AUKUS
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Its the first part of the Australia France Bilateral roadmap, apparently its already covers to be a standing invitiation for french aircraft to participate in Pitch Black and the Navy / Army in Talisman Sabre
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 243
Likes: 42
From: South Glos
I'm sure somone will write a good book on this saga one day, like they did with the Collins class shenanigans.
Before going to the French, the RAN wanted the Astute class but the Aus politicians wouldn't countenance nuclear. The tried to get BAES interested in doing a non-nuclear Astute but it never went anywhere. By the time they finally realised they had to go nuclear, they were too late for Astute, so need to go with Astute replacement.
'Steel, Spies & Spin' is recommended bedtime reading for anyone in the UK submarine business.
Also 'End of an Era' by RJ Daniels which has a chapter on Aus O class replacement. I lent that book to one of the senior British sub engineers involved with Collins and he said it rang true.
Before going to the French, the RAN wanted the Astute class but the Aus politicians wouldn't countenance nuclear. The tried to get BAES interested in doing a non-nuclear Astute but it never went anywhere. By the time they finally realised they had to go nuclear, they were too late for Astute, so need to go with Astute replacement.
'Steel, Spies & Spin' is recommended bedtime reading for anyone in the UK submarine business.
Also 'End of an Era' by RJ Daniels which has a chapter on Aus O class replacement. I lent that book to one of the senior British sub engineers involved with Collins and he said it rang true.
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
Only pillar 2… so far…..
https://globalnews.ca/news/10409582/...iance-trudeau/
Canada exploring possibility of joining AUKUS alliance, Trudeau says
https://archive.ph/2024.04.08-180349...1-96fc61115378
US, UK and Australia say Japan could join part of Aukus pact
https://globalnews.ca/news/10409582/...iance-trudeau/
Canada exploring possibility of joining AUKUS alliance, Trudeau says
https://archive.ph/2024.04.08-180349...1-96fc61115378
US, UK and Australia say Japan could join part of Aukus pact
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/work...rom-australia/
Work ongoing for UK nuclear sub to operate from Australia
As part of AUKUS, the United Kingdom and the United States are establishing a rotational presence of one UK Astute class submarine and up to four U.S. Virginia class submarines at HMAS Stirling, located near Perth in Western Australia, by 2027….
Work ongoing for UK nuclear sub to operate from Australia
As part of AUKUS, the United Kingdom and the United States are establishing a rotational presence of one UK Astute class submarine and up to four U.S. Virginia class submarines at HMAS Stirling, located near Perth in Western Australia, by 2027….
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
Only pillar 2… so far…..
https://globalnews.ca/news/10409582/...iance-trudeau/
Canada exploring possibility of joining AUKUS alliance, Trudeau says
https://globalnews.ca/news/10409582/...iance-trudeau/
Canada exploring possibility of joining AUKUS alliance, Trudeau says
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
AUKUS is expanding its Pillar II component to Land capabilities, with a focus on Long Range Fires for 2024.
Both Australia and UK intend to adopt the Precision Strike Missile and UK has ambitious plans for putting advanced payloads on GMLRS rockets, so there is obvious scope.
Both Australia and UK intend to adopt the Precision Strike Missile and UK has ambitious plans for putting advanced payloads on GMLRS rockets, so there is obvious scope.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,247
Likes: 1,658
From: Ferrara
This weeks Economist
"Some Australians are increasingly sceptical of AUKUS -The government needs to sell its ground-breaking security pact much harder................................ A decades-long commitment, then, with a big price tag—the subs alone are expected to cost Australia up to $368bn. In return, AUKUS ties Australia’s security more closely to America’s and, Australia hopes, ties America more securely into the Indo-Pacific region. On April 8th the defence ministers of the three countries released a cautious statement saying they were “considering co-operation” with Japan, too.
