Видео

The effectiveness of Tomahawks will diminish in time given their lack of stealth and speed, but the US is currently developing the LRASMXR, an 1800km+ version of the LRASM & LRASMER. We can look at the prospect of manufacturing them in time.

So RAN & RAAF have different LW torpedoes? Seems unnecessary. It's not like the Mk.54 isn't good.

P-8s will also be fitted with AGM-158C LRASM for anti-ship operations but it will be a few years yet before necessary upgrades are done on the Australian aircraft.

❤Thanks.

People seem to misunderstand the mission of these ships. Their job is to monitor, not a combat mission. That is the job of the new subs and f35s. Honestly, the detractors need to open their eyes.

Okay sounds good ,but, what are we using now?

I'm thinking that there're heavier caliber firearms on most Alaska Game Warden's boats

Βάλτε Ελληνικούς υπότιτλους!!!

It was because the US declined to sell the F35 to Thailand and offered F16 instead. The Gripen was just a much more attractive package than the F16 which would've come with a lot of US imposed operational restrictions.

The best short range jet fighter on the market,just now

Hi

misinformation. yes russia may not trust their stealth capabilities as they lack the technology needed such as the radar absorbent film present in the f35 and f22. this is nothing surprising and it may be the sole reason of the multiple radars on the su 57 to compensate for the lower stealth. the su 57s radars are not duds, to say dud is to say they do not exist or do not work or are simply decoys, they are not as you also said in the same video they are in a experimental phase, making them not duds. false, L band can reliably lock onto targets as all of the US and Russian aircraft can as they all use L band as their main band for radars (mig 29/33/35, su 27/34/35, F-14/15/16/18), the band of the F22 and F35 may be variable and unable to be identified. false on my end as well, F-22 band is band X according to (www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_pdf.cfm?DACH_RECNO=944), so the technology of the band X radars is enough to become of main broad use, but band L may still perform its duty against stealth unlike band X. false: band L and X radars may be coordinated for LOCK-ON, out of pure common senseñ. Your info is not backed up by any sources as well unknown: wether the computing unit of the su57 is capable of running all radars at once is a concern for you, it may not as otherwise the radars would have not been integrated to begin with, and we are on 2024, technological limitations are not existant when it comes to computation. unknown: band X radars do produce more heat than L band but there is no source on wether they caused a fire on a su-57 or wether this is a concern or not. for the radars to be operational they must work within temperature range, meaning this issue has been fixed already or has been soft fixed. Unknown or true: i have not researched the financial setbacks of the alleged ban of gallium arsenide nor wether it is true SK sold such chemical to russia.

모가미의 가장큰 적은 엔화 입니다. 대들 모가미급의 가격때문에 머리 아파 했는데.. 사업 추진 당시 (2016/17) 에 비해 너무 변한 엔화 환률의 착시현상으로 일반적으로 도는 $350m은 말도 안되고 대략 $500-650m 사이 일걸로 예상 됩니다. 특히, Mk41통합 문제 (레이더 및 전투 시스템은 일본 발사와 무장은 수입 이라는 함정) 와 AA 능력 향상을 위해 Mk41 32 Cell로 가면서 규모가 커진게 치명적 이었습니다. 특히 미국의 공급망 붕괴로 이지스 및 관련 시스템 (Mk41) 가격 폭주와 공급 지연이 걸리면서 난리난 상황 입니다.

Have the writers for this piece been reading the news? Canada is buying the largest fleet (15) of Type 26 "River" class destroyers, which fulfils much of what is said here including ASW, anti-air and electronic surveilance. It is also purchasing 8-12 new submarines for arctic patrol, 88 F35's and investing in cyber warfare capabilities. Whenever it is required of us, Canada has always hit above its weight class. We are not the US's "little brother". Canada has never lost a war. There is a reason for that. However, I will agree that we need to be part of AUKUS as a Pacific nation.

