ARMADA AUSTRALIANA

  • 228 Respostas
  • 63570 Visualizações
*

LuisPolis

  • Membro
  • *
  • 31
  • Recebeu: 15 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 16 vez(es)
  • +2/-1
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #210 em: Setembro 20, 2021, 04:32:05 pm »

Estou curioso para saber em qual ambiente /ecossistema os australianos vão recrutar seus engenheiros e especialistas em caldeiras nucleares, sendo o país alérgico a essa ciência.

Essa parte será feita pelos Ingleses.


Fora os custos por oito SSN construídos no país, ou seja, as cifras pela transferências de tecnologia e o estabelecimento de uma ferramenta industrial dedicada, bem como de instalações específicas. Serão custos nada módicos tal como estavam previstos os 12 SSK da Naval Group.

Não vai haver transferência de tecnologia. Os equipamentos serão enviados como peças de lego. É só montar sobe supervisão.


Por vinte anos, portanto, a Marinha Real Australiana terá que lidar com seus seis submarinos Collins ... Ao mesmo tempo, terá que treinar tripulações para implementar seu futuro SSN. Isso levanta, novamente, a questão dos recursos humanos.

Eles serão treinados a bordo dos subs Americanos e Britânicos. Os países envolvidos são todos de culturas que sabem quantificar o conhecimento. Os processos são muito simplificados e testados.

 

*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12444
  • Recebeu: 615 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 237 vez(es)
  • +328/-220
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #211 em: Setembro 20, 2021, 07:13:12 pm »
 

*

Kalil

  • Perito
  • **
  • 470
  • Recebeu: 69 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 93 vez(es)
  • +33/-14
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #212 em: Setembro 20, 2021, 09:10:39 pm »

Estou curioso para saber em qual ambiente /ecossistema os australianos vão recrutar seus engenheiros e especialistas em caldeiras nucleares, sendo o país alérgico a essa ciência.

Essa parte será feita pelos Ingleses.


Fora os custos por oito SSN construídos no país, ou seja, as cifras pela transferências de tecnologia e o estabelecimento de uma ferramenta industrial dedicada, bem como de instalações específicas. Serão custos nada módicos tal como estavam previstos os 12 SSK da Naval Group.

Não vai haver transferência de tecnologia. Os equipamentos serão enviados como peças de lego. É só montar sobe supervisão.


Por vinte anos, portanto, a Marinha Real Australiana terá que lidar com seus seis submarinos Collins ... Ao mesmo tempo, terá que treinar tripulações para implementar seu futuro SSN. Isso levanta, novamente, a questão dos recursos humanos.

Eles serão treinados a bordo dos subs Americanos e Britânicos. Os países envolvidos são todos de culturas que sabem quantificar o conhecimento. Os processos são muito simplificados e testados.

Submarinos nucleares é do mais simples e fácil de construir que há, faz mesmo lembrar os legos.

Os ingleses demoraram 20 anos para ter 4  Astute class operacionais, mas vão ser mais rápidos para ajudar os primos..
 

*

LuisPolis

  • Membro
  • *
  • 31
  • Recebeu: 15 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 16 vez(es)
  • +2/-1
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #213 em: Setembro 20, 2021, 09:38:59 pm »

Estou curioso para saber em qual ambiente /ecossistema os australianos vão recrutar seus engenheiros e especialistas em caldeiras nucleares, sendo o país alérgico a essa ciência.

Essa parte será feita pelos Ingleses.


Fora os custos por oito SSN construídos no país, ou seja, as cifras pela transferências de tecnologia e o estabelecimento de uma ferramenta industrial dedicada, bem como de instalações específicas. Serão custos nada módicos tal como estavam previstos os 12 SSK da Naval Group.

Não vai haver transferência de tecnologia. Os equipamentos serão enviados como peças de lego. É só montar sobe supervisão.


