Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[Mark_Evans]

Is a submarine dry dock to be considered in South Australia for the maintenance of the submarines ,I understand presently the U.S has issues with this and has plans to address it
Submarine maintenance backlogs and delays take toll on fleet’s development work at sea (defensenews.com)

Yes, I was wondering about that. No mention yet of Adelaide possibly supporting overhaul on US submarines. Could Adelaide get involved one of the levels of maintenance on the Virginia's and start getting used to the boats before they arrive.
Another article from Sept 22 here. NAVSEA: Navy ‘Struggling’ to Get Attack Subs Out of Repairs on Time as Demand Increases - USNI News

 

[hauritz]

Seems absurd that we are not developing a parallel civil nuke industry. I suspect this will ultimately be initiated under a coalition government and Labor will not remove it should the wheels get moving.

Just so happens that on the news tonight they talked about another surge in power prices. Coincidence yes, but my first thought was that we need to take advantage of the technology, industry and skilled workforce that will be created to support this submarine program.

Got to recoup some of that $365 billion.

 

[Reptilia]

I would be very surprised.

Think an expanded or additional ship lift and hard stand

Can see the wharf being extended and the sub lift being lengthened or replaced with something like the size of the ship lift.
The ASC shed is about 150m long, both Virginia block 1-4 115m and future SSNA around 120m will fit in it undercover.
The final Assembly hall should be directly behind it, beside the Hunter class assembly hall.

something like this posted in the advertiser, https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news...e/news-story/4b5b287c742e7c3eecd50d7cec3e9a71

except the assembly hall would be directly behind Asc. The yard would extend much further than the proposed attack yard. Several other buildings would be needed. That might move a few more companies further down the rd like they have done previously. Building 310 on the picture no longer exists.

 

[Aardvark144]

Interesting comments for sure, but it wouldn't be the first time he has made unusual or controversial remarks. Hopefully people realise he is an outlier and as he criticises it, more are defending and promoting it (including current and former PMs of the ALP).

His comments about simply sinking an approaching armada with aircraft and missiles probably indicates the amount of SME he brings to the table.

His expressed views would have nothing to do with spending 13 years (up until 2017/18) as an Advisor to and on the Board of, the Chinese Government Development Bank would it?

 

[Reptilia]

His expressed views would have nothing to do with spending 13 years (up until 2017/18) as an Advisor to and on the Board of, the Chinese Government Development Bank would it?

Crazy how he didn’t answer the question about the treatment of uygurs in China and instead deflected and started talking about the Indian prime minister modi and his shortcomings.
He said a fleet of 45 Evolved Collins, 15 in the water, (rule of 3) would be better than 3 Virginia + aukus subs. Only using the evolved subs in shallower waters. Pity no one asked him about uuvs replacing close to shore operations in the future and that future subs would have VLS and not just conventional torpedoes.

 

[Bob53]

Ahem the science doesn't agree with you. The Artic polar ice will eventually completely disappear but that's decades away. You still have the ice shelves in Antarctica to deal with.

I was being a bit facetious… probably recalling of the predictions from Australia’s head climate scientist from around 2000. I think the prediction from ol Tim was that Artic would be ice free ice by around 2012 and the sea would rise up to 20ft …. On the upside providing a lot more operational space for our new subs.

 

[Bob53]

Is a submarine dry dock to be considered in South Australia for the maintenance of the submarines ,I understand presently the U.S has issues with this and has plans to address it
Submarine maintenance backlogs and delays take toll on fleet’s development work at sea (defensenews.com)

Would there be advantage in a dry dock over a lift and hard stand?

 

[seaspear]

I understand that nuclear waste is to be stored on defence sites but what would be the plans for the decommissioning and dismantling of the submarines at end of service ,this is not cheap and there are a number of countries with old nuclear submarines still moored after some years
Navy, Civilian Nuclear Regulators Struggling Over How to Dismantle Former USS Enterprise - USNI News

 

[SD67]

The Virginia Payload Tube design is based on knowledge gained when the 4 excess Ohio class were converted to SSGN status. This is why they used the same diameter as the ballistic missile tubes. It allows for 6 Tomahawks around the circumference with the 7th one in the centre (except for the 2 VPT’s that are bow mounted in Virginia Block 3 and on, which only have the 6 missiles around the circumference). They also developed Special Forces equipment to go into the two forward tubes of the Ohio SSGN’s so there’s capability that we are not privy to.

