Aller au contenu
Fini la pub... bienvenue à la cagnotte ! ×
AIR-DEFENSE.NET

Marine Australienne: modernisations, acquisitions et exercices navals.


Philippe Top-Force

Messages recommandés

  Le 09/11/2021 à 09:03, capmat a dit :

Très juste,

ce n'est pas une bonne idée d'acheter "d'occasion" pour du sous marin. Les canadiens ont acheté des sous marins d'occasion à la Royale Navy....ils le regretterons encore à la dix septième génération.

Expand  

Faut dire qu'ils se sont fait refourguer de sacré bouses :tongue:

Conçu par des anglais déjà ... Et mal stocké pendant 6 ans 

  • Haha (+1) 2
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 05/11/2021 à 16:27, ARMEN56 a dit :

Opinion | Australie : des sous-marins sur étagère

Expand  

Ca n’a pas de sens ! Pour la meme raison que le porte avions europeen. 

les américains ne mentent pas …. C’est une blague ? Je commence a faire une allergie aux marins et a leur penchant pro us. 
 

 

  Le 08/11/2021 à 08:26, SLT a dit :

C'est parce que tu en as une lecture très extérieure et pas du tout du point de vue d'un Australien qui pense que le deal est un vol de premier ordre et qu'il faut s'en débarasser aussi vite que possible.

Expand  

La majorité des australiens se foutent du lrogramme ne comprennent pas qu’il s’agissait de creer une filiaire et ne faisaient que compter le cout par soum comme s’ils importaient. Ensuite non, les australiens qui comprennent un minimum ont bite compris que le nouveau contrat aller couter encore plus cher. L’australie ne s’arrete pas a skynews… enfin le pm passe pour un incompétent au niveau diplomatique et pas qu’avec la france. Bon courage a lui pour attendee 18 mois qu’aukus devienne concret, ca va etre tres long, je suis pas certains qu’il soit encore là a date. Et surtout plus personne a l’international ne lui fera confiance, le coup du texto sorti de son contexte et balancé a la presse … ca passe pas dans le communauté diplo. 
je parle meme pas du bordel de prendre une coque fr et un systeme d’arme us … (ridicule)
 

 

perso, je crois sincèrement que l’australie devra prendre un ssk allemand 

  • Upvote (+1) 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 08/11/2021 à 08:26, SLT a dit :

Pour certains Australien, je pense que ces éléments de language sont suffisants pour dire que oui, les français savaient que le deal allait être annulé.

Expand  

Derniere chose, c’est pas l’annulation mais la maniere qui chose, a vouloir le faire en secret dans le dos de la france. Meme biden a ete surpris. 18 mois de nego et pas 2n pour prevenir la france. C’est particulièrement leger. Meme les australiens devront se l’avouer. D’ailleurs le pm dit que l’aukus devait rester secret pour des raisons de secu, le contrat etant lier a l’aukus … il faudrait savoir. Il y a une différence entre les fr s’en doutaient et les francais savaient. 

  • J'aime (+1) 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 09/11/2021 à 14:29, mudrets a dit :

Depuis quelque temps, le nez de Morrisson s'allongé démesurément .... Bientôt, il va s'appeler Pinaukaus !

Expand  

Pour une fois qu’un truc s’allonge chez ce monsieur …

  Le 09/11/2021 à 08:56, Deres a dit :

plus une recharge du réacteur je suppose ...

Expand  

Normalement ces soum sont pas fait pour etre rechargés.  

Modifié par wagdoox
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 09/11/2021 à 15:39, wagdoox a dit :

Normalement ces soum sont pas fait pour etre rechargés.  

Expand  

Il me semble que ça a été envisagé ou même réalisé par la Navy. Faut découper la coque toussa toussa. Quelque chose de très artisanal en somme.

Conclusion ça va couter une cou*lle...

Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 09/11/2021 à 15:45, Nec temere a dit :

Il me semble que ça a été envisagé ou même réalisé par la Navy. Faut découper la coque toussa toussa. Quelque chose de très artisanal en somme.