Por vinte anos, portanto, a Marinha Real Australiana terá que lidar com seus seis submarinos Collins ... Ao mesmo tempo, terá que treinar tripulações para implementar seu futuro SSN. Isso levanta, novamente, a questão dos recursos humanos.

Eles serão treinados a bordo dos subs Americanos e Britânicos. Os países envolvidos são todos de culturas que sabem quantificar o conhecimento. Os processos são muito simplificados e testados.

Submarinos nucleares é do mais simples e fácil de construir que há, faz mesmo lembrar os legos.

Os ingleses demoraram 20 anos para ter 4  Astute class operacionais, mas vão ser mais rápidos para ajudar os primos..

Não foi isso que quis dizer. O que quis dizer é que os australianos não vão gastar em investigação como o Brasil. Os subs serão montados sob supervisão ou melhor será o RU e EUA a irem montar os mesmos na Austrália.
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12411
  • Recebeu: 2252 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 2907 vez(es)
  • +1791/-3828
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #214 em: Setembro 21, 2021, 02:06:49 pm »
French MoD Setting The Record Straight On Australian Submarine Affair

The spokesperson of the French Ministry of Defense (MoD), Hervé Grandjean, took to Twitter today to set the record straight on the "Australian submarine affair".

Xavier Vavasseur  21 Sep 2021

Australia last week announced its intention to acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines (SSN) as part of an enhanced trilateral security partnership between Australia, the UK and the US dubbed AUKUS. This announcement also means the end of the Attack Class Submarine Program which sparked a major diplomatic crisis between France and its three allies.

For the record, the Australian Government selected Naval Group (then known as DCNS) as its preferred international partner for the design of 12 Future submarines for the Royal Australian Navy on April 26 2016. In the SEA1000 project, DCNS was competing with the Shortfin Barracuda design against Germany’s ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) Type 216 and Japan’s Soryu-class designs. Based on the new Barracuda nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) of the French Navy (the first ship has already been delivered), Australia’s Attack-class submarine was set to be 97 meters in length and 8.8 meters in diameter.  Lockheed Martin was announced as the Future Submarine Combat System Integrator in September 2016 and the Design Build and Integration Contract was signed 12 January 2018.

The recently cancelled Attack-class program was set to see the first of twelve new submarines start construction in 2023 and be delivered in the mid-2030s. The new plan under the AUKUS initiative aims at starting to build the first of at least eight SSNs from the 2030ies.

In this context, Hervé Grandjean, spokesman of the French Mod published today a long and detailed thread on Twitter:

In the last few days, everything and its opposite has been said about the Australian submarine contract. The safety of Australians and the performance of our industrialists deserve better than peremptory statements. A #thread to better understand the Australian submarine affair.

— Porte-parole du ministère des Armées (@HerveGrandjean) September 21, 2021
France and submarines are a serious business.

Over the past 120 years, France has built more than 250 submarines, including more than 230 conventional-powered ones. The feedback in terms of engineering and know-how is considerable.

The French project benefited directly from the technological assets of the Suffren nuclear attack submarine, as well as from Naval Group’s expertise, gained from numerous Scorpene programs sold for export (Chile, Malaysia, India, Brazil)

In many ways, the performance of the Attack submarine offered by France to the Australians was better than that offered by a nuclear submarine. Why?

Particularly in terms of acoustics, the discretion of a conventional submarine remains under certain circumstances paradoxically better than that of a nuclear submarine: a conventional submarine does not have a permanent cooling system for its reactor in operation.

The silent speed (at which a submarine can listen without being detected) was particularly high thanks to the pump-jet technology, that very few countries master.

The submarine proposed to Australia was of oceanic class, meaning it had very high autonomy and range capabilities.

France and Australian submarines: the customer is king

In 2009, the Australian Defence White Paper, two years after the start of the Collins replacement project, already said: “The Government has ruled out nuclear propulsion for these submarines”.

In August 2021, the joint press release of the French and Australian defense and foreign affairs ministers still stated, “Ministers underlined the importance of the Future Submarine program.”

