AUKUS
Which is why I think if the UK was willing to sell the last 2 astutes then that would be the way to go. Nothing to say the US wouldn't change their mine because some congressman get their panties in a twist about something totaly unrelated. I also dont think either will happen, at best australia will be offered some clapped out T or LA class
We’ll know next Monday (US West Coast time).
Despite what this article says, I suspect that it will be a British designed hull with a US reactor (probably S9G). It would be difficult to squeeze a PWR3 reactor into a smaller diameter Virginia hull as indicated in this article.
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/...nak-in-person/
Despite what this article says, I suspect that it will be a British designed hull with a US reactor (probably S9G). It would be difficult to squeeze a PWR3 reactor into a smaller diameter Virginia hull as indicated in this article.
https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03/...nak-in-person/
My money is first RAN subs will be SSN(R/X) they will have a tripartite reactor, engineering and propulsor rest of sub will be configured to the each countries wants and needs. For interim australia will wind up with an astute or 2 in perth, dunno if they will be forward deployed with joint nationality crews or will be a straight up cash purchase. While I think a straight up purchase is possible its unlikely.
"I suspect that it will be a British designed hull with a US reactor (probably S9G)"
But then you lose commonalty with either the USN or the RN - and the cost of modding any design will be fearsome. If you want to be cost effective and minimise risks you buy off the shelf, and preferably from a long production line
But then you lose commonalty with either the USN or the RN - and the cost of modding any design will be fearsome. If you want to be cost effective and minimise risks you buy off the shelf, and preferably from a long production line
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
My money is first RAN subs will be SSN(R/X) they will have a tripartite reactor
One if the main advantages of using a PWR3 reactor is also exportability. exporting a U.S. reactor will require Congress to change the law, something it may not be willing to do. the UK won’t have that problem.
LEU reactors would require mid-life refuelling - a reason which led Australia to discard the option of French nuclear Barracuda subs as it would take away strategic independence for the life if the boat and require several years in a French/US yard to perform per boat.
The above to just to make the point there are no easy low risk decisions involved.
SSNX will also be Columbia size and cost around $6B apiece.
https://tinyurl.com/3epaamnw
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11826
US looks at LEU reactors every so often and goes back the HEU reactors
Barracudas were never an option, they were niether asked for or offered. They would also be a very big grey area under the NPT, australia would require a lot of compliance activity
LEU reactors would require mid-life refuelling - a reason which led Australia to discard the option of French nuclear Barracuda subs
"I suspect that it will be a British designed hull with a US reactor (probably S9G)"
But then you lose commonalty with either the USN or the RN - and the cost of modding any design will be fearsome. If you want to be cost effective and minimise risks you buy off the shelf, and preferably from a long production line
But then you lose commonalty with either the USN or the RN - and the cost of modding any design will be fearsome. If you want to be cost effective and minimise risks you buy off the shelf, and preferably from a long production line
If a British hull is selected, the RAN will require it to have the US combat system and weapons as that will be crucial to timely resupply in event of a conflict in this region. This will mean a large amount of redesign internally but, it’s a big improvement operationally. We’ll know a lot more on Monday.
Article in this evening's edition of The Times. Seems to be all conjecture rather than factual.
Aukus submarine deal: Australia ‘to buy British over American’
Aukus submarine deal: Australia ‘to buy British over American’
Military experts have suggested that Australia will acquire nuclear submarines built by Britain rather than the United States as part of the Aukus defence pact.
Anthony Albanese, the Australian prime minister, will leave for the US on Wednesday. He is expected to be joined in San Diego by President Biden and Rishi Sunak at the US Navy’s second-largest naval base. Reports suggest they will discuss the sharing of top-secret nuclear technology under Aukus, an agreement between the nations that was announced in September 2021.
One of Australia’s leading defence experts, John Blaxland, head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, has raised the prospect that Australia will acquire UK- built nuclear propulsion submarines as a stopgap until it is able to build its own.
Blaxland said that Australia favoured smaller British submarines. “The US produces larger boats but its production line is at capacity, while the British option is smaller and easier to crew,” Blaxland wrote on The Conversation. “Crew size is a critical limitation for the Australian submarine arm, which has challenges crewing even the significantly smaller Collins-class submarines.
