AUKUS
Small sub compared to the size of virginia's, virginia is to much sub and to much manpower for australia, astute doesn't have VLS. Australia needs something about 4K-6K tons displacement with VLS. Hence the comment a smaller (not small) Regional sub
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
Yes Virginia Class there is a Santa Clause AUKUS mebbe: Plan to get nuclear submarines faster (msn.com)
There’s a real sub-surface battle going on now. An interim capability for the RAN. Labor’s left and the Greens are pushing it and once it arrives good-bye SSN’s. It will go the way of the Raptor- remember Labor lambasting the interim Super Hornet arrangement going to an election saying they’d look at the Raptor? All BS. Just like their support for SSN’s.
There’s a real sub-surface battle going on now. An interim capability for the RAN. Labor’s left and the Greens are pushing it and once it arrives good-bye SSN’s.
It will go the way of the Raptor- remember Labor lambasting the interim Super Hornet arrangement going to an election saying they’d look at the Raptor? All BS. Just like their support for SSN’s.
It will go the way of the Raptor- remember Labor lambasting the interim Super Hornet arrangement going to an election saying they’d look at the Raptor? All BS. Just like their support for SSN’s.
Your post is more like a disgruntled liberal voter, rather than a military point of view
I remember the Super hornet too. In parliament the RAAF said they were unneeded to replace the F-111.
The Raptor was in reference to the F-35 and just something to say in the election run up.
I actually think it reflects badly on Dutton to voice this info on the sub negotiations in opposition. It's not a good start to his being leader of the opposition.
Last edited by golder; 9th Jun 2022 at 12:07.
I’m not a fan of rigid partisan politics so no, I’m not a disgruntled Liberal voter. I have no link or proof though none I know from Labor’s left want nuclear submarines. The Greens have stated as much.
Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.
I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.
I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
Nah - don't buy that assertion.
I reckon Labor will stick with the SSNs - this is a decision that's much bigger, broader and long term than Richard Marles.
The much bigger problem is the capability gap in my view.
They face Sophie's choice.
Go with an interim fleet to maintain your numbers of submariners and you massively blow your budget.
Go with an XLUUV and you're banking on technology that's only just being developed - and don't end up with enough crews when the SSNs finally arrive.
Buy the B-21 and you have a combination of the two above.
The two Virginia boats would have been an ideal solution if the Yanks had agreed.
As for Dutton - the man's a 100 IQ unreconstructed Queensland policeman and nowt more.
Genius self-inflicted move by the Coalition electing him - totally unpalatable to the broader electorate.
ADDING:
“We’re signed up to AUKUS and Anthony [Albanese] was straight across to the Quad meeting, and the relationship with our key ally in the United States was affirmed immediately,” he told Today on Friday morning.
I reckon Labor will stick with the SSNs - this is a decision that's much bigger, broader and long term than Richard Marles.
The much bigger problem is the capability gap in my view.
They face Sophie's choice.
Go with an interim fleet to maintain your numbers of submariners and you massively blow your budget.
Go with an XLUUV and you're banking on technology that's only just being developed - and don't end up with enough crews when the SSNs finally arrive.
Buy the B-21 and you have a combination of the two above.
The two Virginia boats would have been an ideal solution if the Yanks had agreed.
As for Dutton - the man's a 100 IQ unreconstructed Queensland policeman and nowt more.
Genius self-inflicted move by the Coalition electing him - totally unpalatable to the broader electorate.
ADDING:
Australia is ‘not going to back out of’ AUKUS deal: Burke
By Ashleigh McMillan and Anthony Galloway
Leader of the House Tony Burke says the Albanese government is committed to the AUKUS deal, a trilateral security pact between Australia, the US and Britain.“We’re signed up to AUKUS and Anthony [Albanese] was straight across to the Quad meeting, and the relationship with our key ally in the United States was affirmed immediately,” he told Today on Friday morning.
Last edited by tartare; 10th Jun 2022 at 01:25.
CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
Glad to have the adults back at the steering wheel now
I’m not a fan of rigid partisan politics so no, I’m not a disgruntled Liberal voter. I have no link or proof though none I know from Labor’s left want nuclear submarines. The Greens have stated as much.
Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.
I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
Dutton’s article in The Australian read more like a concerned Australian reading the tea leaves of Labor faction-fighting and a bungled Defence bureaucracy. If we need nuclear submarines we need them sooner rather than later. The two ASAP option was a logical ambition to introduce the capability at its earliest and avoid a capability gap in a convincing manner.
I don’t trust Marles and am concerned of where the roots of the CCP political influence may lie. He just has to be another insipid Defence Minister and the CCP has won another battle in the Pacific without a shot.
Now back to AUKUS. Dutton was talking of leasing subs as an interim filler. There won't be a purchase yet, we haven't even decided what one to get. Going by the US figures. You need 3.5 nuke submarines, to keep one in the water. The other 2.5 are in a maintenance cycle. We definitely won't be buying and running 3 classes of submarines, Where 2 Virginia's doesn't keep one in the water. As well as the Collins we retire from their aprox 22 year refit and service timeline from 2026. That takes us nearly to 2050 for the last sub, if we don't do another life extension. On some or all, if the hulls can handle it.
There is also the RAN that have said they can gap-fill a possible Collins shortfall, with other 'weapon systems'. Said in parliament when they cancelled the Skyguardian.
Last edited by golder; 10th Jun 2022 at 03:33.
