Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sukhoi-30mki; naturalman1975
Being an old Army guy I know literally nothing about Western navies (*any* navies for that matter) but it seems to me that countries like Australia can't be expected to always have cutting edge technology in their Armed Forces.Australia,for one thing,is a small country whose economy is,unless I'm mistaken,currently having noteworthy difficulties.
2 posted on 09/14/2016 4:53:15 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Proud Member Of The "Basket Of Deplorables")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Gay State Conservative
It's more to do with the combat system baseline version. From memory the Aussie AWD's will run a Baseline 7, but the latest USN Baseline is 9. It's not just a software upgrade, there is a bunch of hardware that goes with it. Baseline 9 incorporates a complete overhaul of the ships’ computer architecture.

By the time the last AWD is commissioned the first will need to go into refit to get upgraded to either Baseline 9.x or 10 (whatever is available).

All said and done, we should have bought Flight IIA Arleigh Burke's straight from the US production line. We could have bought twice as many ships, better ships, and benefit from a large and established engineering and logistic supply chain.

3 posted on 09/14/2016 5:05:50 AM PDT by Dundee (They gave up all their tomorrows for our today's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Gay State Conservative

“Being an old Army guy I know literally nothing about Western navies (*any* navies for that matter) but it seems to me that countries like Australia can’t be expected to always have cutting edge technology in their Armed Forces.Australia,for one thing,is a small country whose economy is,unless I’m mistaken,currently having noteworthy difficulties. “

Small countries with small economies should concentrate on smaller vessels and drones and build lots more of them. It does not take a huge, multi-billion dollar ship to launch cruise missiles or super-fast anti-ship missiles. Sure they can’t carry as many but chances are they won’t fire many either. This isn’t world war two with dumb weapons where you have to fill the sky with flack. Smaller and more numerous means your capability is spread over a wider area and is harder to find and hit.

America builds huge ships because it can. But they are also huge targets. An enemy will not attack until they have an advantage. The Japanese, for example, had long range torpedoes that they used to huge effect, neutralizing a lot of ships that were, on other scales more effective. If the Chinese Mach 10 antiship missiles turn out to be effective, then we can say goodbye to the era of large ships. We won’t know until the next Pearl Harbor.


7 posted on 09/14/2016 5:50:01 AM PDT by Gen.Blather (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson