Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[hairyman]

why the insistance on American aid to design a non nuclear boat, something they dont have much experience in? The only input they had to the original Collins was the weapons system, which was a lemon and had to be replaced.

@hairyman Alexsa's Red Warning in post above equally applies to you. Go read Rule #20. I won't dock you demerit points this time or record an official warning, but if you do it again it will happen.

Ngatimozart.

 

[vonnoobie]

why the insistance on American aid to design a non nuclear boat, something they dont have much experience in? The only input they had to the original Collins was the weapons system, which was a lemon and had to be replaced.

I would suggest doing more research as they fixed our lemon of an operating system and they also fixed the prop. While the US doesn't build diesel boats they have excellent design teams who have aided in getting several conventional submarine programs back on track.

The US has a solid record in this area so they are a natural choice. Who else would we go to anyway? Japan and Germany have boats built towards different conops as such their teams lean that way, UK hasn't been in it for almost 30 years, France ? , Spain? Again different conops and they themselves got the Americans to help fix their boats.

 

[t68]

OT…the only way any nuclear applications beyond research and medical radionuclide production happens in Australia is if climate change requires a massive reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that renewables can’t fully meet.

There have been a number of parliamentary studies into nuclear power over the years. PMHoward was a big believer in nuclear energy


One of the more recent studies

Australian electricity options : nuclear

20 july 2020 PDF version [384KB] Ian Cronshaw<a name=GroupName> Visiting Fellow, Crawford School, Australian National University Executive summary Nuclear electricity provides around a tenth of world electricity needs, with only a few other applications in the energy se

www.aph.gov.au

“Nuclear power production is currently not permitted under two main pieces of Commonwealth legislation—the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act 1998 (the ARPANS Act), and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the EPBC Act). These Acts expressly prohibit the approval, licensing, construction, or operation of a nuclear fuel fabrication plant; a nuclear power plant; an enrichment plant; or a reprocessing facility”

 

[John Newman]

OT…the only way any nuclear applications beyond research and medical radionuclide production happens in Australia is if climate change requires a massive reduction in greenhouse gas emissions that renewables can’t fully meet.

Will never ever happen.

The usual cohort of green lefty tree hugging climate alarmists will never go for nuclear.

I’ve had numerous discussions over the years with people from those groups mentioned above and it just ain’t in their DNA, they would still rather more plant food in the atmosphere than ever consider going down the Nuclear path.

Nuclear power in Australia - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The poll is a pretty good guide to how people feel in regard to Nuclear Power in Australia from the respective political voting blocks:

For
59% - LNP Coalition
30% - ALP
22% - Greens

Against
34% - LNP Coalition
66% - ALP
78% - Greens

Don’t know
7% - LNP Coalition
4% - ALP
0% - Greens

As long as my arsehole continues to point to the ground I simply can’t see the various political groups, and their supporters, coming to a bipartisan consensus on Nuclear Power generation in Australia.

The logical extension of that is Nuclear submarines, that’s even further down the road.

Ain’t going to happen, never ever.

Cheers,

 

[vonnoobie]

Nuclear power needs to be nipped in the butt on this thread. For submarines we don't have the time, partisan support or production capacity. For civil power needs they are far too expensive and simply not needed. Between current battery tech and costs along with pumped hydro storage of which Australia has enough potential sites to meet our requirements 100 x we have no worries for power.

Let's stop this discussion here and get back to reality, cheers

 

[swerve]

@Git_Kraken

Please do some research. Even a basic Google Search will have picked up OPAL. You might want to look at SILEX and ANSTO as well. A really quick check would find that ANU have a Masters in Nuclear Science run by their nuclear physics department. Try looking at AINSE as well

AINSE – