AUKUS
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 638
Likes: 101
From: australia
I can't see those two opinion pieces of manned diesel electric, coming to fruition; I think the US will continue with SSN/SSBN and the growing UUV
It seems to be where Australia is heading
It seems to be where Australia is heading
Sharks for filling the moat: what Anduril’s autonomous submarines can do for Australia
11 Sep 2025|Sam Goldsmith and ASPI staff
Autonomous submarines that Australia has launched into production are likely to relieve operational pressure on the country’s crewed submarines, undertake the most dangerous undersea missions, and present an enemy with greater risk of detection and attack.
While the government and builder Anduril are saying little about specific technology built into the submarines, called Ghost Sharks, some features are clearly probable or even certain, at least when the design is fully developed. Likely missions include communications and radar intelligence, detecting ships and other submarines, and laying mines.
The $1.7 billion, five-year contract announced on 10 September would cover production of a first batch of dozens of Ghost Sharks, with entry into service early in 2026, the government said. The money would also pay for maintaining the submarines in service and for further development of the design.
11 Sep 2025|Sam Goldsmith and ASPI staff
Autonomous submarines that Australia has launched into production are likely to relieve operational pressure on the country’s crewed submarines, undertake the most dangerous undersea missions, and present an enemy with greater risk of detection and attack.While the government and builder Anduril are saying little about specific technology built into the submarines, called Ghost Sharks, some features are clearly probable or even certain, at least when the design is fully developed. Likely missions include communications and radar intelligence, detecting ships and other submarines, and laying mines.
The $1.7 billion, five-year contract announced on 10 September would cover production of a first batch of dozens of Ghost Sharks, with entry into service early in 2026, the government said. The money would also pay for maintaining the submarines in service and for further development of the design.
Last edited by golder; 4th March 2026 at 20:02.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,245
Likes: 1,657
From: Ferrara
I think today's news strengthens the case for an SSN. Range & speed that a conventional boat just doesn't have.
Yes there are quite a few conventional & AIP subs around but they're built because they can't afford an SSN. And TBH the record of reliability for conventional boats isn't exactly brilliant.
Yes there are quite a few conventional & AIP subs around but they're built because they can't afford an SSN. And TBH the record of reliability for conventional boats isn't exactly brilliant.
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 883
Likes: 225
From: Australia
I think today's news strengthens the case for an SSN. Range & speed that a conventional boat just doesn't have.
Yes there are quite a few conventional & AIP subs around but they're built because they can't afford an SSN. And TBH the record of reliability for conventional boats isn't exactly brilliant.
Yes there are quite a few conventional & AIP subs around but they're built because they can't afford an SSN. And TBH the record of reliability for conventional boats isn't exactly brilliant.
Reliability of SSKs would likely be on a par with SSNs if the same was spent on their maintenance! Future operation of SSNs by RAN will likely suck maintenance funds away from every other class in the fleet (as if the situation isn't already problematical now).
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,245
Likes: 1,657
From: Ferrara
your problem with a conventional sub is always range - especially submerged
For the Collins boats Wiki gives
Range
A Los Angleses is given as
Speed
Endurance 90 days
For Australia - it's 2500 kms just to reach the southern side of Indonesia from Fremantle. That's 100 hours/4days submerged for an SSN but 10 days on the surface for a Collins.
For the Collins boats Wiki gives
Range
- 11,500 nautical miles (21,300 km; 13,200 mi) at 10 knots (19 km/h; 12 mph) surfaced
- 9,000 nmi (17,000 km; 10,000 mi) at 10 kn (19 km/h; 12 mph) periscope
- 480 nmi (890 km; 550 mi) at 4 kn (7.4 km/h; 4.6 mph) submerged
A Los Angleses is given as
Speed
- Surfaced: 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph)
- Submerged: Over 25 knots (46 km/h; 29 mph), official;[3] 33+ knots, reported[4][5]
Endurance 90 days
For Australia - it's 2500 kms just to reach the southern side of Indonesia from Fremantle. That's 100 hours/4days submerged for an SSN but 10 days on the surface for a Collins.
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 638
Likes: 101
From: australia
Your point is sound, In fairness there are regional refuel/supply ports, To me the biggest thing is detection, Snorting is/will be problematic with space based, LiDAR, SAR radar, Two weeks AIP still flatten the main battery bank base load, Collins decided against AIP because it didn't extend the underwater that much and the space could be used for more advantage
Australia was a LADS world leader, I don't know where we are now,
Laser Airborne Depth Sounder (LADS) | DST
"In 1996, an improved LADS laser platform was developed for United States Navy use in a P-3 Orion aircraft. In 1998, the new-generation LADS Mk II commenced commercial operations mounted in a de Havilland Dash 8-202 aircraft."
This is what China is claiming in 2019
China has tested a new laser designed to find submarines. This is how it works - ABC News
Australia was a LADS world leader, I don't know where we are now,
Laser Airborne Depth Sounder (LADS) | DST
"In 1996, an improved LADS laser platform was developed for United States Navy use in a P-3 Orion aircraft. In 1998, the new-generation LADS Mk II commenced commercial operations mounted in a de Havilland Dash 8-202 aircraft."
This is what China is claiming in 2019
China has tested a new laser designed to find submarines. This is how it works - ABC News
Last edited by golder; 7th March 2026 at 05:31.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,245
Likes: 1,657
From: Ferrara
Even based out of Darwin a conventional sub will only reach as far as Mindanao max - not even as far N as Guam or as far west as Singapore. Of course most people have no real idea just how far China is away from Australia. Finland is closer to China than Australia is.
You'd have to have basing agreements with Indonesia and IIRC they are dead set against foreign bases of any sort
You'd have to have basing agreements with Indonesia and IIRC they are dead set against foreign bases of any sort
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 4,087
Likes: 4,429
From: 3rd Rock, #29B
Even based out of Darwin a conventional sub will only reach as far as Mindanao max - not even as far N as Guam or as far west as Singapore. Of course most people have no real idea just how far China is away from Australia. Finland is closer to China than Australia is.
You'd have to have basing agreements with Indonesia and IIRC they are dead set against foreign bases of any sort
You'd have to have basing agreements with Indonesia and IIRC they are dead set against foreign bases of any sort
If Australia is asked to be a party to a contingent somewhere, then that presumably involves the logistics of local basing to do so. Say the RAN is asked to defend Barking Sands, presumably the local facilities would be available. If it is asked to support activity in the straits of Hormuz, then again, Dodge would probably be available, and darn, it has some good burgers there. It is unlikely that the Australian PM is going to wake up with a rush of blood to the head and go and declare that the Malvinas have to surrender unconditionally to Canberra. Not even Western Samoa, unlikely even Fiji, and NZL, well, since the underarm bowling incident, it is not so open to the affections of its cuzn's. As Surfers and Sydneys eastern burbs are predominantly NZ'ers, the kiwis would like nothing more than the opportunity to have a welfare handout from the grate southern land (not my opinion; the rhetoric that was passed in years gone by that avoided doing the math on the economic benefits of C.E.R.).
I'd actually support an effort to pillage and plunder the supply of biltong from the far side of the I.O., curse you Southern Africa for my addiction to biltong. It remains one of the greatest exports from Africa that doesn't have a "MADE BY DENEL" sticker on the outside.
Exactly who is the enemy that is considered under AUKUS? China? They increase their sphere of influence by being able to actually afford to bribe South Pacific island nations with Yuan, and RMB, while Australia's population objects to national aid and foreign assistance to its neighbours as being a waste. Either way, there is a cost, either in assistance or in defence posture if having PLAN boats moored in the Solomons is offending our sense of order. Being vigilant is not a bad thing, so the RQ-4 seems to be a reasonable proposition, but having a capital ship that becomes your whole defence force seems to be a risky proposition.
Submarines are a planners nightmare, as they have to be accounted for, whether they are there or not, so long as they exist somewhere. Might be the reason the Chinese took such efforts to establish submerged entry to their bases in SW Hainan.
Cocos Keeling apart from having bloody big crabs, has a great yacht club, x'lent harbours, and last time I checked, it still had an Ozzy Ozzy Ozzy sticker on the flag. Same for X'mas Island, which is actually a pretty cool plaice. Both have great beaches, and are close enough to close out the Straits of Malacca, without depleting all of the XXXX on board. If you are wanting to make friends with the PLAN as they covet thy neighbour, I would assume that Oz is unlikely to take on PRC by its lonesome self... so there is Guam, Naha, Yokosuka, Sasebo, Subic (still good for a steak), Viet Nam still has great ports, and brilliant Pho, and would probably not be averse to some presence if the SCS has gone rowdy, they have a history, like India of plinking with the PRC, and they have legitimate annoyances with the 7 dash, 9 dash, toilet dash whatever it is that the PLAN puts forth neglecting UNCLOS (but, given that team members within AUKUS seem to need remedial reading and comprehension classes when it comes to the UN Charter, and international law... hard to get too grumpy, after all, Chinese is quite a change from English so its hardly surprising that there are some inconsistencies with "compliance" with the rules that at one time it was though was a good idea to place into print).
With reports that the apparent adults in the room have been describing the tiff in Iran in terms of Armageddon, the scripture version, not the screen play with Bruce Willis & co, it all appears to be rather irrelevant; we may as well get out the popcorn, and marshmallows and watch the show that is being put on today, AUKUS or no AUKUS.
Collins boats have a range of 11,000nm, which is not shabby for a conventional tub without fleet support, what other countries does Oz really want to go pick a fight with?
Last edited by fdr; 8th March 2026 at 22:02.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,245
Likes: 1,657
From: Ferrara
That of course is the big question.
there are quite a few people on here who seem to think that Australia will finish up fighting China, and some seem to look forward to it. There are also those who would support the USA come what may. And those who can't face the idea that a very small set of armed forces may be a reasonable position for Australia. A constabulary force in your own (very large) backyard.
That's for Australia and Australians to decide - but I think the rest of us should point out the issues with the various choices.
there are quite a few people on here who seem to think that Australia will finish up fighting China, and some seem to look forward to it. There are also those who would support the USA come what may. And those who can't face the idea that a very small set of armed forces may be a reasonable position for Australia. A constabulary force in your own (very large) backyard.
That's for Australia and Australians to decide - but I think the rest of us should point out the issues with the various choices.
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 4,087
Likes: 4,429
From: 3rd Rock, #29B
That of course is the big question.
there are quite a few people on here who seem to think that Australia will finish up fighting China, and some seem to look forward to it. There are also those who would support the USA come what may. And those who can't face the idea that a very small set of armed forces may be a reasonable position for Australia. A constabulary force in your own (very large) backyard.
That's for Australia and Australians to decide - but I think the rest of us should point out the issues with the various choices.
there are quite a few people on here who seem to think that Australia will finish up fighting China, and some seem to look forward to it. There are also those who would support the USA come what may. And those who can't face the idea that a very small set of armed forces may be a reasonable position for Australia. A constabulary force in your own (very large) backyard.
That's for Australia and Australians to decide - but I think the rest of us should point out the issues with the various choices.
Mongolia did its bit in spreading DNA about a fair chunk of the planet, and nowadays is an interesting place to spend a few days at, other than in mid winter, when the reason the hordes went cross country becomes self evident. The rest of the dynasties of the Middle Kingdom, Qin, Han, Tang, Qing, and the other 9 or 10 dynasties were for the most part busy sorting out their own mess, the majority of conflicts were internal. China has a beef with Taiwan, which is not over the island, that has never been a part of China proper. The nationalist Chinese under Chiang Kai-Shek's KMT were not Boy Scouts, but they opposed Mao Zedong and the CCP, and no love was lost in the exercise. Mao did his bit to set back China by a couple of centuries with the cultural revolution, which was another ground hog day, with a different ribbon to forerunners.
China has been successful as it determined that the PRC's CCP could do well by having a hybrid capitalism with communist political control, and that has been fairly successful, until one dude came along and decided that the never again dynasties, was given the heave ho, in a amazingly public manner not so long ago. So, now we got an emperor in all but name. Xi, in strengthening his power base has ended up being pretty effective at ferreting (pandering?) out some spectacular corruption that even rhetoric Russians would blush over. The reported water in propellant tanks of ICBMs was but one example, legions of soldiers being on books and not in boots was another.
