Jump to content

JasonJ

Members
  • Posts

    12,012
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JasonJ

  1. Japanese-Australian SSK probably would get Japanese lithium batteries. Those grant greater endurnace, high speed duration, and quicker recharge. AFAIK, diesel engine can be shut on and off more easily so a sub can sit quietly. Nuclear can't be shut down quickly on a moment when absolute silence is wanted.
  2. Time scale estimates: -If it's a tailored made sub specifically for Australia, then first one done by earliest of late 2030s. -If UK made Astutes or US made Virginias, first delivery by late 2020s. -If Australian made Astute or Virginia, then first by early 2030s. http://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/09/australian-made-ssn-may-take-till-late.html?m=1
  3. Well the French are upset. Even if their program was not working, the suddenness of partner sub change is a little unsettling TBH. Usually reports would come in before a majir change is made with a tone of something like "we'll start considering alternatives". This was just like *BAM* UK nuclear sub with Boris and Biden! https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20210915-us-britain-australia-announce-new-security-pact-to-counter-china
  4. So I guess with how things were with that French setup, additionally, some sort of US combat program would be installed as Argus described: https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/46225-australia-to-get-nuclear-submarines/&do=findComment&comment=1547367
  5. The press conference by the three leaders. Lots of emphasis on it being conventionally armed and the keeping of nuclear nonproliferation obligations, a shout out to France, 18 month long planning initial phase for infrastructure/human resource research,etc., and so on.
  6. During the three-way sub bid between Japan, Germany, and France.. ISTR that the Japan bid was still to use US combat systems. It was fine for Japan since they used to having US cobat systems in their stuff, AEGIS destroyers, for example. So I had the impression that the US preferred Australia to pick the Japan. So in some way, the US was already prepared to lend some submarine tech for the Australia submarine project. Swapping out a Japanese hull for a UK hull probably suits the US just fine, if not, even more so. Although of course we don't know what kind of hull it will be. The simplest would be to just use an Astute-based sub with some inside modernization. But if its going to be some US-UK jointly developed entirely new sub, then I can see hard issues about sub secret tech between US-UK collaboration.
  7. It adds to the UK's Global Britain. They have a carrier task force here afterall.
  8. The French program seemed to have been becoming more and more "build in France" with a higher and higher price in the past few years. Build in Australia was an important point. Which still leaves the German bid as perfectly suitable. But the French bid one on the assumption of build in Australia. If it was Australian thinking to intentionally quite, then the French program did a huge service for making no progress all these years while walking backwards on the build in Australia commitment. So Australian intention to cancel for full nuclear from the beginning seems unlikely. So now what specifically is the new ssn going to look like that fits Australian needs? Something not as big as Astute? Smaller crew? Collins has just 56. If using previous design, they'll still want to reduce crew size. Best advantage with nuke for Australia is speed and endurance for the wide spanning oceans around Australia and further to the Indian Ocean or the Philippines Sea. Even though Australia has no nuclear industry, it has had some intetest in nuclear subs. So now that it looks like it'll happen, they'll need that international nuclear tech/maintenance support. So not just the sub itself but the whole support scheme will be very imporatant. All very expensize. Depending on how well this new program goes, it still may have been better that [yeah, here it comes] they had just stuck with Soryu.
  9. Well yeah, lasers is being experimented with by several countries. But "hydrogen extraction fins"? Where is such a thing?
  10. What developments (civilian or military) are there so far with hydrogen extraction fins?
  11. And the F-35s from the above quoted training. https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1436317222507589655
  12. Just being payed is too easy of a solution. Maybe they weren't getting paid for a reason. Not doing job properly while still demanding pay or spotted using previous payment for Taliban interest.. who knows..
  13. Well that matter is done so maybe a chance to start fresh. On that second hand info, yes, Japan sent some military aircraft but seemed to have had their pickyp destination not in Afghanistan but in Pakistan and with only a handful of pickups. The Taliban said no JSDF allowed in and Japan generally complied but were able to get in Afganistan for a little, for better or worse. One C-2 arrived in Pakistan on August 24th. Went into Afghanistan on the 25th but no pickups arrived. It returned to Pakistan on the 26th. Two C-130s arrived at Pakistan on the 25th. They made four two-way trips between Pakistan and Afghanistan on the 26th and 27th. On the 26th they picked up 14 Afghans. On the 27th, they picked up one Japanese national. https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/41069-meanwhile-in-afghanistan/&do=findComment&comment=1545621 http://www.asahi.com/amp/articles/ASP933C92P92UTIL041.html ROK sent a few military aircraft as well and picked up a few 100 Afghans, for better or worse. https://www.tanknet.org/index.php?/topic/41069-meanwhile-in-afghanistan/&do=findComment&comment=1543217