“With Britain facing significant financial pressures, a couple of submarines from the UK production line may act as a lifeline to its naval construction industry, while also providing the Albanese government with the promise of a face-saving submarine delivery before the end of the decade.”
An alternative option, according to Breaking Defense, an American website, is that the leaders could announce the use of British nuclear reactors paired with American-made boats.
Peter Dutton, a former Australian defence minister and now the leader of the opposition, said last week that as defence minister he was advised that British submarines posed issues. These included a lack of production capacity in Britain and reservations about the “interoperability” of the submarines with those made by the US, Australia’s closest defence ally.
Australia’s defences face a serious capability gap when its existing, locally built, Collins-class diesel submarines are retired in the 2030s after 33 years in service.
There have been reports that Britain is prepared to sell Australia two Astute-class nuclear submarines, HMS Agamemnon and HMS Agincourt, which are due for completion in 2024 and 2026 respectively.
The Sun reported last month that Sunak’s government had reached an agreement in principle to provide the Royal Australian Navy with British-designed and at least partially built nuclear-powered submarines, worth an estimated £2 billion each.
A spokesperson for the British government later said: “While talks are ongoing, we will not prejudge the outcome of the current scoping period, which is being used to understand Australia’s capability requirement.”
At 97 metres long, Astute-class submarines are the largest and most advanced attack craft ever built for the Royal Navy. They can circumnavigate the globe submerged, producing their own oxygen and drinking water, and incorporate a suite of advanced sensors.
The submarines carry both Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM) and Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes, providing a range of offensive capabilities.
Anthony Albanese, the Australian prime minister, will leave for the US on Wednesday. He is expected to be joined in San Diego by President Biden and Rishi Sunak at the US Navy’s second-largest naval base. Reports suggest they will discuss the sharing of top-secret nuclear technology under Aukus, an agreement between the nations that was announced in September 2021.
One of Australia’s leading defence experts, John Blaxland, head of the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University, has raised the prospect that Australia will acquire UK- built nuclear propulsion submarines as a stopgap until it is able to build its own.
Blaxland said that Australia favoured smaller British submarines. “The US produces larger boats but its production line is at capacity, while the British option is smaller and easier to crew,” Blaxland wrote on The Conversation. “Crew size is a critical limitation for the Australian submarine arm, which has challenges crewing even the significantly smaller Collins-class submarines.
“With Britain facing significant financial pressures, a couple of submarines from the UK production line may act as a lifeline to its naval construction industry, while also providing the Albanese government with the promise of a face-saving submarine delivery before the end of the decade.”
An alternative option, according to Breaking Defense, an American website, is that the leaders could announce the use of British nuclear reactors paired with American-made boats.
Peter Dutton, a former Australian defence minister and now the leader of the opposition, said last week that as defence minister he was advised that British submarines posed issues. These included a lack of production capacity in Britain and reservations about the “interoperability” of the submarines with those made by the US, Australia’s closest defence ally.
Australia’s defences face a serious capability gap when its existing, locally built, Collins-class diesel submarines are retired in the 2030s after 33 years in service.
There have been reports that Britain is prepared to sell Australia two Astute-class nuclear submarines, HMS Agamemnon and HMS Agincourt, which are due for completion in 2024 and 2026 respectively.
The Sun reported last month that Sunak’s government had reached an agreement in principle to provide the Royal Australian Navy with British-designed and at least partially built nuclear-powered submarines, worth an estimated £2 billion each.
A spokesperson for the British government later said: “While talks are ongoing, we will not prejudge the outcome of the current scoping period, which is being used to understand Australia’s capability requirement.”
At 97 metres long, Astute-class submarines are the largest and most advanced attack craft ever built for the Royal Navy. They can circumnavigate the globe submerged, producing their own oxygen and drinking water, and incorporate a suite of advanced sensors.
The submarines carry both Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles (TLAM) and Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes, providing a range of offensive capabilities.