On the same day as the AUKUS announcement, the Australians wrote to France to say that they were satisfied with the submarine’s achievable performance and with the progress of the program. In short: forward to launching the next phase of the contract.

Returning to the surface to recharge the batteries is inherent to a diesel-electric submarine. This was the Australian request.

A nuclear submarine has, by nature, a greater projection capability than a conventional submarine. The planned tonnage of the SM Attack (between 5,000 and 6,000 tonnes) was large enough to provide the projection capability required for Australian naval operations.

The Australian choice: bad news for… the Australians.

The first Attack submarines were to be delivered by 2030. With this new AUKUS partnership, it will be more like 2040. That’s a long time, when you see how fast China is militarizing…#FastIsBeautiful

According to a June 2021 Congressional Research Service report, the production costs of the last two Virginia SSNs ordered (35th and 36th) would be $6.91 billion, or $3.46 billion per unit (€2.95 billion). Much more expensive than a French Barracuda for example…#GoodManagement

The September 17 announcement indicates that the nuclear submarines will be built in Australia. But Australia says it does not want a nuclear industry, neither civilian nor military. #Coherence

Are we to understand that the United States will provide complete nuclear boiler rooms to be integrated into submarines, with teams of American technicians to ensure commissioning, maintenance and perhaps even operation? #Sovereignty

Investments in infrastructure capable of hosting nuclear submarines in Australia, necessary to prevent any environmental risk, will be expensive and complex. #Complexity

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/09/french-mod-setting-the-record-straight-on-australian-submarine-affair/
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

Kalil

  • Perito
  • **
  • 470
  • Recebeu: 69 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 93 vez(es)
  • +33/-14
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #215 em: Setembro 21, 2021, 04:08:35 pm »

Estou curioso para saber em qual ambiente /ecossistema os australianos vão recrutar seus engenheiros e especialistas em caldeiras nucleares, sendo o país alérgico a essa ciência.

Essa parte será feita pelos Ingleses.


Fora os custos por oito SSN construídos no país, ou seja, as cifras pela transferências de tecnologia e o estabelecimento de uma ferramenta industrial dedicada, bem como de instalações específicas. Serão custos nada módicos tal como estavam previstos os 12 SSK da Naval Group.

Não vai haver transferência de tecnologia. Os equipamentos serão enviados como peças de lego. É só montar sobe supervisão.


Por vinte anos, portanto, a Marinha Real Australiana terá que lidar com seus seis submarinos Collins ... Ao mesmo tempo, terá que treinar tripulações para implementar seu futuro SSN. Isso levanta, novamente, a questão dos recursos humanos.

Eles serão treinados a bordo dos subs Americanos e Britânicos. Os países envolvidos são todos de culturas que sabem quantificar o conhecimento. Os processos são muito simplificados e testados.

Submarinos nucleares é do mais simples e fácil de construir que há, faz mesmo lembrar os legos.

Os ingleses demoraram 20 anos para ter 4  Astute class operacionais, mas vão ser mais rápidos para ajudar os primos..

Não foi isso que quis dizer. O que quis dizer é que os australianos não vão gastar em investigação como o Brasil. Os subs serão montados sob supervisão ou melhor será o RU e EUA a irem montar os mesmos na Austrália.

Eu percebi, só estou a dizer que este programa de simples não tem nada, será um atraso de muitos anos no que era a previsão original da Marinha australiana. Mesmo com toda a ajuda que possa haver, montar subs nucleares nunca será fácil nem rápido.

Os franceses estavam há vários anos a transformar um projecto que era de um sub nuclear num sub convencional, ironia do destino, esse desenvolvimento vai todo para o lixo para ser substituído por .. um submarino nuclear.
 
Os seguintes utilizadores agradeceram esta mensagem: LuisPolis

*

HSMW

  • Moderador Global
  • *****
  • 10852
  • Recebeu: 1722 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 4710 vez(es)
  • +278/-136
    • http://youtube.com/HSMW
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #216 em: Setembro 21, 2021, 06:39:25 pm »
É impressão minha ou há demasiada choradeira e um alarido pouco usual na nossa comunicação social sobre este assunto?

