Welcome to Global Defense Corp, your source for all things defense and aerospace industry. Subscribe to Global Defense Corp. Follow us on Twitter: @globaldefcorp Instagram: @globaldefensecorp Facebook: @globaldefensecorp
Visit our website: www.globaldefensecorp.com
Пікірлер
We need to STOP all the BULLSHIT about what we're getting for the frigates and destroyers and put some air defence hardware on the BOTH Queen Elizabeth class carriers BEFORE some terrorist or terrorist state attacks them from the air! Because at the moment they're doing a very good impression of target bullseye!
I read that the Navy wanted a third Canberra class ship, but the government said no because lack of manpower
The best fit general purpose frigate are The MEKO A-200 and the Mogami class frigate followed by Navantia's F110 and South Korean Deagu class frigate. The first 2 have tree dimensional capabilities and lower crew numbers while the Deagu class frigate would probably have the fastest time. My gut feeling is to go with one of the Asian ships to form better interoperability ties.
Hypersonic missiles were developed by Australia 15 years ago and as you say Hi Fire, sci fire abd hi five were the names, in conjunction also with Norway. This is a up date of this, the Australians were the first to make a scram jet engine work.
Let’s hope our contribution to this R&D translates into Australian acquisition of these missiles in numbers that constitute a deterrent to potential adversaries. We’re building a one billion dollar missile construction facility in collaboration with a US military conglomerate. Let’s hope they pull their fingers out and add this technology to produce another production line or two!
Lol America will share the technology with Australia because Australia helped develop it through HIFIRE joint hypersonic tests even said it on all information about HACAM if look hard enough. Early 2000's Australian Ray Stalker was first to get essence of flight from scramjets, more thrust then drag. Australian company a part of HIFIRE has built world fastest scramjet at mach 12 and just won a USA HYCAT DUI contract to build USA hypersonic vehicles. Hypersonixs is the name and will test fly a scramjet drone by next year.. Ray Stalker also invented Stalker tubes a special free piston hypersonic wind tunnel to test hypersonics in real life flight conditions, China copied this design and now claim they have world fastest at mach 35. Australia tunnel was mach 30
Most people don't realise that Australia leads the world in scramjet research, amongst many other related things.
Who have hypersonic missiles technology 🎯🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@PeterLamin-pi6rv USA, Australia, Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, China, North Korea, Israel. That's who.
The Imperative for an Australian Nuclear Deterrent in the Face of China's Existential Threat. Australia's strategic security landscape is increasingly fraught with challenges that pose an existential threat to its sovereignty. Foremost among these is China's rising military might, whose expansionist policies and aggressive posturing in the Indo-Pacific region have raised alarms about Australia's future stability and security. Given the current state of Australia's defence capabilities, the acquisition of nuclear weapons emerges as a crucial strategy to deter potential aggression and ensure national survival. Strategic Vulnerabilities and Defense Shortcomings: - Australia boasts a vast and sparsely populated coastline stretching over 25,000 kilometres, presenting a formidable challenge for defence and surveillance. The Australian Defence Force (ADF) is under-equipped to secure this extensive border against a superior military force like China. Key shortcomings include: 1. Insufficient Defense Expenditure: Australia's defence budget, while significant, is spread thin across multiple domains, resulting in a lack of advanced and comprehensive land, sea, and air deterrents. The current expenditure levels are inadequate to match the rapid military advancements seen in China. 2. Manpower Constraints: The ADF is experiencing its lowest manpower levels since World War II. This limited personnel pool hampers Australia's ability to project power and sustain prolonged defensive operations, particularly against a numerically superior foe. This is evidenced by the new Australian Foreign Legion forecast to boost recruit numbers. 3. Technological and Capability Gaps: The ADF lacks the advanced technological edge and integrated defence systems to effectively counter modern threats. This includes deficits in missile defence, cyber capabilities, and strategic mobility. The Case for a Nuclear Deterrent. In the face of these challenges, nuclear weapons offer a potent solution that can offset conventional military disadvantages and provide a credible deterrent against existential threats. The strategic rationale for Australia to pursue nuclear armament includes: 1. Deterrence Against Superior Forces: Nuclear weapons serve as a powerful deterrent, compelling any potential aggressor to reconsider the risks of a military incursion. The mere presence of a credible nuclear arsenal can induce hesitation and strategic caution in adversaries, including China. 2. Force Multiplier: A nuclear capability would act as a force multiplier, significantly enhancing Australia’s defensive posture without needing proportional increases in conventional forces. This would enable Australia to maintain a more balanced and sustainable defence budget. 3. Sovereignty and Autonomy: Possessing nuclear weapons would enhance Australia’s strategic autonomy, reducing dependence on allied support in times of crisis and enabling more decisive and independent defence policies. 4. Geopolitical Stability: A nuclear-armed Australia would contribute to regional stability by establishing a balance of power. This could deter China's direct aggression, coercive tactics, and geopolitical maneuvering. Conclusion. In a rapidly evolving security environment, the acquisition of nuclear weapons presents a compelling strategic imperative for Australia. Faced with China's overwhelming military superiority and constrained by current defence capabilities, Australia must consider a nuclear deterrent to secure its sovereignty, safeguard its vast coastline, and ensure national survival. By developing a credible nuclear arsenal, Australia can transform its strategic landscape, compelling any potential aggressor to think twice before undertaking any kinetic actions against the nation. Australia needs to grow up.