Conclusion ça va couter une cou*lle...

Expand  

Alors c’est pas prevu, il faut comprendre qu’il y a pas d’acces prevu. Apres decouper et recoller bonjour le perle. Enfin ca va couter mais ca va aussi demander des resources industriels que les usa n’ont peut etre pas. Un atm ca se prepare tres a l’avance et ca demande des installations 

Modifié par wagdoox
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 09/11/2021 à 15:49, wagdoox a dit :

Alors c’est pas prevu, il faut comprendre qu’il y a pas d’acces prevu. Apres decouper et recoller bonjour le perle. Enfin ca va couter mais ca va aussi demander des resources industriels que les usa n’ont peut etre pas. Un atm ca se prepare tres a l’avance et ca demande des installations 

Expand  

On est bien d'accord là dessus. C'est pas très réaliste comme projet...

Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 09/11/2021 à 15:49, wagdoox a dit :

Alors c’est pas prevu, il faut comprendre qu’il y a pas d’acces prevu. Apres decouper et recoller bonjour le perle. Enfin ca va couter mais ca va aussi demander des resources industriels que les usa n’ont peut etre pas. Un atm ca se prepare tres a l’avance et ca demande des installations 

Expand  

en fait, les soums americains, c'est du consommable. quand les piles sont usées, tu jette le tout. :chirolp_iei:

 

  • Haha (+1) 4
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

En attendant les sous-marins nucléaires, une resucée de sous-marins diesel-électriques ?

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/submarine-taskforce-mulls-son-of-collins-before-nuclear-boats-arrive-20211116-p59995

  Quote

While the nuclear-powered submarine taskforce is concentrating on acquiring submarines from the United States and Britain under the AUKUS arrangements, sources said the chief of the taskforce, Vice-Admiral Jonathan Mead, had a remit that also includes looking at interim submarine capability.

The government had initially floated leasing a British or American nuclear-powered submarine until the first of the new boats were delivered, but this is viewed as increasingly unlikely.

Admiral Mead told a budget estimates committee last month Defence wanted at least one nuclear submarine, and ideally more, before 2040 and was working to accelerate that timetable.

In the meantime, all six Collins-class submarines will have their lives extended for another 10 years, beginning in 2026 and two years thereafter. However, that means the first submarine is due to retire in 2038, cutting it fine if there are any delays with the nuclear program.

Navy chief Mike Noonan has left open the possibility of carrying out a second life extension to the Collins-class submarines, but sources said the price difference between refurbishing an ageing submarine and building a brand new diesel-electric boat based on the Collins but with more modern systems would be comparatively small.

ASC has conducted comprehensive studies on modernising the existing Collins-class submarines, which drawing upon the original design could form the basis a new boat.

“Building a new Collins-class submarine would give you more capability and keep the workforce together in Adelaide. And you are not trying to force a 40-year-old submarine to do stuff,” one source said.

The fresh consideration of interim submarine capabilities comes after Defence Department Secretary Greg Moriarty told Senate estimates last month the department had “not at the moment” provided advice to government on the matter.

“The focus of the Nuclear-Powered Submarine Task Force is to work closely with the UK and US over the next 18 months to identify the optimal pathway to deliver at least eight nuclear-powered submarines for Australia,” the department said in a statement.

“In parallel, the government is investing between $4.3 – 6.4 billion in the life-of-type extension of all six Collins class submarines. The Collins class submarine to this day remains one of the most capable conventional submarines in the world.”

Australian Strategic Policy Institute analyst Marcus Hellyer said building a “son of Collins” had problems, including that original component manufacturers were no longer around and the navy was reluctant to operate three classes of submarines, but nevertheless it could help mitigate risk.

“We’re in a bad situation. But it is definitely worth exploring in a serious way,” he said.