É que normalmente estão-se borrifando para os temas de defesa, principalmente sobre as forças armadas nacionais.
Mas os submarinos australianos até são tema abordado no telejornal, como se não tivéssemos problemas cá!!!


Pressão/influência chinesa?

Talvez seja só impressão minha...
« Última modificação: Setembro 21, 2021, 06:40:02 pm por HSMW »
https://www.youtube.com/user/HSMW/videos

"Tudo pela Nação, nada contra a Nação."
 

*

LuisPolis

  • Membro
  • *
  • 31
  • Recebeu: 15 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 16 vez(es)
  • +2/-1
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #217 em: Setembro 21, 2021, 08:50:22 pm »
É impressão minha ou há demasiada choradeira e um alarido pouco usual na nossa comunicação social sobre este assunto?

É que normalmente estão-se borrifando para os temas de defesa, principalmente sobre as forças armadas nacionais.
Mas os submarinos australianos até são tema abordado no telejornal, como se não tivéssemos problemas cá!!!


Pressão/influência chinesa?

Talvez seja só impressão minha...

Por acaso também estou com essa impressão. O curioso é que a choradeira nem sequer foi instântanea (a notícia saiu para aí na sexta-feira e o choradinho começou em força ontem)
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12411
  • Recebeu: 2252 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 2907 vez(es)
  • +1791/-3828
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #218 em: Setembro 22, 2021, 08:59:09 am »
Fala-se nisto na nossa CS?
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

Viajante

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2514
  • Recebeu: 1241 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 579 vez(es)
  • +2138/-771
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #219 em: Setembro 22, 2021, 09:42:42 am »
Fala-se nisto na nossa CS?

É verdade!
Os nossos submarinos foram sempre ostracizados desde a sua recepção, ainda no tempo do Sócrates..... talvez por não ter sido ele a negociar as contrapartidas!
Mas a nossa comunicação social só fala nos submarinos australianos, pelo facto de terem rasgado o contrato com os franceses! Inacreditável a nossa CS.....

Aspecto positivo, os avecs podiam pressionar a Alemanha para que todas as compras militares dos países da UE ficassem fora do défice, através de créditos directos no BCE. Por exemplo estabelecia-se um valor anual de compras, por exemplo de 50 000 milhões de euros para toda a UE, como Portugal tem 2,1% da população, tinha direito a pouco mais de mil milhões de compras anuais, comparticipadas a 85%. O orçamento de estado (ou LPM) só tinha de cobrir os 15% restantes!

Se os avecs são realmente inteligentes, tentavam algo do género!
« Última modificação: Setembro 22, 2021, 09:43:49 am por Viajante »
 

*

LM

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1841
  • Recebeu: 515 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 1649 vez(es)
  • +306/-16
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #220 em: Setembro 22, 2021, 11:20:20 am »
Era uma forma excelente de aumentar as despesas na Defesa europeia - mas, confessso, duvido que o governo e/ou restantes responsáveis políticos, fossem aproveitar... não é prioridade, para eles nem vêem razão para isso (pelo contrario preferem não investir).

Ainda arranjavam forma, tipo a habilidade das rendas dos quartéis, de usar essa folga em outras coisas...       
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
 

*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12444
  • Recebeu: 615 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 237 vez(es)
  • +328/-220
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #221 em: Setembro 23, 2021, 08:38:45 pm »
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12411
  • Recebeu: 2252 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 2907 vez(es)
  • +1791/-3828
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #222 em: Setembro 24, 2021, 10:20:06 am »
Australia in talks to lease, buy existing subs​

September 23, 2021, by Fatima Bahtić

The Australian government will be in discussions to lease or buy the existing submarines from the US and UK in the next 12 to 18 months, Australia’s Minister for Defence Peter Dutton revealed.

