AUKUS

[Asturias56]

Osbourne has a ... chequered record ... at construction over the years but its all there is. main problem has been more attractive jobs elsewhere in SA

[artee]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

Osbourne has a ... chequered record ... at construction over the years but its all there is. main problem has been more attractive jobs elsewhere in SA

And the Australian Submarine Corporation incurred the famous quote by the Defence Minister at the time - "I wouldn't trust them to build a canoe". It was 8 years ago, but even so...

Defence Minister David Johnston

[Asturias56]

I know quite a few people in SA - and one of the issues seems to be training people to do ANY industrial job these days. Once the Car and white goods factories closed down the idea of working with machinery seems to have got a very bad name locally

[Going Boeing]

Originally Posted by artee

And the Australian Submarine Corporation incurred the famous quote by the Defence Minister at the time - "I wouldn't trust them to build a canoe". It was 8 years ago, but even so...

Defence Minister David Johnston

I believe that was when PM Tony Abott was strongly in favour of having 12 diesel electric submarines built in Japan and comments like that were designed to prepare the public to accept that they wouldn’t be built locally.

I understand that ASC has been restructured by a competent CEO and is now considered to be capable of building the future submarines - provided they can find, & train, sufficient staff. This is a problem affecting most companies in Western countries.

[rattman]

Why I dont think the australian nuclear sub will have UK reactors

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ired-with-glue

[Asturias56]

And they were only found when the heads dropped off for a second time......................

[ORAC]

And they were only found when the heads dropped off for a second time......................

Bit more complex than that - found during an inspection as part of the work verification process.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/212179...ne-super-glue/

[Asturias56]

Still - not exactly a brilliant story .............

[Going Boeing]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Bit more complex than that - found during an inspection as part of the work verification process.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/212179...ne-super-glue/

It’s disgraceful and will have serious repercussions. They will now have to inspect every vessel that has been worked on by Babcock Plymouth.

This is right up there with the falsification of test results on steel used in the construction of USN submarines for about 20 years.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b1954445.html

[Buster Hyman]

https://www.theage.com.au/world/euro...02-p5chbk.html

British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace says building Canberra’s fleet of nuclear-powered submarines under the AUKUS pact is likely to be a tri-nation project, raising expectations Australia, the United Kingdom and United States will jointly develop a new generation of boats.

I wonder if the could lead to a combined force?

[Asturias56]

yes - it'll be called the USN

and when will this "new generation" enter service?

[microlighttp]

It’s quite clear from both articles that the bolt heads that were supposedly glued on, we’re holding the insulation on to the coolant pipes and not the pressure envelope(flanges).
Still not good and calls in to question the general standards. But that’s Laggers for you!

[tartare]

Naïve questions - would it be technically feasible to build modules in different countries and then assemble them into a full submarine in another?
Would it be cost effective to do so - and allow an increase in output of yards in US, UK and a new yard in Australia?
EG (gross oversimplification) - the Yanks build the reactor part, the Brits build the back and the Aussies build the front (yes I know submarines are extraordinarily complex, highly integrated pieces of equipment).
Reactor and back are then shipped to Oz to be joined to front.
I suspect I know the answer.

[megan]

Naïve questions - would it be technically feasible to build modules in different countries and then assemble them into a full submarine in another

We do it with aircraft, when I worked in shipbuilding different fabricators built sections which were then put together on the slipway, albeit in this case the fabricators were located in the same city and not international.

[rattman]

Originally Posted by tartare

Naïve questions - would it be technically feasible to build modules in different countries and then assemble them into a full submarine in another?

Theres no practical or technical reason you cant, its only economics / politics. As it stands today modules for ships are built in one location and shipped to another to be assembled. Even recently Austal was announced that they would building 2 different types of modules for virginia and a columbia submarines where they would be barged to either GDEB for final assembly

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...arine-program/

[tartare]

Originally Posted by rattman

Theres no practical or technical reason you cant, its only economics / politics. As it stands today modules for ships are built in one location and shipped to another to be assembled. Even recently Austal was announced that they would building 2 different types of modules for virginia and a columbia submarines where they would be barged to either GDEB for final assembly

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...arine-program/

Thank you - my reason for asking was the use of the phrase "It really is, is a genuinely trilateral effort to see both the UK and the US provide Australia with a nuclear-powered submarine capability." by Marles. I wondered if they were looking at doing something like this.

[rattman]

Originally Posted by tartare

Thank you - my reason for asking was the use of the phrase "It really is, is a genuinely trilateral effort to see both the UK and the US provide Australia with a nuclear-powered submarine capability." by Marles. I wondered if they were looking at doing something like this.

Personally I think they are, I would be bettting that it comes down to for australia, reactors, engineering and propulsors will be built somewhere not australia, either UK or US. They get assembled into part of a submarines, shipped to australia via a heavy lift ship where the a rest of the sub is joined to it, sonar, torpedo room, living and command sections. Then final assembly, launching and startup of the reactor

Canberra and Adelaide LHD were built in spain, shipped to australia via heavy lift ship and then fitout was done locally. Its would be much easier to ship half a submarine

[rattman]

I dont trust the sun. But they are claiming its done deal for astutes.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/213565...eal-australia/

[golder]

"Insiders say ministers would be open to building a sub for another ally — like Australia "

Canada needs nukes, for under the ice.

[rattman]

Originally Posted by golder

"Insiders say ministers would be open to building a sub for another ally — like Australia "

Canada needs nukes, for under the ice.

Canada will never get nuke boats while they and the US are fighting over the northwest passage being internal waterways or international shipping channel