Oh dear we need some more
"A French official told Agence France-Presse on Saturday that they still believed AUKUS was a mistake. “Regarding Australia, it was treason,” the unnamed official said."
www.smh.com.au
"A French official told Agence France-Presse on Saturday that they still believed AUKUS was a mistake. “Regarding Australia, it was treason,” the unnamed official said."
‘An absolute priority’: Albanese promises AUKUS will mean jobs for Australia
Before jetting out of India, the prime minister sought to counter concerns the submarine pact would not lead to a massive injection of jobs for Australia.
Work share to fabricate parts of a N reactor ? Let's see now. Among other things a N reactor requires , are a large number of forged parts . No it's not what you think pops . You need look up forging in metal working. Now for you to manage work share , forging is as basic as it gets assuming you've good expertise in the matter . Some expertise doesn't count . It has to be good.
Else in 20 yrs well before you croak , you're likely to see headlines like - Aussie N sub sinks . 100 Aussie sailors meet a watery grave . N reactor failed as per initial reports . Improperly forged parts suspected . Now while improperly forged parts is an oxymoron , trust you get the drift .
India, which received the Australian PM for a three-day visit, would do well to remember this message above
France is more upset with the UK and US for stealing their customer. The other thing to remember. as far as the french are concerned. You are just a customer. a cash cow they can milk. no milk? it's off to the abator .
Last edited:
Not a fan of Naval Group or French military industry complex's biz practises but that's what business practises are like today , unfortunate though it is. However, I can totally see why & how the US & UK have been successfully leading you by the nose for more than 75 yrs now. Of course with the UK it's been true since longer.
(apdr (aus), mar.09)
(thx to the aussies)
Viewpoint: No Australian content as AUKUS tilts toward a U.K. purchase
We will all be put out of our misery – metaphorically speaking – on Tuesday, Australian time, when the “optimal pathway” for acquiring nuclear powered submarines will be revealed. This will be in the U.S. west coast city of San Diego by President Joe Biden, U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and our own Anthony Albanese, flying in after a visit to India.
The latest rumours have an air of consistency to them, namely that the pathway will somehow involve Australian participation in the next generation U.K. attack class submarine program, currently known as the SSN(R). Given that this activity might produce a new nuclear-powered submarine by 2050, there are hints that the Royal Navy could sell the last two Astute submarines – yet to be completed – to Australia as gap fillers.
There are several things to be said about this, none of them especially positive. The first is that the U.S. seems to have effectively pulled out of all of this, perhaps having studied the idea, concluding that there are far too many practical and political obstacles in the way of helping Australia develop its own submarine production capability – which was one of the foundational aims of AUKUS. The U.S. industrial base is stretched to capacity – and the wisdom of transferring exceptionally sensitive military technology to a small nation with uncertain cyber security credentials is not universally accepted in the Pentagon.
By turning the practicalities over to the U.K. and Australia to work through is actually a win-win. Washington relieves itself of a technically difficult, time-consuming undertaking – but at the same time President Biden can hold up the deal as evidence of Westminster and Canberra fully committing to the U.S. led anti-China alliance.
At some future point – a very distant one – Australia’s submarines might indeed have a lot of U.S. content in the form of weapons, combat system and sensors. However, if Australia ends up with two Astutes, they will come with British weapons and electronics, unless they were to be retrofitted – a time consuming and very costly process – which would seem to negate the purpose of the deal. They will also come with reactors no longer in production because of safety concerns about their design.
Nuclear-powered submarines – just like all other complex systems – require a lot of maintenance for safety and performance reasons. If Australia has only two of them, it is likely that for some periods of time neither will be available, with the most likely scenario being that a single Astute will be able to put to sea at any given time. Billions of dollars will need to be spent on a new east coast facility and crews will need to be trained.
If this scenario is correct, the huge winner will be the U.K. Once again, the colonials – that’s us – will be spending a fortune on British technology, which former Defence Minister Peter Dutton has pointed out is not the best. The media has reported Sunak jumping for joy and being dizzy with excitement about the announcement – which is hardly surprising given that Australia will be subsidising his deeply troubled budget and will provide some desperately needed retrospective justification for Brexit.
Other reporting has the U.S. also supplying Australia with Virginia class submarines in the 2030s. However, why Washington would divert submarines intended for the USN is unclear, though if there is a massive ramping up of production capacity it might be possible. The idea that we would operate two classes of SSNs from two different countries seems strange, to put it mildly.
Let’s hope that the rumours are incorrect because otherwise this is looking like a thoroughly bad deal for Australia. As well as costing a vast amount of money – tens of billions of dollars – the effect on national security for the next 30 years will be minimal. There might well be thousands of new jobs created in the U.K., but there will be none here, unless you count pouring concrete for the new base. /end
Electric Boat Plans to Hire 5K This Year, Partners With High Schools for Recruitment
Groton-based General Dynamics Electric Boat is growing at a rate that they have not seen in more than four decades(thx to the aussies)
You do realise that this is just teasing the frogs? Though these fanboys don't like being called out when they BS. It will be over, when Macron leaves office. It cost him political points. Our PM at the time is gone. things move on.
The really funny part, is that we are not only not buying the French sub, we are buying both US AND UK subs. That has to hurt.
Villers-Bretonneux: ’France and Australia together forever…’ | Sir John Monash Centre
One small village in France will forever remember the sacrifice of the young Australians who saved them from German occupation and potential...
sjmc.gov.au
Last edited:
Agreed, We legally canceled an order. That had cancelation options and Macron got upset.
Though the Frogs don't seem to be doing well on the business front. They don't seen to be ahead of the game. India is doing well.
The race to be the next most important technological powerhouse is a close one between the UK and India, .. top five countries in 29 of the 44 technologies.
South Korea and Germany follow closely behind, appearing in the top five countries in 20 and 17 technologies, respectively.
Australia is in the top five for nine technologies, followed closely by Italy (seven technologies), Iran (six), Japan (four) and Canada (four). Russia, Singapore, Saudi Arabia,
France, Malaysia and the Netherlands are in the top five for one or two technologies. A number of other countries, including Spain and Turkey, regularly make the top 10 countries but aren’t in the top five.
Pops that Institute which compiled this BS list seems to have done it more to burnish their credentials than their credibility. We've just had a debate on this in different threads over the last week. Since you restrict your presence to a couple of threads , here's an update. They've compiled their lists of those technologies based on the number of papers released in science journals & patents filed.
Hence under the head of Aircraft Engine & Hypersonic propulsion the list is as under :
1.) China
2.) US
3.) India
4.) UK
5.) Iran
Now India & Iran are yet to develop their own indigenous turbofan or turboprop. China's only recently deployed it's range of both.
I should've known what to expect the moment I read it was featured by the "Australia Strategic Policy Institute Ltd " but it didn't strike a bell then & I linked it here. I feel like slapping myself now.
France has a program about hypervelocity though :
For more than nine years now, there has been talk of a successor to the Air-to-Ground Medium-Range Missile [ASMP], on which the airborne component of France's nuclear deterrent is currently based, which relies on the Strategic Air Forces [SAF] and the Naval Nuclear Air Force [NNAF].
One of the first to mention it was General Denis Mercier, then chief of staff of the French Air Force, during a parliamentary hearing in the spring of 2014. At the time, he had explained, two projects were being studied, one favoring stealth, the other emphasizing hypervelocity. In other words, the debate was about the possibility of developing a hypersonic missile.
A few months later, having indicated that the successor to the ASMP would be the ASN4G [4th generation Air-Ground Nuclear], Jean-Yves Le Drian, then Minister of Defence, suggested that the debate between stealth and hypervelocity had not yet been decided. "Bold designs, using stealth or hyper-velocity technologies for example, at the cutting edge of technological developments, will be explored," he said.
In any case, the two options envisaged implied taking up several technological challenges, as the Office national d'études et de recherches aérospatiales [ONERA] briefly pointed out in its 2015-25 strategic plan.
Thus, it argued, the "strategy of penetration of adversary defences by missiles at hypersonic speeds remains a major scientific and technological challenge", requiring the use of a "very large number of disciplines" such as aerodynamics, propulsion, the architecture of the vector, its control and piloting. The same applies to stealth, which "requires materials with durable characteristics compatible with the severity of the environments they are used in, as well as mission preparation systems optimized for responsiveness and maximum penetration of defenses.
In any case, in a budgetary notice published in October 2021, the deputy Christophe Lejeune made it known that a "technological solution" for this ASN4G was going to be "soon retained".
"ONERA and [the missile manufacturer] MBDA have developed two tracks for this future missile: a ramjet missile from the Camosis upstream study plan [PEA], and a hypervelocity super ramjet missile from the Prometheus PEA," the deputy had indeed indicated. He added: "The technological solution that should be chosen soon could be a manoeuvring hypersonic missile capable of guaranteeing the penetration capacity of defences, in a context of increasing [A2/AD] denial of access.
More specifically, the Camosis PEA emphasised stealth, with a missile capable of flying at 4,000 to 5,000 km/h [i.e. below the hypersonic threshold], i.e. at twice the speed of an ASMP/A. As for the Prometheus PEA, it focused on hypervelocity. A priori, it was the subject of a mixed ramjet test [an engine capable of performing successively a subsonic and supersonic combustion, nldr], carried out recently in the United States.
