Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

halfmanhalfbronco

Aukus.

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, CPslograd said:

France has the second largest EEZ in the world, and a legitimate navy.  
 

can’t believe I’m the one defending the French on this board.

That's fine. They can try to build ships I guess. But they have a tradition of doing absolutely nothing for hundreds of years. Countries with more naval success than France lately include such luminaries as Tunisia, Chile, Korea, and the Netherlands. 

They can spend a bunch on a new coach and get some 5 star recruits but until they actually win a game they are not gonna be taken seriously. 

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, happycamper said:

That's fine. They can try to build ships I guess. But they have a tradition of doing absolutely nothing for hundreds of years. Countries with more naval success than France lately include such luminaries as Tunisia, Chile, Korea, and the Netherlands. 

They can spend a bunch on a new coach and get some 5 star recruits but until they actually win a game they are not gonna be taken seriously. 

I know right?!?!  Their last two major engagements wiped out their fleet in port!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

are they going to build them in AUS?  Or buy them from the UK/US?  

 

Sounds like they are going to build them in Australia.  It won't be the Virginia or the Astute but an Australian submarine that is their peer.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geopolitical strategy is not based on feels. This shit happens all the time in the defense and civil commercial aviation industries. France is Frenching over lost jobs, and I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot we would do the same.

Give it another week of backdoor shuttle diplomacy and all will be forgiven moving forward.

St-Javelin-Sm.jpgChase.jpg 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

Sounds like they are going to build them in Australia.  It won't be the Virginia or the Astute but an Australian submarine that is their peer.

 

that's effin stupid.  It takes forever to design a new system from the ground up.  That basically just sealed this deal as a failure then.  They would have better luck buying an existing class of sub from a maintenance and cost perspective, especially if they bought virginia class subs.  You know the US is going to be manufacturing those systems for decades.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HR_Poke said:

that's effin stupid.  It takes forever to design a new system from the ground up.  That basically just sealed this deal as a failure then.  They would have better luck buying an existing class of sub from a maintenance and cost perspective, especially if they bought virginia class subs.  You know the US is going to be manufacturing those systems for decades.  

 

It appears that is part of the calculus.  This will lock Australia into a higher level of technology dependence with the US.  It appears it will be the brits that will be doing the assisting with reactor design and technology as well as submariner training.  The new submarine may barrow some design from the Astute class as well.  
 

This guy breaks things down pretty well.

https://www.iiss.org/blogs/analysis/2021/09/australia-submarines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

It appears that is part of the calculus.  This will lock Australia into a higher level of technology dependence with the US.  It appears it will be the brits that will be doing the assisting with reactor design and technology as well as submariner training.  The new submarine may barrow some design from the Astute class as well.  
 

This guy breaks things down pretty well.

https://www.iiss.org/blogs/analysis/2021/09/australia-submarines

based on that article it doesn't sound like they have announced what the plan is regarding the design and technology.  If they are taking UK reactor design then they would be better off just buying an astute class sub.  You can't really just slap a reactor into a new design, they aren't modular like that.  And it's going to take them probably a decade of AUS officers and enlisted men serving on a nuke sub before they would be ready to operate their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

The idea of having a partner with 8+ nuclear attack subs the quality of Virginia or Astute class in China's back yard is awesome though.

+++++ China.

While China sucks, do we really want to start a Cold War with them?  I fear this is going to lead to more hostility in the South China Sea. War of any kind with China will be a net negative for the US, even a trade war. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HR_Poke said:

based on that article it doesn't sound like they have announced what the plan is regarding the design and technology.  If they are taking UK reactor design then they would be better off just buying an astute class sub.  You can't really just slap a reactor into a new design, they aren't modular like that.  And it's going to take them probably a decade of AUS officers and enlisted men serving on a nuke sub before they would be ready to operate their own.

Sounds like we are Delian League -ing it

Remember that every argument you have with someone on MWCboard is actually the continuation of a different argument they had with someone else also on MWCboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

While China sucks, do we really want to start a Cold War with them?  I fear this is going to lead to more hostility in the South China Sea. War of any kind with China will be a net negative for the US, even a trade war. 

 

We can't allow the further militarization of the SCS.  We need allies with teeth in the region to accomplish that.  We are already in a cold war of sorts with China and have been reactionary while they steel our secrets with impunity, act recklessly in LEO, work to erode our institutions from afar, participate in cyber attacks against key american infrastructure and create illegal islands to make illegal territory claims.  If the US wants to maintain a strategic competitive edge over China it is going to require doing things that will piss them off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

 

We can't allow the further militarization of the SCS.  We need allies with teeth in the region to accomplish that.  We are already in a cold war of sorts with China and have been reactionary while they steel our secrets with impunity, act recklessly in LEO, work to erode our institutions from afar, participate in cyber attacks against key american infrastructure and create illegal islands to make illegal territory claims.  If the US wants to maintain a strategic competitive edge over China it is going to require doing things that will piss them off.

if we really wanted to deny them the SCS we would be installing THADD systems on all the islands currently occupied by the Philippines, Vietnam, etc.  China does this shit all the time to stoke nationalism, it's the only play they currently have to keep their populace in line as they know a violent suppression like they did in the 80's is probably going to lead to a revolution.  They also emboldened the military so much that I'm not 100% sure Xi could control them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, bsu_alum9 said:

While China sucks, do we really want to start a Cold War with them?  I fear this is going to lead to more hostility in the South China Sea. War of any kind with China will be a net negative for the US, even a trade war. 

Yes. Millions are dead. The commies cannot be allowed to be the world’s hegemon. 

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume this has been in the works for some time and predates the Biden administration.  Trump would have done this deal in a second too, so I'm not being partisan here.

Not a great time to start a major row with our European allies after the Afghanistan debacle.  And I think it's preposterous that the RAN is going to build and operate a fleet of 8 SSN's given their infrastructure and defense budget.  I think it's bad politics, bad alliance management, and bad procurement policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...