It was worse under Rudd and Gillard as they cut projects and took funds and diverted away from the ADF. The coalition government poured funding into ADF although it was such a bad state most the funding just brought it back to a standard level. The Turnbal government made a huge mistake by sitting on new projects and making wrong decisions for eqwipment such as the barracuda class conventional powerd submarines. And going with the hunter class that was still a paper design at the time. It has delayed the RAN for required replacement on time. Look the hunter class its won't start to be built till 2030s. 2040s for submarines the best decision so far is to require 11 general purpose frigates that may actually get built sooner then the others
If you know anything about modern naval salvo warfare, you’d know the optionally crewed vessels will be essential in any hot blue water engagement. Navy was correct in saying we were tied up in our own backyard, and so we should be.
Everyone seems to forget the Hunters are specialist sub hunters that we are trying to turn into a general frigate, we need them as sub hunters and another type if frigate for the general duties
We need serious action. Australia is in a very good position to solve the problems that we are facing. We must change our strategies and optimise for modernising and replacing our current systems. Unless we make these new changes, we will fall even further behind.
Oh we helped, we sent six service people! That was generous and made a huge difference I’m sure! 😂 As for the size and capability of our navy our governments of both federal sides cannot seem to have a continuous process of funding and development of capability such as ship building and training. It has been a stop start process for decades. Something needs to change and it has to be bipartisan. As to how on earth we will staff the AUKUS boats, well that’s a quantum leap totally!
coming from a merchant marine background I can say that it's hard to get young people to want to spend months on a ship with slow internet. I wonder how fast the internet is for the Australian sailors? A regular sluggish ships satelite internet costs around $10K a month.
Wow and I thought we had issues in the states, thanks Australia for making me feel a thousand times better about our defensive capabilities, at leased I know that we won't be first to be invaded. What kind of dysfunctional government leads an island nation to not have a viable navy is beyond me.
The Hunters should have been canceled altogether and replaced with the Navantia F-110 with OZ spec equipment and the flight three destroyer from Navantia as well.
If you want to build ships in Australia using overseas IP then your talking years to delivery. A smarter country would have the hulls built overseas (cheaper labour rates) but do systems integration in Australia (higher level skills and through life support).
My prediction on the Frigate selection is this. Alpha 3000 not in the contention, it is a paper tiger and should be dropped. Daegu, this is resource hungry 140 crew. Low endurance 4500nm, only 16VLS. All this needs to change. To change this is too hard to do quickly. Meko A200: Great range 7200nm, 120 crew, design is mature. 10-18 month build. VLS needs to be upgrade to 24/32 cells. There is space. There is space to hold more than 8 SSM as well. Mogani: Range unknown, 90 crew, VLS needs to be upgrade to 24/32 cells, 15 month build time. Has facility for UUV and USV. Politically a good choice. So I believe that it will be between the Meko and the Mogani. Both need more VLS, at least 8 cells need to Tactical length. We are going to see more coordinated saturation attacks on ships in the future, refer to Red Sea/Black Sea. So the frigate solution will need better CIWS(2+). Need to standardise on the 30mm canon, get rid of the 25mm. This provides compatibility with the Army canons. Good to see the Arafuras being used for the border security. The LOSV need to be 64cell VLS units with good CIWS (2+) and the ability to land a SH60. How else do you plan to transfer maintenane pople in the event of a breakdown.
The decision results in cost savings for Labor and pushing a delivery out 10 years so they aren't accountable. Where is the Barracuda money now? We should have bought a 4th AWD in September
The ADF if not hopeless - but it is tiny. And that is normal for the ADF except during the 2 world wars. We just dont want to spend the amount required for a larger ADF. Because we have been lucky.
The Hunter class is a disaster provoked by a need to help the brexited British economy. The selection process was biased and now the RAN is paying for it. NAVANTIA's solutions are well beyond expectations, but they are Spaniards and not british... so sad 😂😂😂 By the way, Spain has been building state-of-the-art battleships for centuries. 🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸
Not if they stick to their guns...no pun intended and follow through on building an effective navy Navy is firstly deterrent .....the aukus agreement has far reaching positive consequences ..see the redulting Chinese ijitial response was alarm at havong the distance retaliatory strike gap that has existed for years with a navy that is way under weaponised so China has been for years a potential open door if they chose to......what we see here is the chance to really beef up strike and defence capability zcross naval ships not half hearted "built for " but not equipped naval purchases Point is Aus needs to stick go a plan znd not jump around like ig has with french subs...i would recommed sill buying 9 - 12 hunter beefed up with recent weapons options remember the original plan gor awd destroyers was for 72 cells not 48 we settled for ...go gor it the more Australia pushes the boat oug on tjis the greater the deterrence China will face and we wont have their fishing boats or worse pestering our eec zones like Chile has at preeent ...China will think twice A humble Aussie abroad point of view
Bottom line is with a population base of only 27.7 million with only 13.6 million taxpayers the country cannot afford or even build a bigger defence force. The numbers dont lie. The should have embrace nuclear submarine technology back in the 80's and we would have had 35+ years operating experience already established. Now that they have decided to go the nuclear route and their late to the party having warheads available and not easily detected is how to do it but that is still over 10 years away. They want a deterrent force inplace quickly and the easiest and fastest way with minimum manpower is ICBM's. You dont have to use them but you do have them. Ship wise. . . Stop chasing a unicorn platform and get some good condition used Arleigh Burkes right now to fill the gap then start a continuous trickle feed of built one at a rate of one every 3 years then you will maintain a skillset workforce and you will always have platforms that are new arriving as older assets are retired.
If you have the time to take the piss out of the services how about you help out with recruiting for them instead. Information like this will only drive people away from the military. Yes you may have shown some light on the issues but you haven’t helped to fix have you. Why not take all that knowledge of and help them recruit so the numbers are there so we can put those ships in the water.
I am not a Labor voter but look what Government signed the contract for all these failed projects. Tiger, MRH90, French Subs, OPV's, Hunter Class Frigates that have blown out by 30B. The LNP. They are both as bad as each other mate. @@gregcooks-qr9wk
Hopefully trump will put the boot up the arse of defence.more ships is too hard,make Australia pay the wages anf dntitlements of a navy that can fight.the USN.sad shame job
No mention of AUKUS in all this, what with the cost of 1 sub estimated to be $12Million dollars a day x by 4 to 8 subs, for 35 yearseven a blind Freddy can see the outcome SHHHHHHHhhhhhhh Don't tell Marles
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Not just the navy, the whole ADF had been under funded for 20 years. It is in a sad state.
For longer, try the last 35 years. Howard government never really delivered anything either but a frigate that was poorly armed
It’s the most advanced it’s ever been and it’s still far below par.
I have been out of the Navy for 52 years now, it was underfunded then to, spending on defense has never been of much concern to our politicians.
It was worse under Rudd and Gillard as they cut projects and took funds and diverted away from the ADF. The coalition government poured funding into ADF although it was such a bad state most the funding just brought it back to a standard level. The Turnbal government made a huge mistake by sitting on new projects and making wrong decisions for eqwipment such as the barracuda class conventional powerd submarines. And going with the hunter class that was still a paper design at the time. It has delayed the RAN for required replacement on time. Look the hunter class its won't start to be built till 2030s. 2040s for submarines the best decision so far is to require 11 general purpose frigates that may actually get built sooner then the others
I've seen many ship DEcommissioning, but few commissioning
Place waiting for you in the Navy, anytime you two wanna join, Claire and Cameron!
Very shameful for everyone in Australia poor quality shameful defence must be stronger protecting all people in Australia
Old weapons shit protecting nothing and no life's shameful for everyone in Australia
If you know anything about modern naval salvo warfare, you’d know the optionally crewed vessels will be essential in any hot blue water engagement. Navy was correct in saying we were tied up in our own backyard, and so we should be.
Having a hopeless defence minister is a good start
Everyone seems to forget the Hunters are specialist sub hunters that we are trying to turn into a general frigate, we need them as sub hunters and another type if frigate for the general duties
We need serious action. Australia is in a very good position to solve the problems that we are facing. We must change our strategies and optimise for modernising and replacing our current systems. Unless we make these new changes, we will fall even further behind.
Oh we helped, we sent six service people! That was generous and made a huge difference I’m sure! 😂 As for the size and capability of our navy our governments of both federal sides cannot seem to have a continuous process of funding and development of capability such as ship building and training. It has been a stop start process for decades. Something needs to change and it has to be bipartisan. As to how on earth we will staff the AUKUS boats, well that’s a quantum leap totally!
coming from a merchant marine background I can say that it's hard to get young people to want to spend months on a ship with slow internet. I wonder how fast the internet is for the Australian sailors? A regular sluggish ships satelite internet costs around $10K a month.
Sack general Campbell
wrong way. should upgrade the existing fleets with anti-drone capability. how difficult that would be?
The navy has determined it needs to be as competent as the elected Gov of the day.
Recruitment difficulties? Bring back the press gang!
Wow and I thought we had issues in the states, thanks Australia for making me feel a thousand times better about our defensive capabilities, at leased I know that we won't be first to be invaded. What kind of dysfunctional government leads an island nation to not have a viable navy is beyond me.
Yes 😪
What Navy!
The Hunters should have been canceled altogether and replaced with the Navantia F-110 with OZ spec equipment and the flight three destroyer from Navantia as well.
They would find a way to delay that also.
If you want to build ships in Australia using overseas IP then your talking years to delivery. A smarter country would have the hulls built overseas (cheaper labour rates) but do systems integration in Australia (higher level skills and through life support).
My prediction on the Frigate selection is this.
Alpha 3000 not in the contention, it is a paper tiger and should be dropped.
Daegu, this is resource hungry 140 crew. Low endurance 4500nm, only 16VLS. All this needs to change. To change this is too hard to do quickly.
Meko A200: Great range 7200nm, 120 crew, design is mature. 10-18 month build. VLS needs to be upgrade to 24/32 cells. There is space. There is space to hold more than 8 SSM as well.
Mogani: Range unknown, 90 crew, VLS needs to be upgrade to 24/32 cells, 15 month build time. Has facility for UUV and USV. Politically a good choice.
So I believe that it will be between the Meko and the Mogani. Both need more VLS, at least 8 cells need to Tactical length.
We are going to see more coordinated saturation attacks on ships in the future, refer to Red Sea/Black Sea. So the frigate solution will need better CIWS(2+). Need to standardise on the 30mm canon, get rid of the 25mm. This provides compatibility with the Army canons.
Good to see the Arafuras being used for the border security.
The LOSV need to be 64cell VLS units with good CIWS (2+) and the ability to land a SH60. How else do you plan to transfer maintenane pople in the event of a breakdown.
Meko A210?
The decision results in cost savings for Labor and pushing a delivery out 10 years so they aren't accountable. Where is the Barracuda money now? We should have bought a 4th AWD in September
well maybe if we didnt import everything and actually had a manufacturing industry it wouldnt be to bad !!!
The ADF if not hopeless - but it is tiny. And that is normal for the ADF except during the 2 world wars. We just dont want to spend the amount required for a larger ADF. Because we have been lucky.
Australia has never been lucky it. Has been a sitting duck for decades . A ticking time bomb for disaster to happen at any time
@@Nathan-ry3yu : We are the luckiest and wealthiest people on the planet. Where are you ?
The Hunter class is a disaster provoked by a need to help the brexited British economy. The selection process was biased and now the RAN is paying for it. NAVANTIA's solutions are well beyond expectations, but they are Spaniards and not british... so sad 😂😂😂
By the way, Spain has been building state-of-the-art battleships for centuries. 🇪🇸🇪🇸🇪🇸
Not if they stick to their guns...no pun intended and follow through on building an effective navy
Navy is firstly deterrent .....the aukus agreement has far reaching positive consequences ..see the redulting Chinese ijitial response was alarm at havong the distance retaliatory strike gap that has existed for years with a navy that is way under weaponised so China has been for years a potential open door if they chose to......what we see here is the chance to really beef up strike and defence capability zcross naval ships not half hearted "built for " but not equipped naval purchases
Point is Aus needs to stick go a plan znd not jump around like ig has with french subs...i would recommed sill buying 9 - 12 hunter beefed up with recent weapons options remember the original plan gor awd destroyers was for 72 cells not 48 we settled for ...go gor it the more Australia pushes the boat oug on tjis the greater the deterrence China will face and we wont have their fishing boats or worse pestering our eec zones like Chile has at preeent ...China will think twice
A humble Aussie abroad point of view
Bottom line is with a population base of only 27.7 million with only 13.6 million taxpayers the country cannot afford or even build a bigger defence force. The numbers dont lie.
The should have embrace nuclear submarine technology back in the 80's and we would have had 35+ years operating experience already established. Now that they have decided to go the nuclear route and their late to the party having warheads available and not easily detected is how to do it but that is still over 10 years away.
They want a deterrent force inplace quickly and the easiest and fastest way with minimum manpower is ICBM's. You dont have to use them but you do have them.
Ship wise. . . Stop chasing a unicorn platform and get some good condition used Arleigh Burkes right now to fill the gap then start a continuous trickle feed of built one at a rate of one every 3 years then you will maintain a skillset workforce and you will always have platforms that are new arriving as older assets are retired.
If you have the time to take the piss out of the services how about you help out with recruiting for them instead. Information like this will only drive people away from the military. Yes you may have shown some light on the issues but you haven’t helped to fix have you.
Why not take all that knowledge of and help them recruit so the numbers are there so we can put those ships in the water.
The CDF and all three Chiefs or the respective services need to go. They are useless and nothing but Politicians in Uniform.
Sorry you have no idea. To many politicians have no idea and labour in the past didn’t give a shit of the ADF.
I am not a Labor voter but look what Government signed the contract for all these failed projects. Tiger, MRH90, French Subs, OPV's, Hunter Class Frigates that have blown out by 30B. The LNP. They are both as bad as each other mate. @@gregcooks-qr9wk
No. How dare you. They are not useless.
They do really cool shows every year where they dress up and march in lines.
Hopefully trump will put the boot up the arse of defence.more ships is too hard,make Australia pay the wages anf dntitlements of a navy that can fight.the USN.sad shame job
She'// be roight, its peacetime.
upgrade the Anzac ships with Israeli weapon systems
I love my navy
Hopeless…?? Have you Aussies seen Canada’s Navy…??
No mention of AUKUS in all this, what with the cost of 1 sub estimated to be $12Million dollars a day x by 4 to 8 subs, for 35 yearseven a blind Freddy can see the outcome SHHHHHHHhhhhhhh Don't tell Marles
What bullshit.