ADF General discussion thread

[Reptilia]

As for defence relevance, every base in Australia needs electricity, that's why the Chinese tried to buy our powerstatiins, and were prohibited from doing so. Imagine an attack on Australia, and the enemy own and runs your power supply?
Imagine trying to defend an attack against 20square kms of wind turbines that if destroyed take years to replace. Imagine how easy it would be for just 1 person to destroy a wind turbine?
Imagine what just 1 cluster munition could do to a solar array?
Yes I know, Imagine what would happen if a nuclear power station took a few hits as well!
Coal and gas would be easiest to defend, and rebuild quickly.

Nuke, Coal and Gas plants are easy to destroy and take ages to replace, so too Wind Farms and Hydro Dams.
Every Home or business with solar+battery setup becomes a power station, it’s a no brainer for defence in the future when most equipment goes electric or hybrid.
Ive seen an entire solar farm wiped out during a cyclone and then up and running again in 3 weeks(probably could be done in just a few days.)

 

[Volkodav]

Nuke, Coal and Gas plants are easy to destroy and take ages to replace, so too Wind Farms and Hydro Dams.
Every Home or business with solar+battery setup becomes a power station, it’s a no brainer for defence in the future when most equipment goes electric or hybrid.
Ive seen an entire solar farm wiped out during a cyclone and then up and running again in 3 weeks(probably could be done in just a few days.)

Solar panels and wind turbines, along with batteries, are the very definition of prefabricated. They are built off site, stored in warehouses then transported to where they are needed for installation.

In fact they would be a sensible addition to any HADR response.

Throw in containerised additive manufacturing and you can start shipping the raw materials they require rather than specific components or spares.

The biggest change is you will need to start training multi skilled artificers again, rather than truck drivers and basic maintainers.

 

[Julian 82]

Nuke, Coal and Gas plants are easy to destroy and take ages to replace, so too Wind Farms and Hydro Dams.
Every Home or business with solar+battery setup becomes a power station, it’s a no brainer for defence in the future when most equipment goes electric or hybrid.
Ive seen an entire solar farm wiped out during a cyclone and then up and running again in 3 weeks(probably could be done in just a few days.)

Except we don’t make any of the batteries or solar panels. Where are these panels coming from? If we go 90% intermittent electricity generation we won’t have any manufacturing industries left.

You need base load AC power for energy intensive industries. It will only get worse with the demand for data centres and supercomputers. This is why Microsoft is buying its own nuclear plants. The fact no other country is attempting to do what we are trying to do speaks for itself.

Under the current energy transition plan, you need to build thousands and thousands of kilometres of transmission lines to connect to the locations that are suitable for wind or solar. This massive expansion of the grid will cost hundreds of billions and it will take longer than anticipated. You can’t build transmission lines across private land without paying just compensation to the affected landowner. Then you have to back up the intermittent energy with gas peaking plants for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. All of these costs have to be amortised so that the proponents recoup their investment. Then the solar panels and wind turbines have to be replaced every 10 - 20 years.

This plan will not be cheap and it will cause significant harm to the environment.

 

[Reptilia]

Except we don’t make any of the batteries or solar panels. Where are these panels coming from? If we go 90% intermittent electricity generation we won’t have any manufacturing industries left.

You need base load AC power for energy intensive industries. It will only get worse with the demand for data centres and supercomputers. This is why Microsoft is buying its own nuclear plants. The fact no other country is attempting to do what we are trying to do speaks for itself.

Under the current energy transition plan, you need to build thousands and thousands of kilometres of transmission lines to connect to the locations that are suitable for wind or solar. This massive expansion of the grid will cost hundreds of billions and it will take longer than anticipated. You can’t build transmission lines across private land without paying just compensation to the affected landowner. Then you have to back up the intermittent energy with gas peaking plants for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. All of these costs have to be amortised so that the proponents recoup their investment. Then the solar panels and wind turbines have to be replaced every 10 - 20 years.

This plan will not be cheap and it will cause significant harm to the environment.

The plan is to build both panels and batteries at scale in Australia.
I’m not against nuclear but building a bunch of 3+ Gen reactors to be completed in 2040s is dumb. We are better off waiting for the next generation, unfortunately still 10-15 years away.
The focus for next 15-20 years should be on Solar, Batteries, Wind, Hydro + Gas whilst keeping an eye on Nuclear tech.

 

[Volkodav]

Except we don’t make any of the batteries or solar panels. Where are these panels coming from? If we go 90% intermittent electricity generation we won’t have any manufacturing industries left.

You need base load AC power for energy intensive industries. It will only get worse with the demand for data centres and supercomputers. This is why Microsoft is buying its own nuclear plants. The fact no other country is attempting to do what we are trying to do speaks for itself.

Under the current energy transition plan, you need to build thousands and thousands of kilometres of transmission lines to connect to the locations that are suitable for wind or solar. This massive expansion of the grid will cost hundreds of billions and it will take longer than anticipated. You can’t build transmission lines across private land without paying just compensation to the affected landowner. Then you have to back up the intermittent energy with gas peaking plants for when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow. All of these costs have to be amortised so that the proponents recoup their investment. Then the solar panels and wind turbines have to be replaced every 10 - 20 years.