The Imperative for an Australian Nuclear Deterrent in the Face of China's Existential Threat. Australia's strategic security landscape is increasingly fraught with challenges that pose an existential threat to its sovereignty. Foremost among these is China's rising military might, whose expansionist policies and aggressive posturing in the Indo-Pacific region have raised alarms about Australia's future stability and security. Given the current state of Australia's defence capabilities, the acquisition of nuclear weapons emerges as a crucial strategy to deter potential aggression and ensure national survival. Strategic Vulnerabilities and Defense Shortcomings: - Australia boasts a vast and sparsely populated coastline stretching over 25,000 kilometres, presenting a formidable challenge for defence and surveillance. The Australian Defence Force (ADF) is under-equipped to secure this extensive border against a superior military force like China. Key shortcomings include: 1. Insufficient Defense Expenditure: Australia's defence budget, while significant, is spread thin across multiple domains, resulting in a lack of advanced and comprehensive land, sea, and air deterrents. The current expenditure levels are inadequate to match the rapid military advancements seen in China. 2. Manpower Constraints: The ADF is experiencing its lowest manpower levels since World War II. This limited personnel pool hampers Australia's ability to project power and sustain prolonged defensive operations, particularly against a numerically superior foe. This is evidenced by the new Australian Foreign Legion forecast to boost recruit numbers. 3. Technological and Capability Gaps: The ADF lacks the advanced technological edge and integrated defence systems to effectively counter modern threats. This includes deficits in missile defence, cyber capabilities, and strategic mobility. The Case for a Nuclear Deterrent. In the face of these challenges, nuclear weapons offer a potent solution that can offset conventional military disadvantages and provide a credible deterrent against existential threats. The strategic rationale for Australia to pursue nuclear armament includes: 1. Deterrence Against Superior Forces: Nuclear weapons serve as a powerful deterrent, compelling any potential aggressor to reconsider the risks of a military incursion. The mere presence of a credible nuclear arsenal can induce hesitation and strategic caution in adversaries, including China. 2. Force Multiplier: A nuclear capability would act as a force multiplier, significantly enhancing Australia’s defensive posture without needing proportional increases in conventional forces. This would enable Australia to maintain a more balanced and sustainable defence budget. 3. Sovereignty and Autonomy: Possessing nuclear weapons would enhance Australia’s strategic autonomy, reducing dependence on allied support in times of crisis and enabling more decisive and independent defence policies. 4. Geopolitical Stability: A nuclear-armed Australia would contribute to regional stability by establishing a balance of power. This could deter China's direct aggression, coercive tactics, and geopolitical maneuvering. Conclusion. In a rapidly evolving security environment, the acquisition of nuclear weapons presents a compelling strategic imperative for Australia. Faced with China's overwhelming military superiority and constrained by current defence capabilities, Australia must consider a nuclear deterrent to secure its sovereignty, safeguard its vast coastline, and ensure national survival. By developing a credible nuclear arsenal, Australia can transform its strategic landscape, compelling any potential aggressor to think twice before undertaking any kinetic actions against the nation. Australia needs to grow up.