“You line up the schedule [for retirement of the Collins and delivery of the nuclear-powered submarines], and it doesn’t line up. If your delivery drumbeat for the nuclear-powered submarines is greater than two years, you are getting new boats slower than the old ones are retired.”

The Australian Industry and Defence Network said while a decision on an interim submarine was a matter for the government, such a program would benefit local defence contractors and preserve the capabilities created by the cancelled French submarine program

“It would allow an Australian workforce to be grown and prepared for the construction of the nuclear submarine. It would allow Australian Industry to efficiently and effectively establish itself for the coming task,” chief executive Brent Clark said.

Expand  

 

Modifié par Rivelo
  • Upvote (+1) 2
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 17/11/2021 à 19:48, Rivelo a dit :

The Australian Industry and Defence Network said while a decision on an interim submarine was a matter for the government, such a program would benefit local defence contractors and preserve the capabilities created by the cancelled French submarine program

“It would allow an Australian workforce to be grown and prepared for the construction of the nuclear submarine. It would allow Australian Industry to efficiently and effectively establish itself for the coming task,” chief executive Brent Clark said.

Expand  

Moralité : ils vont faire des soum moins capables que les Attacks, forcément très différents des Collins et avec un décalage de 2 à 3 ans minimum... et toujours en se basant sur la base industrielle locale qui manque de pratique en la matière.

Moralité c'est comme en 40 où on vire Gamelin pour faire venir Weygand qui mets du temps pour arriver de Syrie... et qui applique le plan Gamzlin.

  • J'aime (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 2
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 22/11/2021 à 14:10, wagdoox a dit :
Expand  

Et elle est de plus en plus drôle ...

Je pense que l'on s'achemine lentement (enfin non de mois en moins lentement) mais sûrement (de plus en plus) vers un pré-positionnement d'unités US en Australie comme au bon vieux temps du "Silent Service" de feu l'Admiral Lockwood ... et ce durant presque 20 ans ...

  • Upvote (+1) 4
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 22/11/2021 à 14:10, wagdoox a dit :
Expand  

Pour remplacer des conventionnelles taillé pour eux ils vont faire construire des SNA adapté, pour les calendes grecques et entre temps acheté de nouveaux conventionnelles mais probablement pas adapté ?

Mais à quel moment ça pourra passer au niveau des représentants élus ? 

C'est plus une blague c'est un sketch des guignols...

Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 22/11/2021 à 15:13, Nec temere a dit :

Mais à quel moment ça pourra passer au niveau des représentants élus ? 

Expand  

Pour l’instant ca passe parce que les parlementaires de son camps en ont besoin. Et ceux d’en face sont ravis de ne plus trainer un programme de plus de 100 milliards. 
des que le programme sera clair et detailler (surtout la facture), l’australie signera un truc pour avoir des soum chinois nec+ultra. Et que des les chinois presenteront la facture, l’australie demandra aux martiens un entreprise…

  • Haha (+1) 3
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Citation

Australia and Nuclear-Powered Submarines

By Norman Friedman November 2021

Proceedings Vol. 147/11/1,425

In September, the Australian government announced it would buy nuclear-powered rather than conventionally powered submarines to replace its six Collins-class diesel-electric boats. The announcement was surprising, because for years Australia had resisted the logic that the sheer size of the region in which its navy operates demands nuclear power. In fact, the country had steadfastly resisted any application of nuclear power, although it mines and exports uranium in considerable quantity.

The dramatic shift in submarine policy came as part of a trilateral security partnership known as AUKUS, intended to enhance the alliance among Australia, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The pact reflects the growing sense of urgency to confront Chinese aggressiveness and coercion. Not surprisingly, the Chinese government strongly de-nounced the submarine deal.

