The US Navy's Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Admiral Mike Gilday, who is the professional head of the US Navy, was reported on September 24, 2021 as saying:
“This [Australian nuclear submarine program] is a very long-term effort that’ll be decades, I think, before a submarine goes in the water — it could be.
I don’t see this as a short-term timeline.
We have an 18-month exploratory period that’ll get after a lot of these questions and help Australia come to grips with exactly what they need to do to get in the path akin to the United States Navy,”
4 comments:
We may get fixated on SSN. The arms race goes on.
South Korea successfully tested a solid rocket booster for space launches vehicles. My guess like the solid rocket Japan has for space launch.
And South Korea successfully tested an SRBN with a ~6 tons warhead. They are working to increase it to ~8 tons. My guess, they can strap it at some time to the above solid rocket as a 2nd stage. Moving right along towards an SS-20 class capability, probably with tungsten MIRVs.
And the US successfully tested in free flight a Mach 5 scramjet.
KQN
Hi KQN
Do you have a link or two to "South Korea successfully tested an SRBN [SRBM?] with a ~6 tons warhead"
Presumably it will be/has been ground, not submarine, launched?
Cheers
Pete
Pete
SRBM is ground launched.
https://news.v.daum.net/v/20210928030056036
KQN
Thanks KQN
I think...
For this very long, yet confusing, unverified, South Korean article https://news.v.daum.net/v/20210928030056036 ie:
[Exclusive] "The military is in front of the world's largest '7-8 t warhead' ballistic missile development"
Shin Shin-jin Sept 28 2021
A government source "de facto nuclear weapons class" with a
range of 300 km.. Test launch "WITHIN A FEW YEARS"
"PLAN FOR DEPLOYMENT IN THE EARLY 2030s"
Retranslation and conflation of an already happened alleged 6 ton Ballitic missile launch
with a "de facto nuclear weapons class" 7-8 ton ballistic missile launch "WITHIN A FEW YEARS" and "PLAN FOR DEPLOYMENT IN THE EARLY 2030s"
Would cause a North Korean nuclear response because NK could NOT assess whether such a monster SK warhead was nuclear, MIRVed and/or containing many decoys.
Much more clarity and verification in a Shorter, English as a first language article is sorely needed.
Regards
Pete
Post a Comment