China copies off everybody....nothing new here.. the Americans have a tough choice to make.....the B 21 is aleady super expensive....a new NGAD fighter or Hypersonic missiles.....the ARRW finally flew and dont know too much about the Makos Hypersonic missile....Russias Kinzhals and Zircons have not performed to expectations eince the Pac 3 missiles showed up in Ukraine.
Why is this being released to the public - wasn't the Australian scram jets technology getting copied by China warning enough ????
China copies e everybody......nothing new here...the Americans have a tough choice to make...the 6th gen fighter or Hypersonic missiles. The ARRW finally flew....dont know too much about Lockheeds Mako Hypersonic missile...claims it can maneuver like a real Hypersonic cruise missile unlike the Russian Kinzhal or the Zircon....
Is not really a secret HACAM was developed through HIFIRE joint Australia, USA hypersonic tests and was anounced as part of SCIFIRE and AUKUS of joint developing a scramjet hypersonic missiles for both countries...
Nope.
Just because you can copy it doesn’t mean you can make it work. China has been reverse engineering Russian military equipment for decades and they still can’t make that work. The Russians are also learning this first hand with the captured Western weapons in Ukraine that they could reverse engineer that gear also but without the proper R&D and manufacturing tech, processes and funding behind you, you can’t do shit which is why no one is worried or cares 😂😂 On a simpler level look at all the KFC and Big Mac sauce recipes on the Internet nowadays, no one has yet to copy it exactly the same 😂😂
Yeah! I bet China uses YT as an intelligence source 😂
Siberia is just self defensed
Great news for Indonesia, wonderful aircraft. Australia and Indonesia may not agree on everything, but a free Indo-Pacific is a joint interest we share.
Canada has re kitted hers into basically a type 45 destroyer but there is no way that i see all 15 of them being built....
really?
As an Australian I would be interested in where exactly they will home base these potent aircraft
Wh6 are we building instead of buying warships, 10 years for 1 frigate, useless. Its out of date before its built.
Wow, our most powerful ships got a missile, major defence boost. Out government is embarrassing. 1 missile, thats just weak.
It's for combat system integration testing.
Correction. It is Ukraine that shot down MH17.
Australian defense is as of today based upon Navantia's warships. Some funny guy decided to help the Brexit-Landers to give them some money. The "formidable" hunter class is a full disaster, which has already caused a 20 billion AUD black hole. Your politicians a re dillusionals and corrupts. Only Navantia has proven to be a reliable partner. How many years will you be without submarines??? That is the other state of the art funny idea people. You'd better get a couple of S80 Navantia's Isaac Peral Class in the meanwhile. You can not survive with 3 AWD destroyers, which should have been 10. Additionally, in your new fleet, you need 2 additional AOR Supply. Good luck! 👍👍👍
Australian defense is as of today based upon Navantia's warships. Some funny guy decided to help the Brexit-Landers to give them some money. The "formidable" hunter class is a full disaster, which has already caused a 20 billion AUD black hole. Your politicians a re dillusionals and corrupts. Only Navantia has proven to be a reliable partner. How many years will you be without submarines??? That is the other state of the art funny idea people. You'd better get a couple of S80 Navantia's Isaac Peral Class in the meanwhile. You can not survive with 3 AWD destroyers, which should have been 10. Additionally, in your new fleet, you need 2 additional AOR Supply. Good luck! 👍👍👍
if marles is involved "VERY ALARMING "At arming Australia watch out china" you might get hit wit a touch of Heartburn .
The purchase of 200+ tomahawk missiles is an almost superfluous gesture if Australia doesn’t have the platforms from which they are launched. The likelihood of the Hobart class carrying anymore than eight of them is low given that they only have 48 VLS cells from which to launch them. The ANZACs only have an eight cell VLS. The planned Hunter Class have only 32 VLS, . . . however . . The second batch of the Hunter Class may be the ‘upgunned’ variant of the Hunter Class ( with the multi-mission bay removed - and a second bank of 64 VLS installed ) with 96 VLS in total. IT STANDS TO REASON that the second three vessels of the Class should be able to genuinely accommodate a full land strike capability! Hopefully they acquire some anti ship variants of the tomahawk also. Let’s hope they don’t waste the Tomahawk purchase - or take the opportunity to give our navy genuine deterrent capability
Possible combination is 8 cells for Tomahawks, 8 cells for ESSM, which is 32, and you have 4 blocks of 8 cells, each. Mixture of SM2 AND SM6 missiles. SM6 doubles up as anti ship. The new Naval Strike missile on top of that. It is still a pretty lethal platform.