That said, during a parliamentary hearing that brought together the main industrialists involved in nuclear deterrence, Admiral [2S] Hervé de Bonnaventure, defence advisor to the CEO of MBDA, said a little more about the ASN4G and confirmed the technological choices concerning it.
Thus, we learn that "technological work" on this ASN4G began in the 1990s, "in parallel with the preparation of the ASMPA [A for improved] and that it was "clearly oriented towards the very high speed domain".
"Since then, we have had the means to test the missile and simulate the flight of the ASN4G in hypervelocity," said Admiral de Bonnaventure, before specifying that MBDA has conducted, in co-contracting with ONERA, studies on hypersonics since 2000-2010, as part of the PROMETHEE 1, 2 and 3 programs.
"The performance of the ASN4G is even better than that of the ASMPA-R [R for renovated]. The ASN4G should be operational by 2035 and should remain so beyond the 2050s: it is therefore necessary to anticipate the ground/air defences of the adversary by that time," he added. Hence the creation of a research department within MBDA, bringing together "ten or so employees", responsible for carrying out a "continuous study of the adversary's defence".
However, the adviser to the CEO of MBDA continued, "it appears that very high performance in terms of speed and manoeuvre is the best method for achieving the latest possible detection, and complicating the task of tracking a radar, or even a collision, and, finally, disrupting an anti-missile missile attack.
As a reminder, the ASMPA-R has the particularity of being able to follow several trajectories [low altitude, very low altitude and high altitude] in order to evade enemy radars. In theory, the same will be true of the ASN4G... but at much higher speeds. "We are entering the field of hypersonics. The load factor will also be multiplied in the terminal phase to decoy enemy defences," insisted Admiral de Bonnaventure.
Finally, he concluded, "the ASN4G, thanks to its limited size and weight, will be compatible with the Rafale and catapultable by an aircraft carrier, in line with the objectives defined by the President of the Republic. This is a unique technical achievement in the world.
During the same hearing, André-Hubert Roussel, executive chairman of ArianeGroup, confirmed that the first flight of the V-MAX hypersonic glider, launched by a sounding rocket, is "scheduled" and that a second demonstrator, the V-MAX2, will be "the extension" of it. He added: "At the same time, the French defense procurement agency (Direction Générale de l'Armement) has entrusted us with several upstream studies on future weapons systems based on these hypersonic technologies.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
source : opex360.com
For more than nine years now, there has been talk of a successor to the Air-to-Ground Medium-Range Missile [ASMP], on which the airborne component of France's nuclear deterrent is currently based, which relies on the Strategic Air Forces [SAF] and the Naval Nuclear Air Force [NNAF].
One of the first to mention it was General Denis Mercier, then chief of staff of the French Air Force, during a parliamentary hearing in the spring of 2014. At the time, he had explained, two projects were being studied, one favoring stealth, the other emphasizing hypervelocity. In other words, the debate was about the possibility of developing a hypersonic missile.
A few months later, having indicated that the successor to the ASMP would be the ASN4G [4th generation Air-Ground Nuclear], Jean-Yves Le Drian, then Minister of Defence, suggested that the debate between stealth and hypervelocity had not yet been decided. "Bold designs, using stealth or hyper-velocity technologies for example, at the cutting edge of technological developments, will be explored," he said.
In any case, the two options envisaged implied taking up several technological challenges, as the Office national d'études et de recherches aérospatiales [ONERA] briefly pointed out in its 2015-25 strategic plan.
Thus, it argued, the "strategy of penetration of adversary defences by missiles at hypersonic speeds remains a major scientific and technological challenge", requiring the use of a "very large number of disciplines" such as aerodynamics, propulsion, the architecture of the vector, its control and piloting. The same applies to stealth, which "requires materials with durable characteristics compatible with the severity of the environments they are used in, as well as mission preparation systems optimized for responsiveness and maximum penetration of defenses.
In any case, in a budgetary notice published in October 2021, the deputy Christophe Lejeune made it known that a "technological solution" for this ASN4G was going to be "soon retained".
"ONERA and [the missile manufacturer] MBDA have developed two tracks for this future missile: a ramjet missile from the Camosis upstream study plan [PEA], and a hypervelocity super ramjet missile from the Prometheus PEA," the deputy had indeed indicated. He added: "The technological solution that should be chosen soon could be a manoeuvring hypersonic missile capable of guaranteeing the penetration capacity of defences, in a context of increasing [A2/AD] denial of access.