The information was confirmed in a transcript released by the defence ministry three days ago. Last week, the government announced its plans to build at least eight nuclear-powered submarines under a new Indo-Pacific security partnership with the United States and Britain, AUKUS.

Nuclear powered submarines have superior characteristics of stealth, speed, maneuverability, survivability and substantial endurance compared to the conventional ones. These abilities allow nuclear-powered submarines to operate in contested areas with a lower risk of detection.

The first initiative under AUKUS is for Australia to acquire nuclear-powered submarine technology, focusing on identifying the optimal pathway to deliver the submarines.

https://www.navaltoday.com/2021/09/23/australia-in-talks-to-lease-buy-existing-subs/
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12411
  • Recebeu: 2252 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 2907 vez(es)
  • +1791/-3828
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #223 em: Setembro 29, 2021, 03:43:57 pm »

Click to Enlarge. The U.S. Navy's Virginia Class, and Royal Navy's Astute Class, are broadly comparable. They can both carry 38 torpedo-sized weapons. This is significantly more than Australia's current Collins Class. These can include Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles.

The 5 Main Options For Australia’s AUKUS Nuclear Submarine Deal

As Australia looks set to join the elite club of nuclear submarine operators, we explore the options. The U.S. Navy's Virginia Class? The Royal Navy's Astute Class? Or something new? We have identified the 5 most obvious candidates.

H I Sutton  29 Sep 2021

Since the announcement that Australia will build nuclear-powered submarines on September 15, speculation has been rife as to which submarines are being considered. The partners, Australian-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS), have given themselves 18 months to come up with a plan.

Few details have trickled out since the joint announcement. So the question remains, which type of nuclear submarine will Australia get? Stepping back, let’s explore the options.

We can be confident that the submarine will essentially be British or American. There are five main options to consider.

The first two are the U.S. Navy and Royal Navy’s existing designs, the (1) Virginia Class and (2) Astute Class. Then there are the corresponding next generation attack submarine programs, the (3) SSN(X) and (4) SSN(R). And lastly, (5) a whole new design but leveraging technology from US and UK.

More ambitiously it might be a substantially indigenous design with only minimal input from US or UK. Or perhaps the next generation submarine projects of all three countries will be combined into a single type, to be built in all three countries. These possibilities feel less likely at this point.

Other honorable mentions could include a fourth country’s design such as France or India. Or China or Russia (as if!). Or only second-hand submarines. Maybe even older ballistic missile types (SSBNs) repurposed as attack submarines. None of these solutions really ring true with the original announcement and are not being explored any further in this article.

1. Virginia Class – America’s trusted attack submarine
The first type which comes to many lips is the U.S. Navy’s Virginia Class. No one doubts its capabilities, and commonality with the US Navy would yield training and support benefits. It uses US weapons systems, which the RAN already has in its inventory, such as the Mk.48 ADCAP torpedo.

And its vertical launch system (VLS) gives compatibility with Tomahawk cruise missiles. Australia is already set to acquire these, but for the surface fleet. It would be natural to put them aboard the Virginias too.

In fact the Virginias make less sense without Tomahawk or some other missile to put into the VLS. The current Block-IV Virginias have 12 vertical missiles, and the Block-V will have 40. The Block-V’s capacity seems overkill, so a Block-IV appears more likely. Although benefiting from some advancements from later blocks.

A challenge with the Virginia Class could be the cost of setting up Australian production. Although there is speculation that Australia could acquire the boats straight off US production lines, this isn’t in the spirit of the announcement. And US yards have years of Virginia class construction ahead. So a new set of tooling would need to be made to set up a new production line in Australia.

2. Astute Class – the British option
The Royal Navy’s Astute class is broadly equivalent to the Virginia Class. Similar in overall size and capability, it may have a couple of advantages which might attract the RAN. The first is that, unlike with the Virginias, tooling might already be available. The last of the Royal Navy’s 7 boats, HMS Agincourt, is expected to be floated in the next couple of years. This might free up the tooling which could be shipped to Australia, representing a significant cost and time saving.

Another potential strength of the Astute is that it has a smaller crew. Still much larger than the current Collins Class, that is to be expected for a long-range nuclear boat, but smaller than the Virginia’s. The Astute is crewed by 98-109 people, while the Virginias normally have around 135. The Collin’s for comparison has 58, so we are talking about at least doubling the submariner needs.

A challenge for the Astute option might be the nuclear reactor. The current PWR2 reactor is no longer in production. Potentially the newer PWR3, or a US reactor, could be fitted, but this would complicate things.

At any rate an Australian Astute Class boat would likely have some modifications to suit RAN needs. We can speculate that these might include an alternative sonar and possibly US weapons to keep continuity with the Collins. But it is anyway compatible with tube-launched Tomahawks.

Some technologies for the next generation SSN(R) design could also be incorporated, which brings us to the next two options.

3 & 4. Next Generation Attack Submarines
Joining one of the existing next-generation projects, SSN(X) and SSN(R), could allow Australia to enter the nuclear submarine club at the very top. Advances in propulsion, sonar, stealth, quantum computing, integration with uncrewed underwater vehicles and so on, would be baked in.

It would also allow the other party, US or UK, to more directly share the development costs, which might be more attractive. The challenge of course will be timelines. Australia needs new submarines to be in the water in 2040s, and the current Collins Class will only last until around 2048. Both the SSN(X) and SSN(R) are expected to start getting wet in the 2030s. But timelines on these types of project are always likely subject to skepticism. Especially if another navy joins the party and adds requirements.

One key technology which hasn’t been discussed much is hypersonic weapons. The US Navy appears to be going that way, and possibly the Royal Navy too. If the RAN want to future-proof, them might consider this variable. Which boat lines them up best for future weapons?

The next-generation boats are also expected to be larger than the current types. Partly this will be due to improved stealth with new propulsion technologies. But in the submarine game, larger normally means more expensive.

5. A truly Australian design
By going their own way, Australia could build a submarine tailored to their needs while still leveraging key British or American technologies. The result might be a smaller and cheaper boat, yet still giving the RAN the main advantages of nuclear power.

Of course this option takes the biggest risk in design terms, even if the end product is more modest. In particular, it would place a strain on the limited pool of naval architects and engineers needed to design it. This is actually true of all the options above, but more so with this one. Would the Australian program be poaching designers from the SSN(X) and SSN(R) programs?

Outlook
Whatever the options being considered, building nuclear submarines in Australia will take decades. In the meantime the current Collins Class diesel-electric submarines will be upgraded to keep them operable.

The RAN might also consider leasing US Navy or Royal Navy boats. Several Los Angeles Class and Trafalgar Class boats are due for retirement in the coming years. These could be extended for a few years until the fuel runs out. Maybe even moored in port as stationary training platforms. In addition to these types of progressive steps, RAN submariners could become a common sight aboard British and American boats. And Australian engineers too.

Stepping back again, it is a massive undertaking for the RAN. But they are lucky to have the AUKUS partnership which opens the door to these illusive technologies.

The biggest threat may be in the process. The boats are all excellent, there is almost no bad option. But an indecision or ambiguity could lead to delays.

And regardless of the RAN program, we may see more countries going for nuclear submarines. And China, the focus of the AUKUS submarine deal, won’t slow down to accommodate Australia’s challenges.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2021/09/the-5-main-options-for-australias-aukus-nuclear-submarine-deal/
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 12411
  • Recebeu: 2252 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 2907 vez(es)
  • +1791/-3828
Re: ARMADA AUSTRALIANA
« Responder #224 em: Outubro 06, 2021, 04:02:34 pm »

The future HMAS Stalwart. second of two new replenishment ships for Australia built in Spain, will commission in 2022. RAN photo.

https://seawaves.com/
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas