32661983
>guessing if my Snapple lied to me

Snapple gives out advice on naval strategy? I'm interested in what they have to say

>>32662029
>Snapple
who the fuck came up with that name anyway? it sounds like the term you'd use for an steve jobs having a mental breakdown, not some fancy ass lemon tea bullshit concentrate.

>>32662074
Easy anon. Show us on the bottle where the Snapple touched you.

File: check mate.jpg (50KB, 750x744px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 750x744px

>>32662199
it didn't touch me anywhere, i just find it a dumb name. like mountain dew, or northrop grumman, or the F-35, or the name of basically any media conglomerate in the US.

australian names are better: hills hoist, vegemite, thong, ute, commodore, old mate, aussie, seppo, rapist (both meaning the same thing, thanks USN you took the virginity of my sister 5 times in one night), arvo, cunt.

all of these terms have very easy to understand meanings, can be used in a wide variety of situations, and are straight to the point. in comparison, i find it hard to insert "snapple" into a conversation without looking like a cunt.

>>32662327
I oddly feel the same way about vegemite. It's almost like it's a dialect/cultural thing.

Also
>Northrop Grumman
>company name formed from two founders names
>dumb name

Is this it guys? Is this that famous Aussie shitposting?

>>32662327
Commodore is German (Opel) , it was adopted by General Motors Holden , and the first real Australian Commodore didn't come out until 2006 with the VE model , until then it was just reworked Opel models.

Holden fan boys not knowing that the Commodore from late 70's when introduced was not even an Australian design until it hit the 4th Generation.

Also the name of the Holden Operations is a conglomerate of American words General Motors Holden.

Come on man.

>>32662327
Snapple is just a brand name for Apple Fruit Drink.
The original name of that particular apple juice product, "Snapple," which derived from the words "snappy" and "apple,"

It's just a brand name . or do you get all pissy when you here Coca-Cola or Pepsi Cola ?

>>32664466
I swer the amount of arguments ive had with dumbass bogans who think commodores are more Australian than falcons because "Ford is American tho"

>>32654629
Why are these cunts cheering ? They are 3 fucking years behind schedule and millions over the budget
Why the fuck did we build these in Australia? It literally would've been cheaper to buy 5 arleigh burkes off America

>>32656745
This is a full on lie
Spain wanted to build the frigates for us ( they are classified as frigates in the Spanish armata) they even offered to build a more modern design as this design is from the early 90s but unfortunately Australia went full retard as usual

>>32665281

Muh jurbs

>>32665322

That's comical.

>>32665281
Building warships is different from commercial ships. Gotta keep the institutional knowledge alive.

>>32665682
But it doesn't work when you have huge gaps in years between ships
We aren't exactly Korea , China , Japan or America
Also muh maintaining knowledge doesn't really work when a lot of the contractors are imported chinks and poo in a loos

>>32651898
Couldn't they also fit them with with anti-ship missiles and fuck up boat with them?

>>32651898

>f**king

You need to fuck off back to faggit, you cum gargeling faggot.

What purpose does it need AA destroyers for?

To defend against Air-borne threats?

>>32665866
>when a lot of the contractors are imported chinks and poo in a loos

I have a hard time believe this

>>32665876
They also have harpoons and torpedo launchers mate

>>32658443
Spotted the management-type.

File: 15403792_1220635621308500_4023369692546654537_o.jpg (243KB, 2048x1151px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 2048x1151px

>>32665866

Just look at all the chinks and loos!!!

File: HMCS Calgary.jpg (330KB, 1920x1220px) Image search: [Google]

330KB, 1920x1220px

>>32656605
Just gotta cut Quebec out of the equation completely when it comes to ship building. Those fucks demand everything be built in Quebec, and for some reason the Feds listen to them.

>>32666926
That's one ugly mast.

>>32666926
that hull weldjob is shit. But I guess you can't really preheat the plates when your climate is usually 0C 80% of the year

>>32661671

They aren't designated as a "light frigate" so much as a "lighter frigate".

Look more at France's FTI to get a closer idea, with an emphasis more on General Operations than ASW. (So bigger gun, anti-FIAC, Mk41 flexibility etc)

>>32668092

Ah, that makes sense. So we could be looking at BMT's offer fitted with mk41.

File: 1280px-DDG-38.jpg (179KB, 1280x780px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 1280x780px

>>32651898
The Navy recommended buying Arleigh Burkes but the Government fell for the Navantia cost effective meme but now these 3 destroyers have ended up costing more than ABs. Before that in the 90s when our Charles F adams were coming up for retirement we were offered the Kidd class but chose to expensively upgrade our OHP instead.

>>32666926
That's a poorly welded ship

>>32666926
That's the most hideous fucking thing I've ever seen, even counting the Echelon turret ships.

>>32673526

WHERES YOU SHIP THEN, HUH? YOU GOT A BETTER ONE!?

Go ahead and talk shit

>>32658443
>>32666351
Suspect use of irony in first post


>>32665866
>>32665909

Contractors install their equipment. So, OTO Melara comes in and mounts the gun, Thales comes in does radar. GM does turbines. But nowadays things get worse - Koreans might do the bottom paint, why? - because its their company's bottom paint with a complicated "installation process" can't just pick up a can.

Much shipyard finishing work is now cleaning up after last scheduled contractor and preparing areas for the next, not construction or even installation.

Maybe the indo monkies can be kept at bay.
Chinks are playing the long game, they're buying the utilities, filling the universities, moving their big companies there.
By the time the general public realizes what's happening, the Australian navy would already be the PLAAN in all but name

>>32673847
leaf triggered

b

u

>>32666926
Shiiieeeeeeet that looks depressing.

Good thing America will always be there to protect you guys.

>>32655080
I wonder how many Mk41s could fit into the space occupied by the CAMM launchers. If you could fit more than 12, do it and quad pack the CAMMs in = even more missiles.

>>32651898
They're thinking their hazard-perry's are getting a bit long in the tooth.

>>32678016

Strike length or tactical? I don't think strike length could fit as CAMM is a pretty short missile and I bet the space below is used.

>>32666499

that fucking cripple lmao

>>32651898

Australia is an area with too big of a coastline and too many mining resources to not have a fuckoff huge navy. The retarded thing is, our government is too stupid to realise putting money into shipyards to develop and build this fuckoff huge navy would bring in a lot of much needed expertise and money into the country.

Instead, we'll just throw money out to another country for a few paltry ships.

File: 20161128ran8095633_130.jpg (1MB, 5630x3126px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 5630x3126px

b

>>32666926

I bet this class doesn't get invited to navy reviews. What an ugly dork of a ship.

>>32678195

Sounds like your typical jingoistic Aussie delusion shitpost m8.

>>32679419
wanker

>>32678614

u

>>32681666
Checked

>>32651898

Why did they go for an older design?

>>32679419

My point wasn't so much that we should aggressively defend the coastline, but that if we're going to do that, we should do it properly. And if we're going to do it properly, we should invest money locally to build those ships which would bring in more immigration, people with skills, keep the money within the country while bringing more in from other countries, have a lot of spots open for work and help boost our economy.

I say the same thing for nuclear power and our energy grid, but that's a different topic.

File: futuristic_1553989i.jpg (31KB, 620x400px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 620x400px

To save money, The Aussie government should hired Sea Shepherd mercenaries. They do better job tracking foreign vessel than Aussie navies itself.