Originally Posted by
Bengo
There is more to this than finding someone/somewhere to build the boats and training some nuclear submariners. Routes for these things exist and there is quite possibly room in the US or UK pipelines for enough Aussie trainees.
What does not exist is an Australian nuclear Regulatory Environment, because Australia has no civil nuclear base.
FWIW Australia does have one operating nuclear reactor and has previously run 2 research reactors on the site since 1958 until the new one commenced operation.
We do not use them for power generation though. Australia was after WW2 a fairly prominent player in the nuclear research field.
Originally Posted by
Bengo
It will take a good time to sort out the legislation, train the (civilian?) Staff to replicate the role of the UKAEA or its US equivalent and for it to write some rules. The new body will have zero experience at start up and will need to borrow that from others.
I would assume ANSTO (Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) that has in one form or another been operating since the 1950s.
Originally Posted by
Bengo
There are a hell of a lot of non-trivial tasks to be done. Who will be the Rickover of dunnunder?
N
I am not an expert in the field so happy to be educated but I would ask, didn't the US, UK, France USSR, China, India (and soon Brazil) manage to get themselves operational with Nuclear powered submarines starting from a starting point where there weren't any nuclear powered submarines, (or even helpful collaborators) following WW2.
Not suggesting it is a trivial task but given other countries have developed nuclear powered vessels so why is it not feasible that Oz does the same? (especially given support from 2 countries with extensive experience in the field).
Note - not saying this is a good or bad idea but is the lack of previous experience really a consideration given a 20 year implementation timeframe and promised support from 2 highly experienced operators?