I have previously read that the SSNR project was planned to be effectively a shortened Dreadnought (ie the 12 launch tubes (3 CMC’s) would be deleted, or reduced to 4). Recently, the UK Government stated that the SSNR would have Vertical Launch tubes similar to the VPT’s, so it’s logical to surmise that they could utilise a CMC of 4 tubes and thus minimise the amount of design work. Vice Admiral Mead indicated that the AUKUS SSN design is about 70% complete so that supports the theory that it’s design is a shortened Dreadnought.

The evolution of the UK’s SSNR into the SSN-AUKUS

Yesterday’s announcement was really good news but we’ll have to wait for more information to be released to confirm our analysis.

Makes perfect sense.

But I tell a lie - it's Babcock not BAE, manufacturing CMC for both Ohio and Successor

Common Missile Compartments

In October 2016 Babcock International was awarded a competitive contract from General Dynamics Electric Boat to manufacture 22 tactical missile tube assemblies as part of the common missile compartment (CMC) project for the UK Successor and US Ohio Class replacement submarine programmes. This...

www.babcockinternational.com

There are going to be some great opportunities for Australian industry long term to sell into an increasingly standardised set of platforms.

 

[Reptilia]

U.S defense department said none of the 3 used or 2 potential new virginia class submarines will have the vpm.

 

[SD67]

I understand that nuclear waste is to be stored on defence sites but what would be the plans for the decommissioning and dismantling of the submarines at end of service ,this is not cheap and there are a number of countries with old nuclear submarines still moored after some years
Navy, Civilian Nuclear Regulators Struggling Over How to Dismantle Former USS Enterprise - USNI News

Submarine Dismantling Project (SDP)

Delivering on the UK Government’s commitment to provide a safe, environmentally responsible and cost-effective solution for the dismantling and disposal of the UK’s decommissioned nuclear submarines.

www.gov.uk

UK to award contract for nuclear sub dismantling in 2023

The first phase of the Submarine Dismantling Project will use HMS Swiftsure as a test case ahead of further expanding the programme.

www.naval-technology.com

In the UK it's never been done. There are 20 SSNs alongside waiting to be dismantled. What we really need is a vast geologically stable country to help us out....

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635961907013206017

This is more than I expected, but it does actually make sense. An investment in UK shipyards from Australia and us building their first boat will enable the RAN to get it faster.

It's also very helpful for us, as it makes the likely unit cost of the RN's future boats considerably lower.

 

[Mikeymike]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635961907013206017

This is more than I expected, but it does actually make sense. An investment in UK shipyards from Australia and us building their first boat will enable the RAN to get it faster.

It's also very helpful for us, as it makes the likely unit cost of the RN's future boats considerably lower.

I think that quote has been misread. the quote was.



I think it is meant to be South Australia where the first RAN boat will be built.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

I think it is meant to be South Australia where the first RAN boat will be built.

Hmm. It can be read two ways. I read it as referring to Barrow, not least because it would help explain the investment in Barrow - which has been confirmed separately. I guess we'll see a correction at some point when that's been cleared up.

Still I wasn't expecting the investment in UK sub-building infrastructure, so that's still another bonus.

 

[OldTex]

U.S defense department said none of the 3 used or 2 potential new virginia class submarines will have the vpm.

Based on the comment from US DoD and considering the timeline for the submarines it would be more likely that the second hand Virginia class SSNs would be block 1 or early block 2. On the same basis it is also unlikely that the optional SSNs will be new build so can be expected to be most likely early block 2 boats. Probably from the group SSN 774 - 779

 

[Morgo]

I understand that nuclear waste is to be stored on defence sites but what would be the plans for the decommissioning and dismantling of the submarines at end of service ,this is not cheap and there are a number of countries with old nuclear submarines still moored after some years
Navy, Civilian Nuclear Regulators Struggling Over How to Dismantle Former USS Enterprise - USNI News

I had assumed the $358bn was full life costs including decommissioning, but that’s an excellent question.

 

[seaspear]

Based on the comment from US DoD and considering the timeline for the submarines it would be more likely that the second hand Virginia class SSNs would be block 1 or early block 2. On the same basis it is also unlikely that the optional SSNs will be new build so can be expected to be most likely early block 2 boats. Probably from the group SSN 774 - 779

I'm not sure of the boats on offer but any boat approaching twenty or more years of out of end of life expectancy of 33 years with all of the expensive decommissioning and stockpiling of nuclear waste does not seem like a great buy

 

[Going Boeing]

U.S defense department said none of the 3 used or 2 potential new virginia class submarines will have the vpm.

OldTex quote: Based on the comment from US DoD and considering the timeline for the submarines it would be more likely that the second hand Virginia class SSNs would be block 1 or early block 2. On the same basis it is also unlikely that the optional SSNs will be new build so can be expected to be most likely early block 2 boats. Probably from the group SSN 774 - 779


I think it’s important to be clear with the terms being used.

VPM is Virginia Payload Module which is the additional hull section (containing 4 Virginia Payload Tubes) being inserted in the Block 5 Virginias, so I interpret the quoted statement as saying that the RAN won be getting any Block 5 boats.
Virginia Payload Tubes (VPT) were originally designed to be mounted in the bow section (2 per boat) of Block 3 Virginia’s and on. Blocks 1 & 2 have 12 individual vertical launch tubes for Tomahawk missiles which were more expensive to manufacture and are not flexible wrt weapons that can be used.

I hope that the 3 Virginia’s that the RAN acquires are at least Block 3 as that will give the flexibility of the 2 VPT’s as well as having the newer Large Aperture Bow (LAB) sonar. The older Block 1 & 2 boats have a spherical sonar which was an updated version of what was used in LA, Ohio, etc classes. Looking at the timeline that the RAN will require to operate the Virginia’s, it appears that Blocks 1 & 2 would not have enough reactor fuel to last the full period so Block 3 appear to be the most suitable.

 

[alexsa]

Would there be advantage in a dry dock over a lift and hard stand?

Depends on a number of factors, including the size of the hardstand or dry dock. Syncro lifts mean the more that one vessel can be on the hardstand and it is not necessary to flood the dock to move the submarine to allow access for another boat. However, a large dock could support more than one boat.

Given the area available in Osbourne I suspect that a syncro lift and hard stand may be the option taken. This does mean that all routine maintenance will be done there noting both the Captain Cook dock and the new facility in Henderson may be used for routine maintenance leaving Osbourne available for building SSN's and doing more significant work. Mind you I am not sure if this would fall foul of the local population in Sydney and Fremantle. The dock in Garden Island in Sydney and the propose large dock in Henderson will have quite a bit of work to do in anycase.

Another wait and see situation.

 

[Scott Elaurant]

A few thoughts.
On Keating: When I was a young graduate studying economics in the late 1980s Treasurer Paul Keating really was a dominant figure in economic policy debate. He was very knowledgeable of economics, articulate and had a cutting wit. But he was never an expert on defence or foreign policy. He was always looking for ways to cut defence spending. The leading expert on defence among politicians of that era was Kim Beasley. Why would we accept Keatings' view ahead of Kim Beasley, who supports SSNs?

On nuclear power: While developing an SSN industry will generate skills in nuclear engineering, that does not mean there is a case for nuclear power in Australia. This is not Europe. Renewable power (wind and solar) in Australia is already cheaper than coal or gas. Nuclear energy is more expensive than coal or gas. I have no ideological objection to nuclear power. It can be made safe with good engineering. But it is always expensive.

The new UK nuclear power plant (Hinkley C) is over 2 years late and more than 50% over budget. It is costing £32 billion for 3.2 GW, about $17 billion Aus per GW. That is more costly than the entire Astute submarine program (all 7, including hull and reactors). By comparison, a 1.2 GW wind farm on the Fraser coast is being built now for $2.1 billion (1/8 the cost). A new 1GW coal plant might cost $5 billion (1/3 the cost). You would only build nuclear power if you had long periods in the winter with neither sun nor wind.

EDF faces shouldering more of soaring bill for Hinkley Point

Nuclear power station costs could rise to £32bn as French group warns Chinese partner may not meet extra payments

www.ft.com

On UK sub infrastructure: all the Australian politicians I have heard quoted since the AUKUS announcement have referred to building all 8 RAN SSNs in ASC, Adelaide. The first of class (for the RN) will be built in Barrow, which has more expertise in trials and commissioning. I assume the same modular construction approach adopted in the Astute build will be used. All the reactor compartments, including Rolls Royce PWR3 reactors, will be made in BAE Barrow and shipped to Adelaide for assembly in each hull. I can understand Australia might need to contribute to Rolls Royce expanding its naval reactor construction capacity, since its capacity will need to effectively double, and the build hall in Barrow used to make the reactor modules. I assume as much as possible of the rest of the submarine will be built in ASC.