A 3D animation showing how a Bofors 57 mm Mk3/Mk110 naval gun reload works. The Bofors 57 mm Mk3/Mk110 is fitted with a two 20-round ready use magazines, two 20-round ammunition cassettes and two 20-round intermediate magazines for a total of 120 rounds.

Hi Ray,

As a “comment” to your article on the “Battle for Australia”, I have added a few lines on the little-known overflight of Geelong, Melbourne, Hobart, Auckland, Wellington and Suva by a “collapsible” Japanese” Glen” float-plane in February 1942 – ie launched from a mother-submarine in Bass Strait. If you choose to include it, it you might wish to use the photograph below of a E14Y Japanese Glen float-plane being launched from a “mother submarine” – see below:

Regards, Ernie Chamberlain

*********

I’d like to comment further on your article on the “Battle for Australia,” I would like to highlight an intriguing but little-known episode from World War II. In February 1942, a Japanese “Glen” floatplane conducted an overflight of several cities, including Geelong, Melbourne, Hobart, Auckland, Wellington, and Suva. This reconnaissance mission is notable due to the unique deployment method: the aircraft was launched from a Japanese I-25 submarine stationed in Bass Strait.

The “Glen” floatplane, designed for such covert operations, was stored in a disassembled state within a watertight hangar on the deck of the submarine. Upon reaching the designated area, the aircraft was quickly assembled and launched, demonstrating the reach and audacity of Japanese reconnaissance efforts during the war.

This operation underscores the strategic importance placed on gathering intelligence and the innovative tactics employed by the Japanese Navy. It also serves as a reminder of the broader scope of wartime activities in the Pacific region, extending beyond the well-documented battles and engagements. Understanding these lesser-known events can provide a more comprehensive view of the complexities and global nature of World War II.

Thanks

Dave Watson

ED: This arrived last night from a mate is the US, it’s an article from a US motoring magazine. I couldn’t copy the photos.

Ford’s foray into electric vehicle (EV) production has encountered significant financial setbacks. Despite ambitious plans to transition towards electric mobility, the company has struggled to achieve profitability in its EV segment. According to Bloomberg, Ford’s losses per electric vehicle exceeded $100,000 in the first quarter of 2024, a stark increase from the previous year’s already substantial deficits. This substantial loss highlights several critical challenges facing Ford and the broader EV market.

Market Dynamics and Decreased Demand

The EV market, which initially showed promising growth, has recently faced a downturn. Factors contributing to the declining demand include high vehicle costs, limited charging infrastructure, and the economic uncertainty affecting consumer spending. As a result, Ford has had to reassess its production targets and scale back orders from battery suppliers, reflecting a broader industry trend of cautious investment amidst fluctuating market conditions.

Production and Supply Chain Challenges

Ford’s significant financial losses also stem from production and supply chain issues. The transition to EV production requires substantial upfront investment in new manufacturing technologies and processes. Additionally, the reliance on a complex supply chain for critical components, such as lithium-ion batteries, has exposed Ford to cost volatility and supply disruptions. These challenges have been exacerbated by global supply chain constraints, leading to increased production costs and delayed vehicle deliveries.

Competitive Landscape and Technological Barriers

The competitive landscape for EVs is intensely crowded, with established automakers and new entrants vying for market share. Companies like Tesla, which have a head start in EV technology and production, have set high benchmarks for cost efficiency and innovation. Ford, despite its legacy and resources, has found it challenging to compete on these fronts. The technological barriers in battery efficiency, range, and charging speed further complicate Ford’s efforts to close the gap with more established EV manufacturers.

Policy and Regulatory Uncertainties

Government policies and regulations play a crucial role in the adoption of EVs. While many regions offer incentives for EV purchases, these policies can be inconsistent and subject to change. Uncertainty around future regulations, such as emissions standards and subsidies, has added another layer of complexity to Ford’s EV strategy. The lack of a stable and supportive policy environment can deter consumers and investors, impacting the overall market growth.

Strategic Shifts and Future Prospects

In response to these challenges, Ford is likely to undertake strategic shifts. This may include focusing on more profitable segments, such as hybrid vehicles, or partnering with technology firms to enhance their EV capabilities. Additionally, Ford might explore alternative business models, like subscription services or fleet sales, to mitigate risks and stabilize revenues.

Despite these setbacks, Ford remains committed to its long-term vision of electrification. The company has announced plans to invest heavily in EV infrastructure, including the development of a dedicated EV platform and the expansion of its charging network. These initiatives are aimed at positioning Ford to capitalize on the anticipated future growth of the EV market.

