With potential conflict brewing in the region, Ben Packham, The Australian’s renowned Foreign Affairs and Defence correspondent, unravels the $7.8 billion lethal weapon load-out that will keep Australia safe.
For a Government that is now acknowledging less than 10 years warning, they aren't actually signing many contracts. Announcements are great, but what is actually contracted?
ADF are losing members at 15% a year. They are to the point of paying lumps sums just to keep drivers in their contracts. Lumps sums used to only be for technical positions. Due to hemorrhaging members, they're paying everyone...
The government must turn it's northern islands such as Cocos island, Christmas island, Melville and even Hammond, Horn and Thursday islands into long range missile/radar, air bases if it is going to take Australia's defence seriously!
Australia needs it’s own military industrial manufacturing capabilities. If we have very long to long range weapons systems, shouldn’t that mean we can use less expensive lower tech “ bomb trucks / aircraft “ delivery vehicles . that can stay loitering out of harms way & from many different angles of attack. Using our more capable assets to spot , identifying & track targets? Surely that’s one way to put more ordnance down range for less cost . We also need a cheaper decoy missile that mimics the real missiles to soak up the enemies anti air defence weapons???.
It doesn't work that way matey. Australia needs a lot of other shit before we can even do what you're talking about...we can't even build train stations or get trains to run properly...what your proposing is decades away.
@@Aaronsmith-cu8ii that’s the whole problem! Everything is decades away & it’s all to late & out dated by the times it’s ready . Or it may never be ready or operational & way over budget!
Australia has it's own manufacturing capability, every single thing you've mentioned is getting moved on. The Ghost Bat is a joint US/Aust product, the Wedgetail E7a Aircraft , own missile manufacturing, Huntsman Howitzers, The SCRAM hypersonic engine, and that's not all. There's the Bushmaster and the new Redback IFV and combat-tested cardboard drones, (brilliant) . We're also involved with the new expansion in manufacturing artillery ordance. And this was a simple ten minute Google search. Look it up , we're getting good at shit - no harm in acknowledging that.
@@timfirth977 oh yeah! So what numbers of production are we talking ? How many units per week / month ? How many do we have in inventory right now & how quickly can we replace them ? How much do these systems cost & how many of these systems will be produced after a 1st initial wave of attacks ? Better late then never I guess @ making some sort of start . Hopeless in my opinion. Cardboard drones! fantastic & exactly the sort of thing a nation such as Australia needs . With a HUGE island landmass & coastline, tiny population & only a extremely tiny population of fit , willing & able fighters . We need massive amounts of simple, cheap & reasonably efficient & effective systems. That can be operated by less then desirable people / fighters . That allows the very few of our best to carry on with their tasks . However the majority of the dream equipment you mentioned, far to little, far to late in my opinion. Heads need to roll & a new national defence strategy is needed ! Only my opinion obviously! Absolutely zero faith in our current government and agencies!
@@timfirth977 sorry if my last post was a bit stabby. Just woke up & rushed for time. I feel it's important to have these conversations & the fastest way forward is a blend of low to very low tech meshed with advanced tech. If cardboard , wood & fabric can be used . It should . Those materials could potentially make things semi stealth & harder to detect. Being innovative, efficient & energy independent goes along way to the strategic health of our island continent. Being isolated & cut off, but sustaining our ability too hold out & fend off our attackers is just one strategic tactical advantage of our island nation . The ability to go it alone is a must imo.
Australia must have long-range strike weapons. This is a must for the defence of a large country like Australia. Drones and missiles are the weapons needed for the modern battlefield. Australia must be able to design and manufacture these never weapons.
Need to talk about space capabilities too. Satellite defence and attack is very important because so many other systems piggy back off it, and rely on it.
Oh yeah lets buy more stuff and get it delivered in 50 years. Lets not look at more affordable and just as effective measures. When the massive Chinese Pearl Harbour event happens which is matter of time not if or how we still wont have many of those systems.
work on sovereign capability & how long we could sustain military action .. we're way too reliant on others. Design & build nxt-gen conventionally-powered Collins, suddenly u'll generate well-paid local jobs & restore manufacturing capability, arm them 2 the teeth & with vertical missile launchers providing the long reach u think only nuclear will deliver. We'll then b able 2 park anywhere in our region, build stronger regional partnerships, save money 4 the domestic agenda & create strategic options. Won't even b able 2 park in NZ, our closest 5-eye partner in the region. We've placed ourselves in a zero-sum dilemma. Sacrificing Army way too risky on an assumption.
I reckon East Timor, PNG and Pacific nations should be integrated more with ADF, Hard cover bases, protected ports built too! Australian Foreign Legion? National Guards? Triple border force for a start! Can’t even keep Indo fisherman out let alone Chinese Special Forces!
Your right, once a missile is fired it is fired. I believe we should take notes of the Viet Cong and how they waged guerrilla warfare on a much superior enemy = and won ! Now is the time to train militia, not when the enemy is at the gates !!! FFS !
The one saving grace is that it will be very difficult if not impossible for an enemy to invade us and be able to hold ground, there really isn’t anyone in this region with the force projection capabilities to be a serious threat
HIIMARS, I do remember a lot of projects where they pay millions for the product, but not the missiles that needs to be affixed to that product. Example was an anti ship sea station helicopter, where purchases the anti ship missiles were no longer feasible, so the whole air frame got binned. More F22s and F35s, with a multitude of missiles and means to defend our shores from China or Indonesia etc. our strategic minds need to think for the now and not the future. I do agree that our country is isolated, but the air and sea capabilities are still lacking. Think Austral/Asia, the islands to our north and making a better alliance with New Zealand eg. The Marines based in Darwin, that can only do so much, but basing strategic assets here would be a massive advantage. I’m not talking about bombers, early warning radar and SAM sites to shoot down ICBMs. Better ISR even though we’ve got our indigenous units to the north, but is the threat going to come from the north?
The overriding theme to this new procurement seems to be broadly anti-access area, denial. This is clearly and at current tensions with China and visiting conflict around Taiwan. The real question in this, is anti-access to what? They’re broadly one of two scenarios Australia’s involvement in any conflict with China over Taiwan. Firstly, Australia is involved in directly with the flying forces on and around Taiwan. In which case such anti-access area, denial hardware is relevant. The second scenario however has Australia playing and assisting role where the US applies to Australia and uses our territory as a staging ground. In this instance, the most likely response from China would be direct attack on Australian territory using long-range missiles. While we have affective anti-missile defences on enable frigates, we currently have extremely limited capability on land to defend ourselves from such attacks by China. It is foreseeable that China may use as limited number of non-nuclear ballistic missiles targeting our capital cities, and other significant infrastructure. For this scenario, Australian age the most advanced anti-missile defences. Patriot, batteries, and Iris T type missile systems.
Perhaps Australia is under the impression that if the second scenario were to play out, then the US would take responsibility for the majority of the cruise missile defence of shared military infrastructure.
How is the Ghost Bat a "loyal wingman" if it's so slow, only 296km/h? Hard to see the case for relying on an unmanned air capability if they're this slow.
@@antonroux6737 Neither the F-35 nor Super Hornet supercruise, so transit isn't an issue, and they're unlikely to be sticking all that close to the 'mothership' during air combat. I also feel that people have overemphasised the teaming of Loyal Wingmen with fast jets; I suspect they'll get just as much use accompanying AWACS and other slower high-value assets.
Australian gun culture needs to change as well, we should have firearm holders not be demonised for having a hobby. And we need to have a look at our self defense laws.
Definitely, it’d be stupid for our citizens not to be armed in such uncertain times, especially with how incompetent our government is, us Aussies gotta start taking taking our personal safety into our hands and not rely on the government to do it themselves
No offence but this has a certain north korean vibe. It just rubs the wrong way somehow. It is good the military is get appropriate equipment but boasting it about umm. Also proabbly not so brilliant to tell any potential enemies all your capabilities because they can easily develop counter measures.
A huge change for the Army eh? What like giving them a proper Air Defence capability…….modern armoured transportation in relevant numbers……… Our military needs to stop following the mainstream media and traditional western allies rhetoric and propaganda. Spend more time and effort building relationships with our neighbours like we should be and not get dragged into trouble that isn’t relevant or real!
One of those reviews done by EY, Deloitte, PWC or KPMG was it. I think the bigger story HERE is to show an itemised list of how the money was spent on the review...
