Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

AUKUS

Old 22nd Aug 2023, 15:22
  #1421 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
Originally Posted by rattman
I would still think the submarine launched tomahawks would be aquired. They can just use them on the a virginia/SSN Aukus as required
one step at a time I suspect................... much easier to justify as "an extension of current purchase" than a whopping up front bill
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 22nd Aug 2023, 21:56
  #1422 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 0
Received 91 Likes on 59 Posts
Originally Posted by Asturias56
one step at a time I suspect................... much easier to justify as "an extension of current purchase" than a whopping up front bill
The rumor is that tomahawk is one of the systems being targets unders GEWOS (sovriegn missile production). Which has some logic to it due to it being relatively low tech and cheaper than LRASM
rattman is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2023, 04:19
  #1423 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,862
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
In March 2023, it was announced that Australia intended to buy 200 Tomahawk RGM-109E Block V all-up-rounds (AURs), 20 RGM-109E Block IV AURs along with the necessary equipment and support. The recent press reports indicate that an order has been made for the 200 Block V’s but there’s been no mention of the 20 Block IV’s.

http://200 Tomahawk RGM-109E Block V...t and support.

My interpretation of the original plan was that the 20 Block IV’s would have kits added to them to make them suitable for Collins submarine tube launched missiles and thus become UGM-109E Block IV missiles. As those kits are no longer in production, I suspect that they were intending to get them from USN stocks as they were used in the first batch of Los Angeles class submarines and are probably in storage. When the Royal Navy replaced their tube launched Block III’s with Block IV’s, they had to migrate the UGM kits across to the new missiles as new kits were no longer available.

The recent lack of firm orders for the Block IV’s indicates that they no longer intend to fit Tomahawk’s to the Collins class as part of the LOTE and wait to have that capability when the first 2 Virginia class join the fleet circa 2032. This would not be desirable as the last Collins class is expected to retire in 2046 so they would still have to provide full capability for the remainder of their service life.




Last edited by Going Boeing; 28th Aug 2023 at 09:55.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2023, 08:25
  #1424 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
there hasn't been any serious mention to fitting them to the Collins class recently but how much work is required? If its reasonably simple you could wait another year as the LOTE doesn't kick of until 2026 and it seems that each boat will be in dock for 2 years
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2023, 10:04
  #1425 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,862
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
My understanding is that it shouldn’t be too difficult to include this capability as the Collins use the same combat system as the LA & Virginia classes so, it probably means using a different software program that has the Tomahawk launch and control software included. I believe that the physical handling of the missiles in the torpedo room does not create any major issues.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2023, 10:35
  #1426 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 16,995
Received 1,365 Likes on 621 Posts
Just the HoC committee, not the government - kit3 flying, but some take off…

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...an-south-korea


Japan and South Korea should be invited to join Aukus, UK parliamentary committee says

Australia and other countries in the Aukus security pact should ask Japan and South Korea to join them to develop advance defence technology, according to an influential UK House of Commons committee.

The proposed expansion would likely focus on activities such as cyber, AI, quantum and undersea technologies – but not the multi-decade project to deliver nuclear-propelled submarines to Australia.

The foreign affairs select committee said the UK government “should propose to Australia and the United States that Japan and South Korea be invited to join an Aukus technological defence cooperation agreement”.

In the report published on Wednesday, the committee noted that Aukus was “not purely about Australia acquiring a fleet of nuclear-powered submarines”.


There is a cyber and advanced technology sharing and joint development component that could be equally, if not more, significant,” the report said.

“There is an in-principle agreement amongst the three powers to work together as closely as possible across the full suite of advanced technologies, including cyber, AI, quantum and undersea technologies, including in submarine detection.

“These could deliver tangible outcomes more quickly than the submarine programme.”…..

The report by the Conservative party-controlled committee also includes a potentially contentious proposal for the UK to seek to join the Quad, a diplomatic initiative that brings together Australia, India, Japan and the US.

Beijing has repeatedly denounced Aukus and the Quad as anti-China groupings that seek to “stoke division and confrontation and revive the cold war mentality”. South-east Asian countries could also be nervous about the proposed expansion.