Conclusion

Ford’s experience underscores the broader challenges and uncertainties facing the automotive industry’s shift towards electrification. While the financial losses are significant, they also highlight the need for strategic adaptation and innovation. As Ford navigates these turbulent waters, its actions will serve as a valuable case study for other automakers and stakeholders in the evolving EV landscape.

.

This landing by the Japanese marked the opening of the Kokoda Campaign – a campaign by Australian forces of the New Guinea Force, based around the 7th Division – to defend Port Moresby, delay the IJA advance until additional Allied forces could muster, and ultimately defeat the IJA forces in Papua. Following the IJA landing, the Japanese quickly advanced inland, seeking an overland route across the Owen Stanley Mountain Range to capture Port Moresby. The most direct and traversable route was the Kokoda Trail, a pathway that snaked through the dense, mountainous and nearly impenetrable jungle of Papua New Guinea. The Kokoda Trail was to become the scene of one of the most well-known campaigns of Australian military history. Over the next four months, Australian soldiers would twice traverse the Kokoda Trail: first withdrawing, then advancing. Major battles would be fought at Oivi, Kokoda Village, Isurava, Eora Creek, Templeton’s Crossing, Efogi, Mission Ridge/Brigade Hill, and Ioribaiwa. Australian victory at Oivi-Gorari over 05-11 November and reaching the Kumusi River on 13 November would signal the end of the Kokoda Campaign. Although further battles would be fought at Buna-Gona and Sanananda to secure Papua New Guinea, the hard-fought campaign across the appalling conditions of the Trail was over. 625 Australian soldiers were killed during the Kokoda Campaign, and over 1,600 wounded. Additionally, in excess of 4,000 soldiers became casualties due to illness. More than 150 Papuans died as members of the Papuan Infantry Battalion or as carriers of critical supplies and wounded along the Kokoda Trail. The four-month campaign was fought in some of the worst conditions Australian soldiers have fought in. The dense jungle, rugged and mountainous terrain, illness, and lack of supplies was just as deadly to Australian soldiers as the Japanese forces. While we know today that Japanese invasion of the Australian mainland was not planned, the Kokoda Campaign was seen at the time to be the final line of defence between the ever-advancing Japanese war machine and home. These factors, along with the skill, endurance, determination, and courage shown by the Australian soldiers have ensured that the Kokoda Campaign has a special place in Australian Army battle honours, and the Anzac legend. The Cove proudly brings to you the third in our Australian Army Battle Honours Series, the history of Australia’s Kokoda Campaign. This video has been a collaboration between The Cove, Australian Army History Unit, Interserv, and Effective Animations.

Australia has released its National Defence Strategy & Integrated Investment Plan 2024. What does this mean for the future of the ADF in terms of new & enhanced capabilities, & when they will be delivered?

The term “Battle for Australia” encompasses the period during World War II when Japan directly threatened the Australian mainland, leading to significant military and civilian efforts to defend the country. This period included several key events and battles from 1942 to 1943.

History

Direct Attacks on Mainland Australia:

After the fall of Singapore on 15 February 1942, Japanese forces launched two significant air raids on Darwin, Northern Territory, on 19 February 1942. These attacks marked the first and largest direct assaults on Australian soil, causing extensive loss of life and damage. Over 230 people were killed, numerous ships were sunk, and infrastructure was heavily damaged.

Battle of the Coral Sea:

In May 1942, the Battle of the Coral Sea took place in the waters northeast of Australia. This was a crucial naval engagement between the Imperial Japanese Navy and Allied forces, primarily the United States and Australia. It was significant for being the first aircraft carrier battle in history and for halting the Japanese advance toward Port Moresby, which was critical in maintaining supply lines between the United States and Australia.

Papua New Guinea Campaign:

From July to September 1942, the Japanese advanced along the Kokoda Track in Papua New Guinea, aiming to capture Port Moresby. Australian forces, comprised largely of militia units and supported by American air power, successfully halted the Japanese advance in harsh jungle terrain. Key battles at Kokoda and Milne Bay marked the first land defeats of Japanese forces during the war.

Japanese Submarine Attacks:

Japanese submarines patrolled Australia’s eastern coast, culminating in the attack on Sydney Harbour on 31 May 1942. Three midget submarines infiltrated the harbor, with one successfully torpedoing the depot ship HMAS Kuttabul, resulting in the deaths of 19 Australian and two British sailors. The submarines continued to menace shipping along the coast until June 1943.