One just hit a Expo in Lebanon

Canada's military has many, many open unfilled reqs for staff. The major problem is that there aren't enough people skilled and trained and cleared to drive military procurement. There is a term used by many in the military now "One Deep" which is to say if one person goes, there isn't a guaranteed or likely replacement ready. If they can't sort out the things that are barriers to people joining. Among the issues are money, not enough staff (which puts too much on those that stay), the sex scandals they have been poor at handling, leadership that has worried more about covering the senior staff than leading with integrity and respect for the rank and file. There's also the issue of military families - you need to jobs to buy a house if you can, and having one that is gone half the time puts a huge load on the other and they can't handle everything domestically if they have kids. They need to deal with that. They also need to stop with the racism, with the neo nazis in the ranks, the unreasonable behaviour by some officers at lower ranks and some senior NCMs, etc. Women aren't joining, young people aren't joining, and minorities are limited in their uptake to opportunities. It's a huge transformation and it can't be fixed with just buying systems. They'll be unable to do that and even if they could, nobody would be there to operate them or handle all the logistics and coordination, etc. Another issue is lack of IT resources to ensure data is properly stored and can be recovered. The medium term (say 5-15 years) the biggest issue is the retirement of a lot of senior technical leads and they don't have the time and staff to train up newer folks - the Colonels and Lieutenant-Colonels and their civilian equivalents are mostly in the 50+ range now and that's retiring time. If they don't get that problem sorted before all these folk leave with all that knowledge is lost, it'll gut us technically, procurement wise, and in so many operational ways.... The Canadian military has been gutted over many decades. We've never met our promised expenditures that we agreed to with NATO and we are a bit of a problem for NORAD too (and any other more modernized military) because our gear is old and worn out. And our troops are worn down. The answer is not buying a whack of military hardware that you don't have any chance to staff. The culture needs to change, the politicians that force us to buy slower, more expensive 'regional benefit approved' projects rather than buying known vehicles and weapons and so on that are allies already operate. Our main priorities should be: 1) Fix the leadership. 2) Fix the issues with harassment and assault. I think it is past time we need a 3rd police for these allegations. The MPs can't handle it - volume and the MPs have other purposes. 3) Recruit, recruit, recruit! Do it with money, with education before and after, with proper health care and veterans support which we keep paring down, and stop treating the military as if it was a business - it is a different beast. 4) Strike a parliamentary cross-party panel that whose job is to identify priorities and see what DND says those priorities require and that committee makes the decisions. It should have at least 9 MPs. And it should be made to understand that this is not a political arena - it is a necessary national security issue. 5) Buy off the shelf equipment that our allies are using (interop for almost free). 6) Make sure your procurement is not 'one big project every 10 years' as that kills our ship building, plane building, etc. Spend some every year to keep these military builders and their staff available and competent. On the hand, put some serious work in generating real teeth in the procurement agreements so that the dates and quality are paramount - which the Canadian providers have been playing loose with for years (decades really). 7) Protect our North. Protect our strategic resources. Own the North West Passage aggressively. Protect the Great Lakes and the Seaway (easy way for enemy stealth subs to get close to key areas of Canada).

Imagen putting them on the 14 P-8, 72 F-33A, 24 F/A-18F?.

They can Organise in 12 Months 3 Mechanised Brigades (Each with 45 M1-A2 Tanks, 125 Redback IFV, 45 Boxer IFV, 90 APCs, 45 Bushrangers, 36 105 mm Guns, 12 155 Guns, 12 K 3 Sp.Guns, 155 mm, 18 Himaras, 36 Nissan, 1250 Vehicles, 36 Black Hawk Helicopters, 18 Kiowas, 18 Attack Apache Helicopters, 6 Chinook helicopter, 150 Stigers -1 (SAM), 150 Carlcustaf ATGW) And 1 Armour Brigades. The 3 Mechanised Brigades Located: 1 in Darwin NT, 1 in Cain's QLQ, 1 in Townsville QLD. And the Armored Brigade Located: 1 in Brisbane QLD. Plus 4 Reserve Light Brigades Located: 1 in Perth WA, 1 in Adelaide SA,1 in Melbourne VICt., 1 in Sydney NSW). How Simple is that??? 🤔

Australia needs 6 Combat Mechanized Brigades and 2 Combat Armoured Brigades. More WarShips and Warplanes. There Spending $500 billion ($350 billion will go for the Nuclear Sumbarines). Use it all to Combat Equip all 8 New Combat Brigades. The 3 Brigades we have can only Fight for 3 Weeks, then?

Canada is looking to purchase 12 subs what Canada is building are 15 destroyers, to replace the frigates and the destroyers that already have been decommissioned.

Canada will have the 12 conventional submarines built before Australian ever acquires 1 nuclear sub .

India is building it. 😂 sad

F16 has longer range not gripen

It's good to see our navy finally getting the equipment it needs.

I think it was pragmatic of Japan to convert its Helicopter carrier into an Aircraft Carrier simply because its design includes two lifts - one aft, and one amidships to clear and raise aircraft. Unfortunately the Australian LHDs only have an aft lift and none other - dramatically reducing its utility in that role. I would like to see Australia and Japan join hands and build more light IZUMO class carriers ( one each ) as at 28,000 tone and a smallish crew ( and an amazing turn of speed at 30+ knots ) it is the most practical alternative for Australia should we decide to go that way.

Russia is now the Second largest army in the world. China remains number one. Russia the largest tapped and untapped resource rich country in the world and China the world's factory are great friends. Sounds like Neocon Nightmare Fuel for Blinken.

They are not officially known as ships any longer. They are designated as Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessels (AOPV). They are woefully under armed and not even properly constructed for naval combat; a total screw up on the part of Crime Minister Turdeau’s government mishandling.

Canada is not building the subs; we have no experience building subs or any way to build them.

I fear someone fell off their rice bowl laughing at this. == Russia and China are 20 years ahead of EVERY COUNTRY IN THE ARCTIC !! == We in Canada today are prey and the pickers are at the door I fear!!!

Canada First these boats should be built and at sea in less than five years. eleven years from now China will control all Canadian waters but maybe that was the plan all along.

Waste of money and time building these toy boats.

🇮🇩🇮🇩

If US looks to supersede fa18's anytime near future (ie NGAD might deliver early) We should supplement our squadrons with Recon Fa18a& Growlers.✔️🇦🇺

first

Now that the government has cancelled the last tranche of 28 F35As, and given that the 24 F18 super Hornets will effectively act in a support role / missile trucks for the F35s, we should invest in at least another squadron of F18 super hornets ( Block 3) ( preferably 2) capable of carrying multiple long range LRASMs and JASSMs. I understand there may be a follow on order for four more Growlers also. To make these jets truly effective we need to double the size of the refueling aircraft fleet. The modest 6-7 aircraft is whoa-fully inadequate to servicing our current aircraft fleet as well as hosting US assets.

Canada will take delivery of the new planes by 2033

Never happen, the Government would have to cancel far too many or all social support programs unless... we get a new political party in this country that isn't Conservative, Liberal or Communist (sorry, NDP) because none our established political parties are friends of the CAF.

The Type 31 it's larger so future-proof, suitable for large heavy changes, better rescue platform, easily modified and cheaper per size than all other offers

MANY will not at all be surprised that Russell/DoD have yet again screwed the pooch on the Tier 2 options to be selected. I have said this many many times and will continue to - Defence just cannot ever be fixed. The only way is if there is a STRONG MinDef who won't cower behind the bloated mid ranks and suits. This announcement from Marles was delivered at/near the start of the year - we've been told a decision on which ship will be down selected by the end of 2024. Good luck with that - we have an election coming up with Marles as Deputy PM and MinDef, pathetic. The ONLY upside is HMAS Sydney's fired off the SM6 + NSM, with head of RAN stating a TLaM will be test fired off Sydney likely by the end of 2024. Again - until a government puts in someone like Hastie who knows all about Russell's games and obstructing - Australia will remain a joke. The city state of Singapore shames our Dept Defence. For once Greg Sheridan and I are in full agreement.

$3.65B - Trudeau skim of 40% = $2.19B for Defence spending and $1.46B for Trudeau. Help make Canada a Post-Trudeau National State.

What a joke! Over 10 years to build it. Irving shouldn’t be building it and no other Canadian ship manufacturers. In 10 years from now we need 10~15 of those ships by 2035.

This comparison make no sense one have a basic trainer purpose.. M 346 is developed for combat, and probably cost 2 or 3 times more. Update: Yak130 basic cost 7 mil M-346 min cost 20 mil...

Its the square black one not the red one I think (the red one was made by a company recently bought by Aduril). Basic module fits in shipping container for shipment but sub length can be longer by fitting extra modules between nose and tail modules according to requirements resulting in a bigger sub if needed. Different modules can be used to build different subs to specialise in different missions

The Norwegian class our AOPS was derived from has a 76mm gun on the focsle and SAM/SSM. The RCN is a joke.

A low calibre gun, how an about at least ONE “Rolling Frame” mutiuse AD, Gr to Gr, with a mini torpedo launcher. Add in a 30 MM Bushmaster, now it’s a Navy ship IMO

Canada needs nuclear powered submarines for speed, endurance, manouverability, distance and parts commonality with Aussie nuke boats. They will be costly but with three oceans to cover and vast distances to manage it is the only option. JUST MAKE SURE THE UK DOES NOT BUILD THEM.

ARE THESE HARPERS HEAVILY ARMED ICE BREAKERS LOL LOL LOL ONE GUN

DID A HELCOPTER EVER LAND ON IT YET?

They'd better be prsctical - C$5 billion for 6 AOP vessels! With all due respect to our military leaders and advisors that recommended such vessels to the navy - why were they not designed to operate year-round in the Arctic, as are Russian icebreakers? What is the ice class? Have not seen anything published that regard, however, I do belive they are ice class I (able to maintain 1-3 kts in ice 1-metre thick). Sorry, do not have any real confidence in the people/groups/committees that had recommended this design.

🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩🤲🙏💪❤️👍💂