"can it be redesigned "
Of course it can - the British industrial companies just LOVE redesigning something.......... like that Armoured vehicle we bought from the USA................ 10 years ago
Of course it can - the British industrial companies just LOVE redesigning something.......... like that Armoured vehicle we bought from the USA................ 10 years ago
The following users liked this post:
The following users liked this post:
The major players are getting the right personnel in place to get the most out of AUKUS.
https://asiapacificdefencereporter.c...ck-aukus-team/
Tartare said, “Oh God - Australia will just make a few changes...
Here we go again.”
If the RAN does acquire (or lease) the last two Astutes, I think they will come with the original equipment as they are probably too advanced in construction to make large changes. This will also assist the RN crew to train their RAN counterparts but, it means a lot of additional work setting up the supply chain and supporting systems for combat systems and weapons that are not in the RAN inventory. I believe the vessels that are subsequently built in Australia will be fitted with US combat systems and weapons.
https://asiapacificdefencereporter.c...ck-aukus-team/
Tartare said, “Oh God - Australia will just make a few changes...
Here we go again.”
If the RAN does acquire (or lease) the last two Astutes, I think they will come with the original equipment as they are probably too advanced in construction to make large changes. This will also assist the RN crew to train their RAN counterparts but, it means a lot of additional work setting up the supply chain and supporting systems for combat systems and weapons that are not in the RAN inventory. I believe the vessels that are subsequently built in Australia will be fitted with US combat systems and weapons.
Last edited by Going Boeing; 7th Mar 2023 at 21:29.
Think you're being optimistic - it 'll be a holding statement
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon...sharing-snags/
Big AUKUS news coming, but Hill and allies see tech sharing snags
Big AUKUS news coming, but Hill and allies see tech sharing snags
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
https://asiapacificdefencereporter.c...ck-aukus-team/
Former Royal Navy admiral named to lead Babcock AUKUS Team
A former UK Royal Navy vice admiral with decades of experience in naval strategy and submarine operations has been appointed as Babcock’s first Managing Director – AUKUS & International to lead the company’s newly established division aiming to deliver key capabilities in support of the trilateral security treaty.
Sir Nick Hine KCB joined Babcock in the UK from the Royal Navy where he was the Second Sea Lord, and brings with him a wealth of wider government and industry facing knowledge which will be invaluable to the delivery of the AUKUS capabilities.
He will lead a team split between Australia and the UK that will seek to coordinate and promote Babcock’s capabilities and manage strategic dialogue with the Australian, US and UK Governments.….
Hine visited Australian Babcock sites recently and is confident the organisation is well positioned to provide the basis to deliver AUKUS capabilities….
Operating the UK’s only licensed facility for refitting refuelling and defuelling nuclear submarines, Babcock manages two of the UK’s three naval bases (HMNB Clyde and HMNB Devonport) which undertake 100 per cent of the deep maintenance, in-service support, and through life management of the UK fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
Contracted by the UK Ministry of Defence, Babcock provides services including fleet engineering, facilities management, waterfront services and logistics and transport.
Former Royal Navy admiral named to lead Babcock AUKUS Team
A former UK Royal Navy vice admiral with decades of experience in naval strategy and submarine operations has been appointed as Babcock’s first Managing Director – AUKUS & International to lead the company’s newly established division aiming to deliver key capabilities in support of the trilateral security treaty.
Sir Nick Hine KCB joined Babcock in the UK from the Royal Navy where he was the Second Sea Lord, and brings with him a wealth of wider government and industry facing knowledge which will be invaluable to the delivery of the AUKUS capabilities.
He will lead a team split between Australia and the UK that will seek to coordinate and promote Babcock’s capabilities and manage strategic dialogue with the Australian, US and UK Governments.….
Hine visited Australian Babcock sites recently and is confident the organisation is well positioned to provide the basis to deliver AUKUS capabilities….
Operating the UK’s only licensed facility for refitting refuelling and defuelling nuclear submarines, Babcock manages two of the UK’s three naval bases (HMNB Clyde and HMNB Devonport) which undertake 100 per cent of the deep maintenance, in-service support, and through life management of the UK fleet of nuclear-powered submarines.
Contracted by the UK Ministry of Defence, Babcock provides services including fleet engineering, facilities management, waterfront services and logistics and transport.
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon...sharing-snags/
Big AUKUS news coming, but Hill and allies see tech sharing snags
Big AUKUS news coming, but Hill and allies see tech sharing snags