  14. Also at Guam, USS Frank Cable is conducting joint-training with JS Oryu which was dispatched for training in the area towards and around Guam from August 20th to September 22nd. https://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/release/202107/20210728.pdf https://mobile.twitter.com/USNavy/status/1437507162578821127?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^embeddedtimeline|twterm^profile%3AINDOPACOM|twgr^eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X3NwYWNlX2NhcmQiOnsiYnVja2V0Ijoib2ZmIiwidmVyc2lvbiI6bnVsbH19|twcon^timelinechrome&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pacom.mil%2F
  15. Of course the USN had its duty as to what to do. The surrender is on the terms described in the Cairo declaration of December 1943. And is not just a surrender but an unconditional surrender which invokes the good ole boy into having to defend that decision. Part of the Cairo Declaration was the freeing of Korea. So it becomes little wonder in the end actually to see a Korean language book published by DoD for military personnel only just 3 to 4 months after the Cairo Declaration was made. Yes, there are other Asian language guides at that same website. No idea what the other pages inside those say. But in the Korean on page 5 it has: Korean is spoken by more than 23 million people. THIS LANGUAGE GUIDE will enable you to ask directions, buy things or order a meal in Korea. Knowing a little of the language will also help you to get along with the people, for they will naturally be pleased to see a stranger showing enough interest in them to try to speak their language.
  16. Perhaps the majority of the navy was kept out of the loop of DoD and government planning so they couldn't speculate. In March 1944, Korean language guides were produced for US servicemen. So there was already some thinking this early about occupying Korea, or how it turned out, only the south half. https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1944-gi-korean-language-guide-tm-30-1831949614
  17. Looks like something from a 1920s military magazine.
  18. I remember doing a search for that sort of thing and found very little general stuff about it. So I can't say much about it.
  19. That's Izumo. Maybe she farted. Don't know the reason. It is in the middle of modification ATM actually. If QE was to joint-train with one of the big ones, I would have expected it to be Kaga for that reason, not Izumo. USMC is to trial run F-35B on Izumo next month or two.
  20. On September 4th, USS Barry and JS Tokiwa conducted joint-training in the East China Sea. https://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/release/202109/20210906.pdf On the 8th and 9th of September, HMS Queen Elizabeth, HMS Defender, RFA Tidespring, RFA Fort Victoria, HNLMS Eversten, HMCS Winnipeg, JS Izumo, and JS Ise conducted joint-training in the waters east of the Kanto region. Some JASDF F-35As, an E-767 and UK/US F-35Bs also joined. Three images in the quote: https://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/release/202109/20210908.pdf https://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/sf/news/09/0909.html https://twitter.com/JMSDF_PAO/status/1435845427295703042
  21. Just for some context while all this training is going on.. After departing Yokosuka, USS Carl Vinson along with USS Lake Champlain, USS Chafee, and USS Tulsa headed to the South China Sea. https://www.cpf.navy.mil/news.aspx/130914 USS Benfold, also in the SCS, conducted a FONOP at Mischief Reef. https://www.c7f.navy.mil/Media/News/Display/Article/2766757/7th-fleet-conducts-freedom-of-navigation-operation/ https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202109/1233756.shtml
  22. Three pictures from the above mentioned training in the quote box below. https://twitter.com/ModJapan_en/status/1435754978732249091 https://twitter.com/JASDF_PAO_ENG/status/1435575618536566793
  23. But isn't a reason for the cross border activity with Taliban and whatever other related groups there may be is because the Taliban in those areas in both Afghanistan and Pakistan are Pashtuns? There may view it as their land. Family members might be stretched across both. Who knows. I have to doubt just money can stop it.
  24. So how exactly is Pakistan a client state of the PRC? But taking that assumption, the Taliban is Pakistan's long term arm into Afghanistan so if the PRC suddenly swoops in to take the role of propping up the Kabul government, is pakistan really going to just withdraw the Taliban? Can the Pakistan government even control Taliban related grouos enough to get them to pull out of Afghanistan? I have to doubt that. Afterall Chinese engineers were killed in Pakistan not long ago. By 2020, there's been lots of reports in the ANA about dissertion, no pay, inflated recruit numbers. It's been an operation entirely dependent on the US so if the US wants to pull out, that's like admitting that it's not working. Suddenly for the PRC to come in and have a go at it? I just can't visualize it. There's surely more for me to know on the matter so some real fruitful details would help.
×
×
  • Create New...