My regular update on conflict and confrontation in Ukraine, the Middle East and the Pacific, accompanied by recommended readings on modern war and future conflict.
RE: Suffren class SSN's. A good deal of the problems with working with the french was their attitude and work ethic. Going back there is not an option especially if we are not buying OTS but insisting on modified fitouts for weapon systems. If we need a strategic intelligence gathering capability SSN Attack boats are not the answer. As the name suggests they are for area denial. Forward basing of a diesel electric fleet with better battery tech (see Japanese) and AIP fitted with surveillance drones can do that job. Investment in emerging magnetic influence satellite technology is making the littoral space ever more transparent. A two class fleet can then have time to mature bringing on SSN's if we really need them (not just want them). The question is and remains : what capability are we really trying to achieve here? I would argue that given our geographical location and population; generating a asymmetric advantage is really what we need. Not sure that Billions of sunk cost on a SSN program is going to generate that.
Like everybody else I am waiting for Trump's inauguration before I say I told you so. Everybody is wondering what is going to happen, including Putin, Zelensky and NATO.
Hard to keep up with events in Syria. Looks like they are in Damascus already. As for what will happen once Assad is deposed, watch this space.
I did read the article re AUKUS submarines and I understand the sense of deja vu, but in general I agree. The cost and timeframe around the AUKUS SSN submarines is so exposed to blowouts and outright failure that it could be seen as almost criminal for any Australian government to pursue this path. I do not know much about the French SSN submarines or any other possible alternatives, but for all the reasons mentioned in the article I believe the current AUKUS Pillar 1 is a poor option when it comes to the defence of Australia.
RE: Suffren class SSN's. A good deal of the problems with working with the french was their attitude and work ethic. Going back there is not an option especially if we are not buying OTS but insisting on modified fitouts for weapon systems. If we need a strategic intelligence gathering capability SSN Attack boats are not the answer. As the name suggests they are for area denial. Forward basing of a diesel electric fleet with better battery tech (see Japanese) and AIP fitted with surveillance drones can do that job. Investment in emerging magnetic influence satellite technology is making the littoral space ever more transparent. A two class fleet can then have time to mature bringing on SSN's if we really need them (not just want them). The question is and remains : what capability are we really trying to achieve here? I would argue that given our geographical location and population; generating a asymmetric advantage is really what we need. Not sure that Billions of sunk cost on a SSN program is going to generate that.
Like everybody else I am waiting for Trump's inauguration before I say I told you so. Everybody is wondering what is going to happen, including Putin, Zelensky and NATO.
Hard to keep up with events in Syria. Looks like they are in Damascus already. As for what will happen once Assad is deposed, watch this space.
I did read the article re AUKUS submarines and I understand the sense of deja vu, but in general I agree. The cost and timeframe around the AUKUS SSN submarines is so exposed to blowouts and outright failure that it could be seen as almost criminal for any Australian government to pursue this path. I do not know much about the French SSN submarines or any other possible alternatives, but for all the reasons mentioned in the article I believe the current AUKUS Pillar 1 is a poor option when it comes to the defence of Australia.
Who are HTS? How many? How are they trained, equipped, & supplied? Who's paying the bills?