Ongoing Air Raids:

Darwin and other northern Australian towns, such as Broome, Port Hedland, Derby, Katherine, and Townsville, faced repeated air raids. Darwin alone endured more than 60 bombing raids until November 1943, causing additional casualties and destruction.

Military and Civilian Efforts:

Australia mobilized over half a million personnel across the Navy, Army, Air Force, and women’s services to defend the nation. Civilians played a critical role by working in industries supporting the war effort and adhering to wartime regulations, including rationing and movement restrictions.

Sydney Under Attack

On the night of 31 May 1942, Sydney Harbour came under attack from three Japanese midget submarines. The assault resulted in the sinking of HMAS Kuttabul, killing 19 Australians and two British sailors. One torpedo failed to explode, grounding on rocks near Garden Island. Another torpedo was recovered from a sunken submarine and is now displayed at the Australian War Memorial. This attack underscored the immediate threat to Australia’s major cities and coastal areas.

Darwin Air Raids

Darwin’s first air raid on 19 February 1942 was the most severe, intended to cripple the town’s infrastructure and military capabilities. This raid, along with subsequent attacks, resulted in over 250 deaths and widespread damage. Other northern towns such as Broome, where around 70 people, including Dutch civilians and American military personnel, died, also faced aerial bombardments. The persistent air raids extended until November 1943, marking a prolonged period of threat from Japanese forces.

Fast Facts

Important Dates:

• Battle for Australia Day: First Wednesday in September, commemorating all battles for Australia’s defence during 1942–1943.
• Key Battles:

• • Midget submarine attack on Sydney: 31 May/1 June 1942
  • Air raids on Darwin: Starting 19 February 1942
  • Battle of the Coral Sea: 4–8 May 1942
  • New Guinea Campaign: January 1942 to August 1945, including significant battles at Kokoda, Milne Bay, Wau, Huon Peninsula, Wewak, and Bougainville.

Casualties:

• Sydney Harbour Attack: 19 Australian and two British sailors killed on HMAS Kuttabul.
• Darwin Air Raids: Over 250 casualties from various nationalities.
• Papua New Guinea Campaign:

• • Kokoda: More than 600 Australians died, over 1,000 wounded.
  • Milne Bay: Over 160 Australians killed or missing, more than 200 wounded.

The Battle for Australia represents a critical chapter in the nation’s history, highlighting the resilience and determination of its military and civilian populations during World War II.

The Australian government’s plan to allocate $84.5 million over the next five years to establish a regulator for vehicle emissions monitoring is a prime example of bureaucratic overreach and inefficient use of taxpayer money. Announced in the federal budget on May 15, this initiative will see $12.6 million annually funnelled into a new entity, the Cleaner Car Regulator, which is set to manage the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).

Labor’s new efficiency standard, effective January 2025, mandates annual tightening of emissions caps for automakers. This approach is touted to reduce passenger vehicle pollution by 60 percent and commercial vehicles and some large SUVs by 50 percent by 2030. While the goal is laudable, the means are deeply flawed.

The establishment of the Cleaner Car Regulator, endowed with sweeping powers to monitor, investigate, and penalize automakers, exemplifies the government’s preference for heavy-handed regulation over more collaborative and market-driven solutions. According to the Department of Climate Change, this new body can apply for court orders to levy fines and injunctions, further increasing the regulatory burden on the automotive industry.

Moreover, the regulator will also be responsible for checking green vehicle standards from 2025 and setting up a credit-trading platform. This platform ostensibly allows automakers to buy their way out of compliance through credits, raising questions about the actual environmental impact of such a system.

To ensure compliance, the regulator will calculate automakers’ sales-weighted average mass and CO2 emissions, comparing these against established limits. Falling short of these targets would trigger notifications of credits and debits to the relevant suppliers. This convoluted system adds layers of complexity and bureaucracy without guaranteeing significant emissions reductions.

Initially operating within the Climate Change Department, the regulator’s structure and efficacy will be up for review in 2026, suggesting even the government is unsure of its long-term viability.

Adding to this questionable policy is the allocation of $10 million for a national awareness campaign and $60 million over four years to install charging stations at car dealerships. While these measures aim to support the transition to electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles, they seem more like token gestures rather than substantial investments in sustainable infrastructure.

Overall, this policy represents a costly and cumbersome approach to addressing vehicle emissions, prioritizing regulatory control over innovation and collaboration with the automotive industry. Instead of fostering an environment where automakers can develop and implement greener technologies organically, the government is imposing an intricate web of mandates and penalties that may do little more than inflate the budget and stifle industry growth.