As annoying as the wiggles on the map are to cartography, and the continued harassment of the Pinoy's navy, the fundamental issue that the PRC is a net importer of food from the countries that it irritates, and has an energy import problem through chokepoints, it also is conflicted in being happy with urbanisation and affluence which is put at risk by its actions in the SCS and towards Taiwan.
All up, and having lived and worked in China, my view is that the term Chinese Fire Drill was quite apt where the government is involved, whereas, anything in the way of commerce is well done, so long as the CCP is not messing with the omelettes, as it has with the property market within and without its own territory. China has 3 ignition sources, the SCS, Taiwan and the 2 bits of India that it continues to have spats with India.
The PRC has internal conflicts that exist from the diversity of the population, which bubbles away in the background, adding sauce to the feast that is China. Never dull.
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,346
Likes: 2,186
From: Texas
Been a few years since I presented a paper on the defensive use of diesels with AIP. For a continent sized country like Australia, you'd need at least three operating bases, each with a few subs and supporting infrastructure, and one ship yard where any of the fleet can get refit/overhaul.
For a smaller country with a shorter coastline -- say, Iran -- who have mostly shallow water in their defensive zones, it's a very good fit (capability/manpower/budget/industrial capacity combination). Same is true for the Baltic nations, and arguable for quite a few of the Mediterranean nations.
The discussion on what AIP/Diesel does for your overall posture is very dependent on how you see your overall regional mission and alliance structure. Not a simple formula when you cast forward 10-15 years into the future to try and figure out the right mix. (fdr's point is a reasonable one, but the issue of foreign basing rights was well raised by Asturias).
For a smaller country with a shorter coastline -- say, Iran -- who have mostly shallow water in their defensive zones, it's a very good fit (capability/manpower/budget/industrial capacity combination). Same is true for the Baltic nations, and arguable for quite a few of the Mediterranean nations.
The discussion on what AIP/Diesel does for your overall posture is very dependent on how you see your overall regional mission and alliance structure. Not a simple formula when you cast forward 10-15 years into the future to try and figure out the right mix. (fdr's point is a reasonable one, but the issue of foreign basing rights was well raised by Asturias).
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,631
Likes: 7,338
From: Peripatetic
The flexibility of an SSN.....
Tom Sharpe reports HMS Anson is no longer alongside in Australia as was previously planned.
There will be no official comment on her deployment, but she is armed with Tomahawk missiles and could provide additional firepower in the Gulf region, if sent there. She could make the transit in less than a week.
There will be no official comment on her deployment, but she is armed with Tomahawk missiles and could provide additional firepower in the Gulf region, if sent there. She could make the transit in less than a week.
Joined: Jun 2001
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 4,087
Likes: 4,429
From: 3rd Rock, #29B
Whether there is an N or not, any boat being away from the dock is a complication to the B team. My point is, SSNs are inherently a long range projection of power, and they achieve the range as a consequence of higher production and maintenance costs compared to their little brothers, the SS/SSGs. While manning might appear to be higher for a large fleet of SS boats, each boat is a lower component of the capital ships of a nation.
Quantity has a quality all of its own when things get kinetic, all other things being equal. SS boats are generally a pain to track. Id take a 6 pack over a single bottle any day.
On basing, a single base is an invitation for bad things to happen. Boats should be distributed whenever possible, their location is not something that should be traced on google earth. This includes all existing naval facilities, Ukraine has been handing out pointers of what to care about, that needs an overhaul of our assumptions unless we want our fleets to resemble the boneyards of Rybachiy bay.
Quantity has a quality all of its own when things get kinetic, all other things being equal. SS boats are generally a pain to track. Id take a 6 pack over a single bottle any day.
On basing, a single base is an invitation for bad things to happen. Boats should be distributed whenever possible, their location is not something that should be traced on google earth. This includes all existing naval facilities, Ukraine has been handing out pointers of what to care about, that needs an overhaul of our assumptions unless we want our fleets to resemble the boneyards of Rybachiy bay.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,245
Likes: 1,657
From: Ferrara
" their location is not something that should be traced on google earth."
that boat sailed many many years ago
It's something like 20 years since I was told by a Lt Gen USMC:-
"assume anything you put on the web or in an email will be in the public domain eventually. There is no such thing as a "secret" any longer. We live in an age of total information, totally distributed".
that boat sailed many many years ago
It's something like 20 years since I was told by a Lt Gen USMC:-
"assume anything you put on the web or in an email will be in the public domain eventually. There is no such thing as a "secret" any longer. We live in an age of total information, totally distributed".
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,631
Likes: 7,338
From: Peripatetic
Key US FMS published for SSN-AUKUS, covering support to the "design and development of AUKUS-specific VERTICAL DEPLOYMENT TUBES; common weapon launchers; MULTIPLE ALL-UP ROUND CANISTER support service modules" plus other supporting electronics etc.
United Kingdom – Submarine Combat and Weapon Systems, Technical Support, U.S. and UK Embedded Personnel, and Associated Training
FOREIGN MILITARY SALES: CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATIONBUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS
MARCH 20, 2026
The government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested to buy technical assistance to the design and development of AUKUS-specific vertical deployment tubes; common weapon launchers; multiple all-up-round canister support service modules; network input output units; servers and switches and custom electronics, which are specific components of the submarine warfare federated tactical system; simulation equipment; engineering demonstration models; testing and installation equipment; equipment components; information technology hardware; publications and technical documentation; software and source code; U.S. industry support; facility support; personnel training; and embedded U.S. and UK personnel located in both UK and U.S. facilities to support submarine design. Other support services included are U.S. government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services; test and trials support; studies and surveys; other related elements of engineering services for associated equipment and program support; and other related elements of logistics and program support that will all be added to a previously implemented case whose value was under the congressional notification threshold.
The original Foreign Military Sales case, valued at $50 million, included the following non-MDE items: non-recurring engineering support; design integration of U.S. equipment; submarine combat and weapons systems support for design and production of next generation, future class of nuclear-powered attack submarines developed for the Royal Australian Navy and United Kingdom Royal Navy, and developed as part of the trilateral security partnership between Australia, UK, and the U.S. (AUKUS); delivery of software and technical publications for combat and weapon systems, and UK liaison office administrative support to the purchaser’s security assistance foreign representative(s) at Naval Sea Systems Command Headquarters. The revised estimated total cost for the case is $1 billion.
This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a NATO Ally that is an important force for political stability and economic progress in Europe.
The proposed sale will improve the UK’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing an effective combatant deterrent capability to protect maritime interests and infrastructure. This acquisition will enhance stability and maritime security in the northwestern region of Europe and contribute to the security and strategic objectives of NATO and the United States. The UK will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be Huntington Ingalls Industries, located in Newport News, VA; General Dynamics Electric Boat, located in Groton, CT; General Dynamics Mission Systems, located in Fairfax, VA; Progeny Systems, located in Manassas, VA; Lockheed Martin, located in Bethesda, MD; and Systems Planning and Analysis, located in Alexandria, VA.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
FOREIGN MILITARY SALES: CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATIONBUREAU OF POLITICAL-MILITARY AFFAIRS
MARCH 20, 2026
The government of the United Kingdom (UK) has requested to buy technical assistance to the design and development of AUKUS-specific vertical deployment tubes; common weapon launchers; multiple all-up-round canister support service modules; network input output units; servers and switches and custom electronics, which are specific components of the submarine warfare federated tactical system; simulation equipment; engineering demonstration models; testing and installation equipment; equipment components; information technology hardware; publications and technical documentation; software and source code; U.S. industry support; facility support; personnel training; and embedded U.S. and UK personnel located in both UK and U.S. facilities to support submarine design. Other support services included are U.S. government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services; test and trials support; studies and surveys; other related elements of engineering services for associated equipment and program support; and other related elements of logistics and program support that will all be added to a previously implemented case whose value was under the congressional notification threshold.