The select committee said it had heard “differing opinions from witnesses on whether the UK should apply to join the Quad, with some strongly supporting UK membership, others suggesting that it is too early to consider this now and one group against the proposal altogether”……

ORAC is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2023, 08:21
  #1427 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 16,995
Received 1,365 Likes on 621 Posts
AUKUS standoff: Australia, UK wait on Congress to approve pact

This is the first story of a three-part series. The second will be available Sept. 7, and the third on Sept. 8.

WASHINGTON ― A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers traveled to Britain this spring in an effort to get tough on China.

But House China committee Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and his delegation quickly found their British counterparts had another matter top of mind: AUKUS, the trilateral nuclear-powered submarine agreement with Britain and Australia.

Officials from those countries made clear to Gallagher and other U.S. lawmakers that Congress must take steps to ensure the deal is a success. Specifically, they want lawmakers to approve a blanket exemption for the U.K. and Australia within Washington’s stringent export control regime.

That policy, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, sets rigorous restrictions on sensitive defense exports. Without ITAR exemptions, they worry the pact won’t succeed.

“The thing we heard most consistently from our allies in Britain is that ITAR is a roadblock for cooperation with them,” Gallagher told reporters. He said a “a free-world approach” to AUKUS is critical.

The AUKUS agreement is intended to draw the three countries’ defense industries closer together by helping Australia develop its own nuclear-powered submarine fleetwhile sharing top secret technology among the allies. If it works, the program will develop cutting-edge capabilities that will influence the future of warfare.

While visiting Australia in August, Gallagher said “long-overdue ITAR reform” could lead to joint U.S.-Australian munitions production and hypersonic weapons development, “turbocharging AUKUS.”

Critics of existing U.S. export control laws, like Gallagher, argue reform is necessary to increase cooperation among the three countries’ defense-industrial bases, a goal the Biden administration is also eager to pursue. But the push to overhaul ITAR has faced resistance, with the State Department and Democrats arguing the export control policy is crucial to keeping defense industry secrets from falling into the hands of rivals such as China.

As the two-year anniversary of AUKUS approaches, the export control debate and a separate tussle over the health of the submarine-industrial base have raised questions about how and when Congress will pass several authorizations needed to make the program into the transformational initiative leaders promised….. [more]
ORAC is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2023, 08:44
  #1428 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
Well there are a lot of people who would like to see the back of ITAR - and AUKUS is a useful stick that has come to hand even tho' there is zero evidence to date that its causing a problem - it's in the realm of "might", "possibly" " at some time" right now

Asturias56 is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2023, 20:58
  #1429 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,075
Received 265 Likes on 173 Posts
Originally Posted by ORAC
AUKUS standoff: Australia, UK wait on Congress to approve pact

This is the first story of a three-part series. The second will be available Sept. 7, and the third on Sept. 8.

WASHINGTON ― A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers traveled to Britain this spring in an effort to get tough on China.

But House China committee Chairman Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and his delegation quickly found their British counterparts had another matter top of mind: AUKUS, the trilateral nuclear-powered submarine agreement with Britain and Australia.

Officials from those countries made clear to Gallagher and other U.S. lawmakers that Congress must take steps to ensure the deal is a success. Specifically, they want lawmakers to approve a blanket exemption for the U.K. and Australia within Washington’s stringent export control regime.

That policy, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, or ITAR, sets rigorous restrictions on sensitive defense exports. Without ITAR exemptions, they worry the pact won’t succeed.

“The thing we heard most consistently from our allies in Britain is that ITAR is a roadblock for cooperation with them,” Gallagher told reporters. He said a “a free-world approach” to AUKUS is critical.

The AUKUS agreement is intended to draw the three countries’ defense industries closer together by helping Australia develop its own nuclear-powered submarine fleetwhile sharing top secret technology among the allies. If it works, the program will develop cutting-edge capabilities that will influence the future of warfare.

