You have demonstarted writing presceince on a number of occasions. Is it possible your next novel could be about a balding middle aged man in Melbourne who comes into a vast amount of money, gets a little taller and loses a few kilos? Asking for a friend.
I don't think we're at the stage of drone munitions loitering off China for a couple of months at a time and then coming home. You still need to deploy the drones to the theatre, so you'd need a carrier of some sort. And at present, no one is really working on underwater drone carriers.
Also I suspect a lot of current anti-sub weapons would be effective against drones.
My mistake I was only considering the use of submarines in the belt of water not exceeding 12M in width measured from the territorial sea baseline in Australia.
All I was saying is that current drones can't do what a nuclear sub can, not entirely. I'm not entirely sold on AUKUS and nuclear subs, but they do have a certain capability that is really difficult to replicate with current drone technology. I do think we shouldn't really look at nuclear subs, it's a radical change and incredibly expensive.
We should definitely develop the capability for drones, but expecting them to magically replace submarines this quickly is expecting a bit much.
With the rapid development of drone technology for above and below the surface the utility of drones for any theatre that requires Australia’s military intervention is superior to the the projected AUKUS (or more correctly ranked by military might USUKA) capability, both now and in the future. The only reason to have a nuclear powered sub fleet is to project nuclear power at long range. The US subs we might get if they ever ramp up their production out put enough are probably decades away by which time drone technology will probably have made them obsolete. If we’re engaging China in a nuclear war as a US ally or proxy none of us will be around long enough to know if our subs reached their destination or launched their missiles at their targets. Our main military requirement is defence and Ukraine has shown us how to defend a coastline against a superior naval force with its neutering of Russia’s Black Sea fleet. The exponential advances in drone technology and applications coupled with the low cost of production suggests that by the time we get the the first USUKA sub, the money spent could probably have provided a drone system that would provide a defence capability greater than the promised fleet. Mr Birmingham’s prescient scenario and Ukraine’s continuing disruption of the concept of modern warfare just expose the desperation of Morrison’s thought bubble which is likely to be as useful for Australia’s defence as it was for his electability.
Been a while since i read the first couple of books in the Tomorrow series by Marsden but the main thing that stuck with me was when the characters were out in the bush lamenting the lack of defensive forces, wondering where the yanks were and the only jets they saw were from NZ. Can't remember exactly what the reasoning was but seems entirely possible now. Damn you authors and your predictive brains.
Fingers crossed there is literary room for a West Wing novichok “situation” that resets the entire administration after failure of known asset to advise handlers.
You have demonstarted writing presceince on a number of occasions. Is it possible your next novel could be about a balding middle aged man in Melbourne who comes into a vast amount of money, gets a little taller and loses a few kilos? Asking for a friend.
this is like a monkey paw though . . . . . . you are just as likely to get all that and then end up in the middle of a sharp short explosion.
Worth it.
You know what this means right? Someone in Ukrainian special ops, possibly even Zelenskyy himself, is a John Birmingham fan ❤️
I wonder if anyone has considered how many underwater drones Australia could field for the cost of one ANKUS sub?
Even if we could only get one, that will be more than the number of subs.
I don't think we're at the stage of drone munitions loitering off China for a couple of months at a time and then coming home. You still need to deploy the drones to the theatre, so you'd need a carrier of some sort. And at present, no one is really working on underwater drone carriers.
Also I suspect a lot of current anti-sub weapons would be effective against drones.
https://thedefensepost.com/2024/04/19/anduril-australia-ghost-shark/
Still not a couple of months, and still needs a carrier to get most of the way there. definitely a step in the right direction.
My mistake I was only considering the use of submarines in the belt of water not exceeding 12M in width measured from the territorial sea baseline in Australia.
All I was saying is that current drones can't do what a nuclear sub can, not entirely. I'm not entirely sold on AUKUS and nuclear subs, but they do have a certain capability that is really difficult to replicate with current drone technology. I do think we shouldn't really look at nuclear subs, it's a radical change and incredibly expensive.
We should definitely develop the capability for drones, but expecting them to magically replace submarines this quickly is expecting a bit much.
With the rapid development of drone technology for above and below the surface the utility of drones for any theatre that requires Australia’s military intervention is superior to the the projected AUKUS (or more correctly ranked by military might USUKA) capability, both now and in the future. The only reason to have a nuclear powered sub fleet is to project nuclear power at long range. The US subs we might get if they ever ramp up their production out put enough are probably decades away by which time drone technology will probably have made them obsolete. If we’re engaging China in a nuclear war as a US ally or proxy none of us will be around long enough to know if our subs reached their destination or launched their missiles at their targets. Our main military requirement is defence and Ukraine has shown us how to defend a coastline against a superior naval force with its neutering of Russia’s Black Sea fleet. The exponential advances in drone technology and applications coupled with the low cost of production suggests that by the time we get the the first USUKA sub, the money spent could probably have provided a drone system that would provide a defence capability greater than the promised fleet. Mr Birmingham’s prescient scenario and Ukraine’s continuing disruption of the concept of modern warfare just expose the desperation of Morrison’s thought bubble which is likely to be as useful for Australia’s defence as it was for his electability.
Labor needs to rethink the whole agreement.
Yes. Pretty sure that was the interns job the other day
Didn’t we actually invent the cardboard drones that Ukraine has been using?
Yes, you did, are you a spy?
Been a while since i read the first couple of books in the Tomorrow series by Marsden but the main thing that stuck with me was when the characters were out in the bush lamenting the lack of defensive forces, wondering where the yanks were and the only jets they saw were from NZ. Can't remember exactly what the reasoning was but seems entirely possible now. Damn you authors and your predictive brains.
Wasn't there also a storyline with a drone swarm in the movie "Angel has Fallen"?
Explosive drones launched from the roof of a truck
Almost the exact same premise as what happened in Russia, except they were anti-personnel not anti-material.
Fingers crossed there is literary room for a West Wing novichok “situation” that resets the entire administration after failure of known asset to advise handlers.