AUKUS
Suspicion breeds confidence
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,406
Likes: 15
From: Gibraltar
HMS Astute has just arrived in Perth. What a coincidence. Expect to see an announcement of her being based there in the not too distant future or even transferred to the RAN
Last edited by Navaleye; 29th October 2021 at 11:24.
Joined: Apr 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 958
Likes: 1,239
From: Herefordshire
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: USA
Joined: Apr 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 958
Likes: 1,239
From: Herefordshire
Doesn’t prove anything of course, but it could very well be seen as straws in the wind. Doubt a permanent transfer is on the cards, but a long-term deployment would certainly provide scope for the training and familiarisation of both crew and base support personnel.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 104
From: Devon
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 104
From: Devon
*Coordinated ASW is the phrase you want. On which note, I wonder if any ASW related programmes are part of AUKUS? RAN ASW helicopters have taken part in UK/NATO exercises.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
as to the ASW australia has been focusing on it, with the new M-60R's and 14 posiedens
Last edited by rattman; 29th October 2021 at 21:02.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 104
From: Devon
Not so much escort as consort. Saying the carrier has escorts suggests that the other warships in a task group just defend the carrier, and that the carrier is passive. Submarines and frigates (in RN terminology) work in conjunction with the ASW helicopters. Continuously operating ASW helicopters around the clock requires a big deck with multiple aircraft.
Likewise a carrier's fighters are frequently controlled by an AAW destroyer.
All of this provides a defence over a large area, and the carrier may be used to protect things like amphibious forces or seaborne logistics - which was the main role of US and UK carriers during the Cold War, and is coming back to the fore in a new era of great power competition.
There must be a better term than 'escort'.
Likewise a carrier's fighters are frequently controlled by an AAW destroyer.
All of this provides a defence over a large area, and the carrier may be used to protect things like amphibious forces or seaborne logistics - which was the main role of US and UK carriers during the Cold War, and is coming back to the fore in a new era of great power competition.
There must be a better term than 'escort'.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Just terminology in the end. Even the MOD cant be consistent, saw artful listed as part of the escorts making up CSG21, then latter they said CSG 21 + artful. In the end what ever term you want to use for it US and UK carrier battlegroups always have an SSN as a member of the CSG/CBG. Which for 21 is artful and not Astute.
Joined: Jun 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 2,238
Likes: 218
From: Eden Valley
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 30th October 2021 at 02:26.
Joined: Oct 2021
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
From: Oz
Article in the New York Times today expressing doubt over the whole project. Starting to look like too much submarine. No way are they going to be built in Adelaide. That is fantasy land.Hope this is not a fiasco in the making. Did everybody have their grownup pants on when they signed up for it ??
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,571
Likes: 374
From: PLanet Earth
Guess it's just interpretation.
The way I read the latest story was it was being suggested that Oz would build the entire front half, the US the entire back half, and then they'd be mated.
Both the Virginia and Astute boats are assembled in modules after all, so I suppose it's technically possible.
The way I read the latest story was it was being suggested that Oz would build the entire front half, the US the entire back half, and then they'd be mated.
Both the Virginia and Astute boats are assembled in modules after all, so I suppose it's technically possible.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Wow.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Do both share the same Crossection?
If not who wins?
Or do you always go for the bigger of the two dimensions?
In an always cramped Sub if you need to squeeze your crap in a narrower or lower Hull, all Off- the- Shelf goes out the window and you start basically from scratch. Also all the piping and wiring will be a nightmare to combine.
This approach clearly sounds 'interesting'.
Submarines are built is sections and assembled together. Same way planes are built and even many ships are buiilt as blocks
Joined: Apr 2010
Aviation Qualifications: Military (Retired)
Posts: 958
Likes: 1,239
From: Herefordshire
Indeed. Many internal modules, like the command deck, are also built separately then slid into the partially assembled hull.
The UK builds SSN & SSBN in a small town in NE England. I fail to see why so many hold the Australians to be incapable of replicating these facilities. True, the reactors and some other internal systems will have to be imported, but the rest is just marine engineering. What's the problem?
The UK builds SSN & SSBN in a small town in NE England. I fail to see why so many hold the Australians to be incapable of replicating these facilities. True, the reactors and some other internal systems will have to be imported, but the rest is just marine engineering. What's the problem?
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 54
From: Somerset
Indeed. Many internal modules, like the command deck, are also built separately then slid into the partially assembled hull.
The UK builds SSN & SSBN in a small town in NE England. I fail to see why so many hold the Australians to be incapable of replicating these facilities. True, the reactors and some other internal systems will have to be imported, but the rest is just marine engineering. What's the problem?
The UK builds SSN & SSBN in a small town in NE England. I fail to see why so many hold the Australians to be incapable of replicating these facilities. True, the reactors and some other internal systems will have to be imported, but the rest is just marine engineering. What's the problem?
I expect the expertise from building the Collins boats has also been dissipated so there will be a lot of things to re-learn, fast. The experience now exists in BAE and EB, but whether there is enough of it to expand from two build operations to three I don't know. Much depends on timescale for the first two or three boats. Go slowly and you can train Aussies in UK and US to assemble and to build in Oz. Be in a hurry and you need to buy ready made, or learn hard and expensive lessons as you go.
You also need a submarine design capability, but upkeep of the Collins boats should have retained that base expertise. Whether it can be expanded fast enough to both keep the existing boats safe and capable whilst sorting out the design work to incorporate Australian content in the new boats is moot.
None of this says that SSN building cannot be done in Oz. Only that it will take time, probably more
time than the pollies want, and it will not be cheap. After all, SSK building has been done before and no one is suggesting an Australian power plant.
N
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 104
From: Devon
I saw a link to this on LinkedIn a few moments ago: Australia looking at existing design to ‘accelerate’ delivery of nuclear-powered submarines - The Sydney Morning Herald
Vice Admiral Meade said the government was “looking at a mature design” and that could “accelerate the delivery of the first submarine in Australia in the 2030s”. He said “at the moment the aperture is wide” but the taskforce over the next 18 months will “narrow down the aperture and get us to the optimal pathway”.
Vice Admiral Meade said the government was “looking at a mature design” and that could “accelerate the delivery of the first submarine in Australia in the 2030s”. He said “at the moment the aperture is wide” but the taskforce over the next 18 months will “narrow down the aperture and get us to the optimal pathway”.