The original Foreign Military Sales case, valued at $50 million, included the following non-MDE items: non-recurring engineering support; design integration of U.S. equipment; submarine combat and weapons systems support for design and production of next generation, future class of nuclear-powered attack submarines developed for the Royal Australian Navy and United Kingdom Royal Navy, and developed as part of the trilateral security partnership between Australia, UK, and the U.S. (AUKUS); delivery of software and technical publications for combat and weapon systems, and UK liaison office administrative support to the purchaser’s security assistance foreign representative(s) at Naval Sea Systems Command Headquarters. The revised estimated total cost for the case is $1 billion.
This proposed sale will support the foreign policy and national security objectives of the United States by improving the security of a NATO Ally that is an important force for political stability and economic progress in Europe.
The proposed sale will improve the UK’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing an effective combatant deterrent capability to protect maritime interests and infrastructure. This acquisition will enhance stability and maritime security in the northwestern region of Europe and contribute to the security and strategic objectives of NATO and the United States. The UK will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment into its armed forces.
The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.
The principal contractors will be Huntington Ingalls Industries, located in Newport News, VA; General Dynamics Electric Boat, located in Groton, CT; General Dynamics Mission Systems, located in Fairfax, VA; Progeny Systems, located in Manassas, VA; Lockheed Martin, located in Bethesda, MD; and Systems Planning and Analysis, located in Alexandria, VA.
There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,346
Likes: 2,186
From: Texas
Progeny Systems... FWIW, I think that is a subset of General dynamics.
{A friend of mine just left them...he's got property in Idaho, and he's decided that he'd rather be there...}
{A friend of mine just left them...he's got property in Idaho, and he's decided that he'd rather be there...}
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 277
Likes: 153
From: Australia
Joined: Dec 2017
Posts: 638
Likes: 101
From: australia
Schooling has started too
Australia announces $15.8m Propel submarine scholarship program - Defence Connect
24 March 2026
Photo: Robert DoughertyThe federal government has launched a $15.8 million initiative called Propel: Australian Submarine Scholarship program to support the development of Australia’s future nuclear-powered submarine workforce.
Propel will offer up to 3,000 scholarships to students studying in priority science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields at Australian universities.
Over its three‑year rollout, the program will provide financial support as well as opportunities to learn from some of Australia’s most accomplished scientists and engineers. More than 800 students nationwide are already taking part as members of the inaugural cohort.
Delivered through a partnership between the Australian Submarine Agency and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE), Propel will help grow the highly skilled workforce needed to deliver and sustain Australia’s nuclear-powered submarines, a key capability under the AUKUS partnership.
“AUKUS represents one of the most significant industrial endeavours in our country’s history and the Albanese government continues to invest in young Australians who will make up our future workforce,” Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence Richard Marles said.
“In order to successfully deliver Australia’s nuclear-powered submarine program, we need to ensure we are developing the skills needed to build and sustain them.
“The Propel scholarship program will help to strengthen our future defence workforce – helping to deliver the capabilities that will keep our nation safe and support a future made in Australia.”
Australia announces $15.8m Propel submarine scholarship program - Defence Connect
Australia announces $15.8m Propel submarine scholarship program
Naval24 March 2026
Photo: Robert DoughertyThe federal government has launched a $15.8 million initiative called Propel: Australian Submarine Scholarship program to support the development of Australia’s future nuclear-powered submarine workforce.
Propel will offer up to 3,000 scholarships to students studying in priority science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields at Australian universities.
Over its three‑year rollout, the program will provide financial support as well as opportunities to learn from some of Australia’s most accomplished scientists and engineers. More than 800 students nationwide are already taking part as members of the inaugural cohort.
Delivered through a partnership between the Australian Submarine Agency and the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE), Propel will help grow the highly skilled workforce needed to deliver and sustain Australia’s nuclear-powered submarines, a key capability under the AUKUS partnership.
“AUKUS represents one of the most significant industrial endeavours in our country’s history and the Albanese government continues to invest in young Australians who will make up our future workforce,” Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence Richard Marles said.
“In order to successfully deliver Australia’s nuclear-powered submarine program, we need to ensure we are developing the skills needed to build and sustain them.
“The Propel scholarship program will help to strengthen our future defence workforce – helping to deliver the capabilities that will keep our nation safe and support a future made in Australia.”