Concur. The lack of magazine capacity across the fleet will limit the utility of the Tomahawk purchase
We need their business, but it doesnt mean we have to get into bed with them
Seriously the more I hear about the Hunter Class Fuckates the more depressed I get. The $3b Hobart's were a great success story and I can not understand why the program was not just continued ?? By now we could have a fleet of 6. Instead we went to the "never was what we needed" very troubled, very stupid $7b Hunters.
Concur. And why not explore option of adding a section to add additional magazine capacity
@@ianmondon9441 32 VLS for a front-line combatant is not enough. 32 x 4 ESSM's are needed for air defense, the additional 16 the Hobarts have can house the strike capacity, SM-6 and Tomahawk. Then 2 x quad canaster launch systems with the new NSM's and we are set. What we need is Hobart Mk 2. Leave the existing 3 alone and get 3 new Mk2 versions.
Pretty sure that this has been thrown under the bus.
Yet Britain cannot get 13 done ?
This will achieve nothing. War is still coming.
Australian Labor government will sell us out to keep their CCP masters, bring on the election.
Wow ¿ Tan sólo $ 370 Millones ? 😲... pero ¿ Son Dólares o Euros ? 🤔 ¿ alguno sabe ?
We don't have any F35b's so why would we waste money to convert these to carry an aircraft we don't have.
A good and unbiased comparison between two work horses in the sky. My money is on Gripen but I'm a Swede😊
America got Sadan and after Binlader. Why they don’t get Putin? This man is a criminal to stop him is to get Kremlin and Putin. I know it isn’t easy , but the other criminals was so. When Putin is a live we can’t live in peace.
Where do you have this from? Not in any news in Norway.
🤣🤣🤣 Then Bradley and now Redback! Don’t send to Ukraine..otherwise you will have to hide them from Russians!🫡😭😭😭
Great! Manufacture our own defence. Yes, yes, yes.
WHAT DID VIDEO JUST SAY ABOUT AUSTRALIA MAKING THE WORLDS BEST IFV? I CAN SEE IT ISNT.
No matter what we send to war it will still burn just ask clowneski
Australia has already made a few great guns. The Owen was an excellent but unorthodox looking smg and the Austen had an excellent grip setup and worked well
Yeah, I think it's already outdated even before it gets to the troops but that is typical of Australia. We're always a good 30 or 40 years behind the rest of the first world countries. More taxpayers funds pissed away. Just add it to the other $350 Billion being wasted currently. The politicians don't have to pay it back.
The australian government already cut the guts out of the army, by cutting the order from 400 down to 129!
No counter drone systems , would seem to be a sitting duck in the modern battlefield unfortunately
1:57 Should have watched to the end. Iron Fist is being upgraded to counter drones.
I believe that it is in Australia's best interest to go with the HHI Chungnam Class for a number of reasons. It is a regional option already built and undergoing pre-acceptance trials with the South Korean Navy. Australia has been working on building closer defence and economic ties with South Korea and this would certainly help that quest. The Koreans have proven that they are very good at what they do and would probably work very quickly with the RAN to integrate the Australian specific sensors and systems. Build time for the first Chungnam class frigate was around 12 months - which would mean a rapid delivery path for the RAN - for at least the first 3 frigates. Perhaps the 3 - 5 years from design finalisation/contract signing and construction of the first 3 frigates would allow Australia sufficient time to prepare adequate facilities to commence the build of the final 8 frigates locally. I do not think Australia is capable of matching SK's build times but if HHI were to oversee the process maybe build time could be reduced.
Evaluate in Ukraine.
In 2002 the Australian University...the Uni of QLD developed the world's FIRST working scram jet engine after which the Australians and the USA developed hyprsonic missiles under what was called the SciFi program. They exist and the fact that they do is tranparent ,although not acknowledged and I would encourage any one who doubts this, as the people who comment make some very otrageous claims, to say that all you have to do is to google up these events. Just to be able to google it indicates there is a lot more hidden and to one poster......"Andrew 19805 ( probably Chinese or Russian?) I would just say you are wrong.
I dont put much credibility in G F P findings.