Not everyone in Australia is pleased. Indeed an AUKUS awkward squad, with varied political persuasions and an assortment of not always cohering grievances, is dropping what one AUKUS backer calls “depth charges of dissent”. The critics include Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull, two former prime ministers, Gareth Evans, a former foreign minister, and Hugh White, a strategist. Criticisms start with practicalities—above all, whether America can deliver the Virginia-class subs. .................................. Mr Turnbull says Australia may see no Virginias “simply because the US Navy won’t be able to spare them”. That would leave Australia less secure, not more.
Others question reliance on Britain’s defence capacity, with its underwhelming record for delivering on time, at cost or up to standard. Meanwhile, Mr White contends, Australia will get suckered into subsidising the other two members’ defence industries...............................................
Add to that the risk of Donald Trump’s possible return to the White House. If Mr Trump saw America as spending money on Australian interests, Mr Evans argues, he could nix the whole thing. Australia, he points out, has no plan B. But the strongest criticisms of AUKUS have to do with a loss of sovereign agency—hitching Australia’s fortunes to an ever-less dependable superpower, as Mr Turnbull sees it, or one liable, as Mr Evans argues, to drag Australia into a war over Taiwan that is counter to Australia’s interests.
For now bipartisan support for AUKUS remains strong. Yet the pact will have few concrete results to show for years to come. The risk is that all the griping will start to erode public confidence. From the start AUKUS’s backers have not made a frank enough case for it. The deal was negotiated in secrecy. Anthony Albanese, then leader of the opposition, was given only hours to throw his support behind it. Now prime minister, he paints AUKUS chiefly as a jobs scheme rather than as a project of vital deterrence.
Rather, Labor and the conservative opposition should better highlight the progress made so far. This includes making HMAS Stirling a useful pit-stop for friendly subs, and new American and Australian money being allocated to building up a submarine industrial base. Above all, they should talk of the challenge posed by Chinese ambitions. They should be clearer about the importance of Australia’s contribution to deterrence. And they should be upfront both about the financial costs and, more grimly, the human ones. If Australia’s politicians do not come clean and seek support for AUKUS on honest terms, the sceptics may well erode the consensus for it. That also poses grave consequences for Australia’s own security. For if the point of deterrence is to prevent a war, then you have to be seen to be ready to fight one. ■"
"Some Australians are increasingly sceptical of AUKUS -The government needs to sell its ground-breaking security pact much harder................................ A decades-long commitment, then, with a big price tag—the subs alone are expected to cost Australia up to $368bn. In return, AUKUS ties Australia’s security more closely to America’s and, Australia hopes, ties America more securely into the Indo-Pacific region. On April 8th the defence ministers of the three countries released a cautious statement saying they were “considering co-operation” with Japan, too.
Not everyone in Australia is pleased. Indeed an AUKUS awkward squad, with varied political persuasions and an assortment of not always cohering grievances, is dropping what one AUKUS backer calls “depth charges of dissent”. The critics include Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull, two former prime ministers, Gareth Evans, a former foreign minister, and Hugh White, a strategist. Criticisms start with practicalities—above all, whether America can deliver the Virginia-class subs. .................................. Mr Turnbull says Australia may see no Virginias “simply because the US Navy won’t be able to spare them”. That would leave Australia less secure, not more.
Others question reliance on Britain’s defence capacity, with its underwhelming record for delivering on time, at cost or up to standard. Meanwhile, Mr White contends, Australia will get suckered into subsidising the other two members’ defence industries...............................................
Add to that the risk of Donald Trump’s possible return to the White House. If Mr Trump saw America as spending money on Australian interests, Mr Evans argues, he could nix the whole thing. Australia, he points out, has no plan B. But the strongest criticisms of AUKUS have to do with a loss of sovereign agency—hitching Australia’s fortunes to an ever-less dependable superpower, as Mr Turnbull sees it, or one liable, as Mr Evans argues, to drag Australia into a war over Taiwan that is counter to Australia’s interests.
