[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: sub.jpg (268 KB, 2048x1365)
268 KB
268 KB JPG
Will it make a significant difference or is it just cope for not getting nuke subs fast enough?

Definitely seems like a better idea than risking a billion dollar platform every time you want to engage something
>>
>>61474116
Retard
>>
>>61474116
>Swedish sub sank US carrier in an excercise

>Subs are the best nuclear launch platform

Retard
>>
>>61474098
Why are they wasting money on a token navy and LARPing as a naval power when they can just find peace with the dominant naval force in the region? The only countries where it’s even worth to bother having a navy and the us russia and china
>>
>>61474133
I mean it's basically a subsidiary navy of the dominant power in the region anyway.

The idea seems to be to have enough forces in combination with USA/Japan to compete with China.
>>
File: ARA General Belgrano.jpg (322 KB, 2400x1569)
322 KB
322 KB JPG
>>61474116
>>
>>61474139
> So completely useless
Do you know what deterrence is retard? They are the best because they are unavoidable and unpreventable. Bombers can be shot down. Silos can be destroyed. Nuclear Sub cannot be found, you never know where the nuke is coming from.

The best weapon is the one you have but never need to use
>>
File: IMG_1282.png (131 KB, 1103x469)
131 KB
131 KB PNG
Subs are in fact obsolete. Definitely opposed to the U.S. anyway, jury’s out on China. This stuff in classified of course I don’t claim to know any of that info but it’s very likely that it’s basically impossible to hide underwater today as a submarine. Knowledge of sound propagation through water, hydrophone tech and signal processing is so far advanced today that it shouldn’t surprise anyone if any given submarine is being tracked from clear across the entire Pacific. There’s been these long towed-arrays able to listen into the deep sound channel for decades and now they’re adding low-frequency sonar to them. China probably doesn’t have cutting-edge sonar tech like that but they do have a SOSUS-like setup (picrel the Undersea Great Wall Project) so it’s very likely they’ll see any sub and be able to target them for focused ASW ops. So it’s frankly less risk to send a UUV into the environment. The Chinese naval militia will probably swarm all over any boat that gets near as a result.
>>
>>61452555
>>
>>61474098
UUVs are huge for countries with smaller populations because they enable you leverage a lot more firepower for the same personnel requirements
>>
>>61474098
I honestly think the speed at which this thing was developed is the bigger news here, this thing is allegedly two years ahead of schedule and on budget
>>
>>61474188
>Do you know what deterrence is retard?
Something that doesn't need expensive subs, retard.
>>
>>61474296
That is interesting, reading a few articles like below
https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2024/04/australia-got-new-sub-drone-far-faster-us-navy-could-have-company-says/395949/
Then I remembered that the Ghost Bat drone was being considered for purchase by USAF.
So maybe Australia is being used as a soft test platform for autonomous vehicles that may have quality issues. There could be more organisational inertia in a US project.
>>
>>61474427
Its more a case that the industry exists here to do it along with the companies, which frees up the US side of things to do their stuff. Plus its 'off' the US books in that they're not paying for it out of their defense budget and the American public have one less thing to whine and bitch about muh taxes. In the ideal situation it will attract US and other allied country's investment and that will spin off into production models later on down the line if they see a need in their doctrine for unmanned submarines and planes.
In a strange kind of way, the military complex here is going very well. All our vehicles are starting to be made here except the Abrams and there's a very large missile (HIMARS) and JSM production kicking into gear next year which is always handy to have another source of things to shoot at people. I won't claim its all fucking awesome and some of its bound to be kind of shit, but its something
>>
>>61474784
Good reviews of stuff like the Bushmaster in Ukraine can't be bad either. Not a ton of pieces of hardware have been asked for by name by Zelensky and all the reports have been pretty glowing.
>>
>>61474811
They are a really good truck, very tough, comfortable and easy to use.
There was talk of the Hawkei PMV being sent but I think they're still in the process of unfucking the production on them and sorting out the various problems of a new vehicle. I think we've sent them about a 100 bushmaster's though which helps greatly improve that danger zone of approach and egress from combat areas. A few got blown up, but that's kind of the point of them, the truck takes the hit but your boys onboard are ok and so far its lived up to that principle
>>
>>61474427
>So maybe Australia is being used as a soft test platform for autonomous
Pre-AUKUS, Australia was taking advantage of ITAR regulations that held back American defence companies from exporting products. Boeing's Ghost Bat ans Anduril's UUV are 2 examples of American companies using Australia to circumvent around ITAR/ tough Export controls
>>
>>61474835
Think it was the US secdef that said something to the effect of 'this hardware was not being sent on the proviso that none of it be used' when images of damaged western hardware first started hitting.
I know diggers have always liked it, but it's never had a workout in a high intensity conflict like this before. Got to be nice for both the ADF and local industry to know they can design, pick and crank out a winner.
As for the Hawkei, yeah. Sounds like fairly typical teething issues.
Optics around the budget in the current economy will probably inform things but I'd be pretty bullish about sending more hardware myself. The obvious moral good of helping Ukraine against Russia and personal enjoyment of contributing to dead Russians aside, it's a good look for Australia. Shows we're willing to contribute and throw our (light) weight around outside our immediate area of influence, gives industry and the ADF information on how home-grown hardware performs in high intensity conflict and if all goes well, helps market domestic production as worth considering to export customers. As long as you're not outright breaking the bank to do it or sending them lemons, it's a win from pretty much every angle.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.