The deal meant canceling an order for 12 non-nuclear submarines that would have been built in collaboration with the French Naval Group. The French boats often were described as versions of the current French nuclear-powered attack submarine, but with a diesel-electric plant in place of the nuclear-powered one. The project would have doubled the size of Australia’s submarine force, but the Australians were already unhappy about the escalating price of the French project. Not surprisingly, the French were furious at its cancellation. But once the Australians had decided to adopt nuclear power, they preferred to buy the most advanced available technology, which is British and American. The Royal Australian Navy already uses a version of the current U.S. submarine command-and-control system and a version of the standard U.S. submarine torpedo.

For the United States, the decision to join with Australia in a nuclear submarine program is equally striking. Until now, only the Royal Navy has received U.S. nuclear technology, under a 1958 agreement that gives the United States a veto over Britain transferring it to another party. For a brief period during the late 1950s, U.S. policy encouraged allied navies to adopt nuclear-powered submarines. Canada considered doing so for about a year, and it appears so did Italy and the Netherlands. The possibility of transferring nuclear submarine technology did not arise again until 1986, when the Canadians considered buying either the British Trafalgar-class or the French Rubis-class submarines, opting for the former before abandoning the project in April 1989.

The U.S. partnership with the Royal Navy in submarine development has been very close. Although the United States provided the prototype British nuclear submarine powerplant, the British made important contributions to U.S. submarine design, such as the concept of rafting for silencing and initial types of pump-jets. The significance of AUKUS is that the Australians are gaining access to the full range of U.S. and British technology, because both nations consider it essential for their Pacific partner to be as capable as possible.

The USS Olympia (SSN-717) departs Pearl Harbor, Hawaii for the 2016 Rim of the Pacific exercise. Recently decommissioned Los Angeles–class submarines such as the Olympia could be transferred to Australia for training purposes before their nuclear-powered submarines come into service. Credit: U.S. Navy (Gabrielle Joyner)

For many years, the Royal Australian Navy has faced a difficult problem with its submarine operations. Submarines are a vital means of gathering intelligence. There are alternatives, but the targets of intelligence-gathering generally can tell when they—mainly aircraft and satellites—are in position. Only submarines are both effective and covert. Keeping a non-nuclear submarine on station far from home for protracted periods is challenging. As with the United States, Australian naval bases are far from areas of great interest.

Nuclear-powered boats, while more expensive than conventional submarines, can deploy great distances at high speed and achieve maximum time on station, while also providing better crew habitability. Because they spend considerably less time on passage to and from a distant area, they can do the same surveillance work as conventionally powered ones with fewer platforms. Nuclear-powered submarines also are likely to be far more survivable in the face of antisubmarine warfare measures. For example, they are often faster than surface ships hunting them.

Modern diesel-electric submarines do offer advantages. They are less expensive and inherently quiet, while nuclear-powered submarines take considerable effort to silence. Diesel-electric submarines also can safely sit on the sea floor to hide. But they cannot offer surplus power to operate sensors, and they are not fast enough (on a sustained basis) to get out of trouble if they reveal themselves. For example, many diesel-electric submarines are credited with maximum submerged speeds of about 20 knots that can be sustained for only 15 minutes to an hour. Some diesel-electric submarines have air-independent propulsion, which enables more protracted operations, but at low speed. Only nuclear powerplants have the energy density to achieve very high sustained performance.

China doubtless sees its growing fleet as a means to coerce other countries in the region. Anything that reduces the value of that fleet helps countries such as the Philippines and Malaysia resist Beijing’s maritime pressure campaign. More adversary nuclear-powered submarines operating in the region must be very high on that list.

For example, more nuclear-powered submarines place China’s new aircraft carriers at higher risk. At the very least, more nuclear-powered submarines in the region greatly increase the price China must pay to keep its fleet credible. Australia’s increased capability may well deepen its ties to countries in Southeast Asia that feel threatened by Chinese power.

Australia’s decision will add nuclear-powered submarines to a region that already has many. China operates a substantial nuclear-powered submarine fleet, which is likely to expand considerably in the near future. India already has a nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine, using Russian reactor technology, and has leased (and recently returned) a Russian nuclear-powered attack submarine. There is a serious Indian Navy proposal to build six nuclear-powered attack submarines, to replace its aging diesel submarine fleet. And to the extent that Russia is an Asian power, it has a large regional nuclear-powered submarine fleet.

For France, the loss of the large Australian submarine contract may be a hint that it should offer its own nuclear submarine technology to prospective buyers. In recent years, the French Naval Group has been successful in selling conventionally powered attack submarines, but that market may be nearly saturated. France is not under any legal constraint in selling its own type of nuclear-powered submarine; the only problem may be the cost of its nuclear technology.

For Australia, the United States probably could lend or transfer existing U.S. nuclear-powered submarines. Many Los Angeles–class boats were laid up instead of being refueled; some still exist. They could be refueled, modernized, and brought back to operational status. Australian crews could be trained to operate them. Experience with these submarines would allow Australian submariners to learn to operate nuclear-powered submarines before Australia has to man its own.

Expand  

 

  • Merci (+1) 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  Le 26/11/2021 à 15:41, pascal a dit :

Australia and Nuclear-Powered Submarines

By Norman Friedman November 2021

Proceedings Vol. 147/11/1,425

In September, the Australian government announced it would buy nuclear-powered rather than conventionally ...

Expand  

La source (ou en tous cas une source, mais pas gratuite)

Et une traduction (maintenant que je peux à nouveau utiliser DeepL :biggrin:

  Révéler le contenu masqué

Le monsieur semble assez porté sur le sujet, analyste de défense et spécialiste de l'histoire militaire (une partie en tous cas, apparemment centré sur l'USN) pour l'US Naval Institute : 
https://www.usni.org/people/norman-friedman
Ce qui me surprend est qu'il n'est pas Australien mais bien citoyen étatsunien.
Je suis assez curieux à propos d'une de ses publications justement : https://nsc.crawford.anu.edu.au/publication/15176/strategic-submarines-and-strategic-stability-looking-towards-2030s , mais j'y jetterai un oeil plus tard.

  • Merci (+1) 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Je ne savais pas où placer cette info....

US Holds Joint Exercises ANNUALEX 2021 with Major Global Powers Aimed at Deterring Aggression

On Nov. 30, naval forces from the United States, Australia, Germany, Japan, and Canada concluded ANNUALEX 2021, a nine-day multilateral, multinational annual joint military exercise held in the Philippine Sea. 

The five participating navies included the Royal Australian Navy (RAN), Royal Canadian Navy (RCN), German Navy (GMN), Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF), and the U.S. Navy. Thirty-five ships and dozens of fighter jets joined the exercise. 

Germany joined the exercise for the first time in 20 years

It appears as though China’s provocative actions toward its neighbors have only drawn the allies closer. Besides the increased collaboration between allied countries demonstrated by AUKUS, America’s security partnership with the UK and Australia, other countries have also joined the league.

Germany’s frigate FGS Bayern (F 217) participated in the exercises in the Philippine Sea. Later, Tulsa had an opportunity to host Bayern crew members for ship tours while moored at the Naval Base in Guam.

https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/12/03/us-holds-joint-exercises-annualex-2021-with-major-global-powers-aimed-at-deterring-ccp-aggression.html

  • Merci (+1) 2
  • Upvote (+1) 1
Lien vers le commentaire
Partager sur d’autres sites

Créer un compte ou se connecter pour commenter

Vous devez être membre afin de pouvoir déposer un commentaire

Créer un compte

Créez un compte sur notre communauté. C’est facile !

Créer un nouveau compte

Se connecter

Vous avez déjà un compte ? Connectez-vous ici.

Connectez-vous maintenant
  • Statistiques des membres

    6 062
    Total des membres
    2 827
    Maximum en ligne
    offabour
    Membre le plus récent
    offabour
    Inscription
  • Statistiques des forums

    21,6k
    Total des sujets
    1,7m
    Total des messages
  • Statistiques des blogs

    4
    Total des blogs
    3
    Total des billets
×
×
  • Créer...