This plan will not be cheap and it will cause significant harm to the environment.

You are completely missing the point.

Power stations, no matter whether they are nuclear, coal, gas, wind, solar, wave, hydro, reclaimed cow farts, etc. all require transmission through a grid.

Further more, grids, these days are being stabilised by fast acting energy storage.

You can have solar on your roof and batteries, you can't have a gas or coal plant in your back yard.

Anything that takes down transmission lines takes down all, non distributed power. It's simple, transmission is source agnostic.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Just as reminder of a US Army project. Though of course the ADF is not there yet. Army solicits bids for microreactors to site at military bases I add this for information purposes rather than advocacy, as Australia is simply not there yet.

 

[Volkodav]

Just as reminder of a US Army project. Though of course the ADF is not there yet. Army solicits bids for microreactors to site at military bases I add this for information purposes rather than advocacy, as Australia is simply not there yet.

Yes, I already mentioned the US army requirement that kicked of the concept.

Not an option for my back yard though.

 

[old faithful]

This is so much more than nuclear (coal/gas) good, renewables bad. You can literally set up solar cells and wind turbines at campsites, grey nomads do it all the time (before going off to vote

Mate, I spend so much time out bush prospecting, you don't need to tell me about solar power!
I have a trailer with a 160w panel and 110apmh agm, my car has duel batteries and I use a 250w solar blanket when parked up as well I have 100amph lithium bank that I use another 200w blanket....and I still take a 2kva generator for cloudy days, you see, power for two Engel fridges , and enough power to charge 2 metal detectors and run everything else becomes compromised even if a few leafs fall on a panel, you never ever get the max w that a panel can produce, regardless of of the regulator, a 250w panel might give you 210w for a few hours in ideal conditions, but if cloudy, might drop as low 60w or less. The lithium bank I have will only allow 5 amph max charge. AGM batteries rated at 100 amph really only have about 60 amph of real time storage.

 

[SammyC]

Australia’s $1B missile deal exposes gaps in Pacific defense race

Fist step in larger AMRAAM inventories, with the US approving up to 400 new units for Australia. I am assuming the Aust Government would likely place this order following the election. At $1.7B AUS, this is a sizable chunk of the $19 billion allocated in the IIP for missile procurement over the next 10 years.

I get confused with the two missile variants, being the C8 and the D3. The order is about 50/50 (200 each). The above article is Bulgarian, but seems to be the most in depth that I have found on the specific derivatives.

I had always thought the D3 was the latest, and has the larger rocket for the additional range. While I understand the C8 has the same electronics and sensors as the D3, my understanding is that it still has the C7 variant rocket, so shorter range.

If you can buy the D3, why would you take the C8.

It's obviously more complex than that as several other countries, including Japan have also recently ordered both types.

Does anybody know what purpose the C8 has over the D3.

 

[StevoJH]

Interestingly both the Gorton and Whitlam governments were apparently looking at nuclear power and (Gorton mostly and less likely Whitlam) nuclear weapons.

Many don't realise how extensively Australia and Australians, were involved in both the US and UK nuclear programs. It would be harder now as we have dumbed ourselves down over the last 20 to 30 years, but up until the 2010s there were still enough old and bolds around to kick something off.

Would it really be a problem though? The physics and design details would be thoroughly understood, the things have been around for 80+ years now.

And as time goes on and manufacturing techniques advance it probably gets easier and easier to actually build the things. If something like that was needed in a hurry it doesn't need to be perfect to the closest tolerances possible in 2025, it just has to work.

Anything like that would need to be invisible, at least until there was viable product ready for deployment. Probably at some remote CSIRO or Defence site.

 

[StevoJH]

In regards to obtaining warheads, I would have thought teaming again with the UK, who are almost certainly going to need to restart their nuclear weapon production line in the very near future to prepare for the US pulling out of Europe. They are going to be desperately looking for financial partners to underwrite the expense, and we have fat check books.

They are apparently already working on new warheads (a US Admiral conveniently told the US Congress about it in 2020, no announcement had been made from the UK side).

The biggest problem is that the UK (and US as well) don't currently produce enriched uranium AFAIK. Their production facilities were decommissioned decades ago.

 

[Todjaeger]

They are apparently already working on new warheads (a US Admiral conveniently told the US Congress about it in 2020, no announcement had been made from the UK side).

The biggest problem is that the UK (and US as well) don't currently produce enriched uranium AFAIK. Their production facilities were decommissioned decades ago.

The W93 warhead is what I believed is planned to replace existing USN stocks of the plutonium W88 warheads in Trident III missiles aboard USN SSBN's, which should be the Columbia-class by the time they enter service. Not sure the exact status of US uranium enrichment/separation capabilities, but if the new warhead is to also be plutonium based, then uranium enrichment would not really matter. The ability to process uranium into plutonium would be more important.

 

[downunderblue]

Would it really be a problem though? The physics and design details would be thoroughly understood, the things have been around for 80+ years now.