While visiting Australia in August, Gallagher said “long-overdue ITAR reform” could lead to joint U.S.-Australian munitions production and hypersonic weapons development, “turbocharging AUKUS.”

Critics of existing U.S. export control laws, like Gallagher, argue reform is necessary to increase cooperation among the three countries’ defense-industrial bases, a goal the Biden administration is also eager to pursue. But the push to overhaul ITAR has faced resistance, with the State Department and Democrats arguing the export control policy is crucial to keeping defense industry secrets from falling into the hands of rivals such as China.

As the two-year anniversary of AUKUS approaches, the export control debate and a separate tussle over the health of the submarine-industrial base have raised questions about how and when Congress will pass several authorizations needed to make the program into the transformational initiative leaders promised….. [more]
IIRC, AUKUS fits under the rubric of treaties, and the US Senate has a say in that per our Constitution. (I hope they support this).
And I agree with that article: without an ITAR waiver, or a few of them, this may run aground.
Lonewolf_50 is online now  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 07:42
  #1430 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 16,995
Received 1,365 Likes on 621 Posts
Second part of series…

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/20...plan-on-track/

Allies target early AUKUS milestones to keep 20-year plan on track

This is the second story of a three-part series. Click here to read the first. The third will be available Sept. 8.
ORAC is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 08:07
  #1431 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
I can't see Congress NOT suspending ITAR for AUKUS - it would send an appalling message to any allies. If they can't trust the UK and Australia where does that leave everyone else?
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 10:31
  #1432 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Philippines
Posts: 360
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Isnt Congress in Summer recess?
ChrisJ800 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 12:03
  #1433 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
supposed to have reconvened on Sept 5th
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 13:24
  #1434 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Darwin, NT, Australia
Posts: 784
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Meanwhile, the current Australian government draws closer to Beijing.
CoodaShooda is offline  
Old 7th Sep 2023, 16:45
  #1435 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,191
Received 321 Likes on 187 Posts
well they do pay you an awful lot of money as you sell the country to them literally cubic metre by cubic metre
Asturias56 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 7th Sep 2023, 22:58
  #1436 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 377
Received 28 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by CoodaShooda
Meanwhile, the current Australian government draws closer to Beijing.
You are letting your political bias come in the way of the reality. The liberal party also pushed for close trade and cooperation relations with China. Concede and don't make me post links. You are only highlighting how useless Scomo was.
golder is offline  
Old 8th Sep 2023, 00:41
  #1437 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Darwin, NT, Australia
Posts: 784
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What political bias would that be, golder?

I am simply observing the number and frequency of reported visits to China by Labor politicians at both state and federal level. Not to mention agreements between state labor governments and the Chinese authorities. Some of these don’t get a mention in local media but are reported by the Chinese press.

Personally, I’m a fan of peaceful co-existence in preference to warlike non-existence; to paraphrase Sir Humphrey Appleby.
CoodaShooda is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2023, 08:08
  #1438 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 16,995
Received 1,365 Likes on 621 Posts
https://www.defensenews.com/congress...anchetti-says/

AUKUS agreement requires submarine production boost, Franchetti says
ORAC is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2023, 10:46
  #1439 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 377
Received 28 Likes on 17 Posts
AUKUS: A GENERATIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO DEEPEN OUR SECURITY PARTNERSHIPS WITH AUSTRALIA AND THE UNITED KINGDOM

Defense and State Department Officials Testify on Australia-U.K.-U.S. Partnership

Officials from the State and Defense Departments testified on the Australia-U.K.-U.S. security partnership (AUKUS) before the Senate
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x8nzcyx

https://www.c-span.org/video/?530253-1/defense-state-department-officials-testify-australia-uk-us-partnership

Last edited by golder; 21st Sep 2023 at 09:27.
golder is offline  
Old 20th Sep 2023, 11:58
  #1440 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 1,264
Likes: 0
Received 91 Likes on 59 Posts
So at DESI23 (defence expo just held in the UK) BAE had a "Next generation submarine" model on display that they wouldn't talk about

(3.19 if the link to time doesn't work)
rattman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.