For now bipartisan support for AUKUS remains strong. Yet the pact will have few concrete results to show for years to come. The risk is that all the griping will start to erode public confidence. From the start AUKUS’s backers have not made a frank enough case for it. The deal was negotiated in secrecy. Anthony Albanese, then leader of the opposition, was given only hours to throw his support behind it. Now prime minister, he paints AUKUS chiefly as a jobs scheme rather than as a project of vital deterrence.
Rather, Labor and the conservative opposition should better highlight the progress made so far. This includes making HMAS Stirling a useful pit-stop for friendly subs, and new American and Australian money being allocated to building up a submarine industrial base. Above all, they should talk of the challenge posed by Chinese ambitions. They should be clearer about the importance of Australia’s contribution to deterrence. And they should be upfront both about the financial costs and, more grimly, the human ones. If Australia’s politicians do not come clean and seek support for AUKUS on honest terms, the sceptics may well erode the consensus for it. That also poses grave consequences for Australia’s own security. For if the point of deterrence is to prevent a war, then you have to be seen to be ready to fight one. ■"
Evertonian
Joined: May 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 13,470
Likes: 278
From: #3117# Ppruner of the Year Nominee 2005
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,083
Likes: 253
From: London/Oxford/New York
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 17
From: South Pole
Being such a high tech & secretive project that doesn’t release details to the public, it’s great to get updates on the SSN AUKUS design status - even if it’s light on detail.
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/20...-technologies/
https://www.defensenews.com/naval/20...-technologies/
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
Not sure how much fail to put in that article since they get it wrong from the start by saying it will have a US reactor and turbines when it will be powered by a RR reactor module built in Derby based on the PWR3 used in Dreadnaught.
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 17
From: South Pole
I suspect that RR are making a lot of the reactor components under licence to keep the politicians happy in that a local company is supplying the main cost item for the SSN’s.
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
Aston Martin cars use AMG engines, it doesn't make them Mercedes.
RR got major input from the US on how to improve the design of the PWR3, leading to a 30% in the number of parts, but that doesn't make it an American reactor.
Designed, built and fuelled at Derby so not dependent on the USA for support during it's service life.
RR got major input from the US on how to improve the design of the PWR3, leading to a 30% in the number of parts, but that doesn't make it an American reactor.
Designed, built and fuelled at Derby so not dependent on the USA for support during it's service life.
Last edited by ORAC; 16th April 2024 at 09:20.
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 1,898
Likes: 17
From: South Pole
Aston Martin cars use AMG engines, it doesn't make them Mercedes.
RR got major input from the US on how to improve the design of the PWR3, leading to a 30% in the number of parts, but that doesn't make it an American reactor.
Designed, built and fuelled at Derby so not dependent on the USA for support during it's service life.
RR got major input from the US on how to improve the design of the PWR3, leading to a 30% in the number of parts, but that doesn't make it an American reactor.
Designed, built and fuelled at Derby so not dependent on the USA for support during it's service life.
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,618
Likes: 205
From: aus
UK does it through https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urenco_Group
Also note the US doesn't do nuclear enrichment, they are running from a stockpile of enriched uranium they purchased from Ex USSR / russian decommissioned warheads. At current rate they are expecting to need to restart enrichment in / around 2050. Also US has a license for a SILEX (Separation of Isotopes by Laser EXcitation) that was developed in australia in the late 90's
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,642
Likes: 7,343
From: Peripatetic
Urenco currently just produced HEU for civilian use.
The UK has a reported stockpile of 22 tons of HEU, each PWR3 reactor contains around 200Kg of HEU which it burns at the rate of 6.06Kg per year during its working life.
Working on the basis of 4 Dreadnaught, 5 SSNA for Australia and 7 for the UK as Astute replacements will need around 3 tons over the next 30 years. So there is no rush to restart production.
The UK has a reported stockpile of 22 tons of HEU, each PWR3 reactor contains around 200Kg of HEU which it burns at the rate of 6.06Kg per year during its working life.
Working on the basis of 4 Dreadnaught, 5 SSNA for Australia and 7 for the UK as Astute replacements will need around 3 tons over the next 30 years. So there is no rush to restart production.