Originally Posted by
ORAC
Fact remains that, at the point the planned handover of subs to Australia is due to take place the fleet will be 46 out of a planned/required 66.
Not saying it won’t take place - but it’s politics and could come under pressure in Congress. Sale is on the proviso that:
You have the wrong end of the stick. No one has ever accused the US of being altruistic. The US wants to forward deploy to Australia. They need nuke sub infrastructure and manpower. It is better for the US, to have Australia with a few of their nuke subs. The main sub is going to be the UK/AU. It's actually a disadvantage to Australia to run 2 types of attack subs. There will be more articles with FUD headlines than I could count over the next 10 years. Congress will also play their games. At the end of the day the primes are going to make money and let's face it. That's all that matters.
Originally Posted by
rattman
Yeah not really a funding cut, what has happened previously including 2022 and 2023 is the navy cuts the sub purchase. Congress after much hand wringing give them an additional budget to get the submarine, the target number is actually 3, 2 virginia per year and 1 Columbia every 18 months + catching up delayed maintainence
It's the way the game is played. The only reason they won't order a sub. Is because there is still one on the yard. They aren't going to close part of the yard and lay off the manpower for a year. Only to start again. That would cost more than the sub. Unless the build years for the 2025 sub is when they want to do major upgrades to both yards? That is also a possibility. There will be a disruption. Over say a 5 year plan. They lose the time to build one sub. That is later made up by the increased production.