More specifically, the Camosis PEA emphasised stealth, with a missile capable of flying at 4,000 to 5,000 km/h [i.e. below the hypersonic threshold], i.e. at twice the speed of an ASMP/A. As for the Prometheus PEA, it focused on hypervelocity. A priori, it was the subject of a mixed ramjet test [an engine capable of performing successively a subsonic and supersonic combustion, nldr], carried out recently in the United States.
That said, during a parliamentary hearing that brought together the main industrialists involved in nuclear deterrence, Admiral [2S] Hervé de Bonnaventure, defence advisor to the CEO of MBDA, said a little more about the ASN4G and confirmed the technological choices concerning it.
Thus, we learn that "technological work" on this ASN4G began in the 1990s, "in parallel with the preparation of the ASMPA [A for improved] and that it was "clearly oriented towards the very high speed domain".
"Since then, we have had the means to test the missile and simulate the flight of the ASN4G in hypervelocity," said Admiral de Bonnaventure, before specifying that MBDA has conducted, in co-contracting with ONERA, studies on hypersonics since 2000-2010, as part of the PROMETHEE 1, 2 and 3 programs.
"The performance of the ASN4G is even better than that of the ASMPA-R [R for renovated]. The ASN4G should be operational by 2035 and should remain so beyond the 2050s: it is therefore necessary to anticipate the ground/air defences of the adversary by that time," he added. Hence the creation of a research department within MBDA, bringing together "ten or so employees", responsible for carrying out a "continuous study of the adversary's defence".
However, the adviser to the CEO of MBDA continued, "it appears that very high performance in terms of speed and manoeuvre is the best method for achieving the latest possible detection, and complicating the task of tracking a radar, or even a collision, and, finally, disrupting an anti-missile missile attack.
As a reminder, the ASMPA-R has the particularity of being able to follow several trajectories [low altitude, very low altitude and high altitude] in order to evade enemy radars. In theory, the same will be true of the ASN4G... but at much higher speeds. "We are entering the field of hypersonics. The load factor will also be multiplied in the terminal phase to decoy enemy defences," insisted Admiral de Bonnaventure.
Finally, he concluded, "the ASN4G, thanks to its limited size and weight, will be compatible with the Rafale and catapultable by an aircraft carrier, in line with the objectives defined by the President of the Republic. This is a unique technical achievement in the world.
During the same hearing, André-Hubert Roussel, executive chairman of ArianeGroup, confirmed that the first flight of the V-MAX hypersonic glider, launched by a sounding rocket, is "scheduled" and that a second demonstrator, the V-MAX2, will be "the extension" of it. He added: "At the same time, the French defense procurement agency (Direction Générale de l'Armement) has entrusted us with several upstream studies on future weapons systems based on these hypersonic technologies.
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
source : opex360.com
After consoling you in the above post. I just saw your other post. that I reposed below John, Let me say that you are silly to boast about a ramjet that the international MBDA is making for you.
Let me know when France is a world leader in SCRAMJET., as Australia is. google is your friend if you want to look it up.
Let me know when France is a world leader in SCRAMJET., as Australia is. google is your friend if you want to look it up.
You don't know what you're talking about, jerk.
Far beyond a supplier-customer relationship, there was a strategic partnership between France and Australia:
Just as there is such a partnership between India and France.
Amarante
You attack the messenger, because you don't like the message. When France had its childish tantrum and withdrew its ambassador. France also cancelled the security agreement.In the following thread, I actually stood up for the french military, saying that the military to military relationships are ongoing, while political squabbles are short. I said there was no reason for the security relationship to be affected by a canceled sale. I was corrected and shown that it was also a military to military separation. I was very surprised by this pettiness. I then realised that France only sees everyone as customers.
In no way can france be considered a true security alliance partner..France considers everyone as a customer. You can also look at what they did to Argentina, They aren't even a reliable supplier to their customers. India isn't silly, they would also know this, you are not to be trusted.
Read about what you did on your frog forum 18 months ago.
Marine Australienne: modernisations, acquisitions et exercices navals.
Last edited:
2/6 “In the meantime, the West takes a completely opposite position. It pursues directly opposite aims - to set India against China. Our Indian friends understand this very well. They have been telling us frankly that they see these attempts.
— M. K. Bhadrakumar (@BhadraPunchline) March 11, 2023
4/6 “One of the tools for such penetration is the AUKUS. There are plans for expanding it by admitting Japan & South Korea. Attempts are being made to split ASEAN, where Americans have already singled out 5 countries that will be more pliable to such calls…
— M. K. Bhadrakumar (@BhadraPunchline) March 11, 2023
6/6 "to join anti-Russian sanctions and not to provide Russia with any opportunity to use Indian resources and Indian logistics to bypass Western sanctions. But India does not agree to this.”
— M. K. Bhadrakumar (@BhadraPunchline) March 11, 2023