Marles’ “open-mind” on an interim submarine capability is the slow death of RAN’s nuclear ambitions. I’m guessing that’s why Dutton’s came out in the national newspaper with an capability gap solution that can actually be met with an earlier purchase of two nuclear boats and US Navy SSN detachments in Australia. Labor firmly behind SSN’s? Let’s wait and see!
Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.
Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 10th Jun 2022 at 07:46.
Marles’ “open-mind” on an interim submarine capability is the slow death of RAN’s nuclear ambitions. I’m guessing that’s why Dutton’s came out in the national newspaper with an capability gap solution that can actually be met with an earlier purchase of two nuclear boats and US Navy SSN detachments in Australia. Labor firmly behind SSN’s? Let’s wait and see!
Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.
Yep shoot my opinion down in silly partisan political play, but I’ve been to branch meetings of the Labor Party in Corio ( Marles’ electorate ) and its always been fanatically anti-nuclear. Hopefully Richard Marles is far more sensible than the left side of his political party.
No dutton came out with a comment that was never being discussed and that he has no ability or capabilty to implement neither does labor because its physically impossible
You were the one that bought the BUT LABOR argument. Thats why I shot down yours and dutton rubbish opinion, you started the bull**** political agruement by saying hes pro china.
You are a liberal / CCP stooge, I dont believe anything you have said
If you clowns are going to have a go at each other with Labor v Liberal or vice versa name calling, how about you take it to a more appropriate media platform such as the cesspools of FB and/or Twitter.
Yes I agree.
However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.
However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.
Yes I agree.
However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.
However, the procurement of nuclear submarines requires bi-partisan political support and if we can stop the mud-slinging and address the elephant in the room? If you wanted to kill the RAN SSN proposition you will procure a conventional submarine in the interim. RAN and USN leadership have stated that the RAN has no ability to operate 3 x submarine types ( assuming Collins, interim capability and SSN ) An undercurrent of resistance is building.
You were the one who who started the mud slinging. It does have bi - partisan support for the concept. The undercurrent existed with in hours of the aukus announcement. Its seems the libs failed to tell the navy about the plan, with the exception of a few shiney bums. The admiral in charge of the a attack class only found at the announcement. they also failed to tell the french and lied to Biden. The actual claim we will buying virginia's is almost complete rubbish and it wont be 3 subs, the interim will replace the collins class so it would be 2 at most
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia OZ
Age: 75
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 0
Received 51 Likes
on
45 Posts
History written with payout: Australian government agrees to pay $835 million to French submarine contractor Naval Group over cancelled contract
Australian government agrees to pay $835 million to French submarine contractor Naval Group over cancelled contract (msn.com)
"...Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the announcement this morning, saying the total amount of money spent by Australian taxpayers on the program is now $3.4 billion. "This is a saving from the $5.5 billion that Senate estimates was told would result from that program," Mr Albanese said...."
Australian government agrees to pay $835 million to French submarine contractor Naval Group over cancelled contract (msn.com)
"...Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the announcement this morning, saying the total amount of money spent by Australian taxpayers on the program is now $3.4 billion. "This is a saving from the $5.5 billion that Senate estimates was told would result from that program," Mr Albanese said...."
Last edited by SpazSinbad; 11th Jun 2022 at 02:13. Reason: usual
Nope, I just said I didn’t trust Marles, worried that his political heartland is anti-nuclear and an interim sub’ will mean the end of the RAN’s SSN ambitions. It’s just an opinion. If you were going to kill off the SSN plan, that would be the way to do it.
I never once abused a contributor to the discussion labelling them a political or disgruntled stooge or even more bizarrely a stooge of the CCP.
My opinion is the only hope for RAN SSN’s is the Dutton-plan or Dutton-Pie In The Sky or the Dutton-outburst in The Australian, suggesting a buy off the US production line. Hopefully that appeases the tribalism of Aussie politics. I can’t see this project getting less political as the realities and complications present.
I never once abused a contributor to the discussion labelling them a political or disgruntled stooge or even more bizarrely a stooge of the CCP.
My opinion is the only hope for RAN SSN’s is the Dutton-plan or Dutton-Pie In The Sky or the Dutton-outburst in The Australian, suggesting a buy off the US production line. Hopefully that appeases the tribalism of Aussie politics. I can’t see this project getting less political as the realities and complications present.
Anything with "N" in it is expensive, takes many years and overruns - same in every country.
Problem in any democracy is that the political horizon is max 4 years - and all that money sloshing about is very tempting for those who wish to buy votes (sorry - meet the concerns of their core supporters of course)
Dutton's plan at least gets a capability in place for (relatively) little money - certainly cheaper than going the "interim" route even I'll bet.
Problem in any democracy is that the political horizon is max 4 years - and all that money sloshing about is very tempting for those who wish to buy votes (sorry - meet the concerns of their core supporters of course)
Dutton's plan at least gets a capability in place for (relatively) little money - certainly cheaper than going the "interim" route even I'll bet.
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Noumea
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The French get their cash - a bit chunk of Aussie taxpayers money - and are therefore happy to be out of this mess.
And RAN will get modern subs (nuclear or not ? US or UK ? still much to debate) within 15 years from now.
And RAN will get modern subs (nuclear or not ? US or UK ? still much to debate) within 15 years from now.
Do you visit many French sites? They are still having a tantrum. The total cost was around 5 billion. 10% of this was an exit fee paid to France. I think we came out OK. The 5 billion is about 5% of what the Nukes subs will cost over their life. Some see the Nukes subs to be worth more than conventional subs. Given the poor planning and mis-steps, overall it will be alright. We currently have an annual$48.6 billion military budget.