And as time goes on and manufacturing techniques advance it probably gets easier and easier to actually build the things. If something like that was needed in a hurry it doesn't need to be perfect to the closest tolerances possible in 2025, it just has to work.

Anything like that would need to be invisible, at least until there was viable product ready for deployment. Probably at some remote CSIRO or Defence site.

I had a look at this a few days ago.

Whilst you can go down a rabbit hole in actually determining how AU could access the expertise or resources to obtain, build or procure a fission device, and a method (JP has a dual use rocket similar to the US LGM-118 Peacekeeper) to accurately deliver it, you utilimately hit a complete dead end when you factor in our law.

In the year of 1986 we signed the Treaty of Rarotonga. This was later enacted into legislation by the Commonwealth under the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty Act 1986 (SPNFZ Act). The SPNFZ Act makes it unlawful to (per sections 8 to 13):

• 8. Manufacture, production and acquisition of nuclear explosive devices prohibited
• 9. Research and development relating to manufacture or production of nuclear explosive devices prohibited
• 10. Possession of, or control over, nuclear explosive devices prohibited
• 11. Stationing of nuclear explosive devices in Australia prohibited
• 12. Testing of nuclear explosive devices prohibited
• 13. Facilitation of manufacture, production, acquisition or testing of nuclear explosive devices prohibited

Section 16(a) of the SPNFZ Act outlines the penalty for being found guilty in contradiction of sections 8 to 13 (individually or collectively) as:

• imprisonment for a period not exceeding 20 years or a fine not exceeding 1,000 penalty units, or both.

Call me a naysayer and/or worrywart, sure, but I think that pretty much kills anything until the law is repealed and that cannot ever be done without full disclosure (and debate/ passing through both houses then obtaining royal consent etc).

In one of my favourite quotes of sci-fi movie history, Private William Hudson once said "Game Over Man, Game Over". I think he nailed it there 100%, just like the SPNFZ Act does in the above scenario.

The other scenario is just not get caught ... lol

 

[spoz]

I don’t think anybody is suggesting that Aust’s acquisition of nuclear weapons is currently in the planning anywhere. If a need was felt for nuclear weapons, it is probable that the alarm would be such that the relevant Parliamentary activity would be completed in double quick time. Having the s**t scared out of you can work wonders for your view of what is important - and it would take that. We’re nowhere near such a state at present.

 

[Tbone]

If the US is giving us nuclear powered submarines could we take on a nuclear power cruise missile bing developed by the U.S. for their Virginia class subs.. which we are receiving in 2032…https://news.usni.org/2025/02/17/report-to-congress-on-nuclear-sea-launched-cruise-missile

Pros And Cons Of The Navy's Controversial Submarine-Launched Nuclear Cruise Missile

Will Trump returning to the White House put wind in the sails of the nuclear-tipped cruise missile program he started?

www.twz.com

 

[Tbone]

We all know it would be a game changer for us and put us back in a position of power!

 

[Bob53]

I see it as an incredibly expensive straw man to divert investment to coal and gas on the promise of something better down the road.

The thing is, the grid is already changing, batteries are real and here to stay, so is roof top solar. The big batteries have already shown their worth in improving grid resilience.

At a tactical level, how the electrons are produced doesn't matter so much any more, it's how they are transmitted and stored (which previously only applied to major hydro).

I'm looking to buy an extra couple of batteries because our power bill went from $300 credit average per quarter to a bill of $1500, because the scum sucking turd retailers cut our feed in tariff by 80% . Instead of selling to them I'm going to store it for my own use.

Why did the tariffs get cut? Easy, there is a glut of power during the day, meaning the "baseload" generators are uneconomical, so they are "taxing" renewable producers to subsidise them.

The sooner we move to a predominantly distributed grid the better in my opinion. Not just for cost and efficiency, but for resilience and security.

We had solar and a battery, as well as a generator in Darwin because of grid issues. Powerlines being taken down (storms), transformers arcing out (suicidal fruit bats). No issues now, just a beep and the flicker of lights when some bogan crashes into a power pole.

At the strategic level, look at Ukraine and Russia's attacks in infrastructure.

Hypersonic missiles even conventionally tipped ballistic missiles would be very effective against fixed power stations, coal, gas, or nuclear. Major substations would be harder as would big batteries, but a distributed network, I honestly don't see how they could take that down, so long as cyber defences were up to scratch.

The wholesale rates are not set by retailers. They are set by Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO).

 

[jeffb]

We all know it would be a game changer for us and put us back in a position of power!

Position of power? I'm not so sure... How many warheads would you need to hold to act as a deterrent to China? It's just not feasible and if a concerted effort towards this level was made, it could lead to Australia becoming internationally isolated, a weak position for a nation our size.

I know it's not sexy but the money would be better spent automating our supply chains and reinvigorating our manufacturing industry.

The smart path forward would be to take the time and money now to organise our industry, power grid, and civilian infrastructure in a distributed and modular way rather than using monolithic projects from the 1960s, 1970s, or 1980s.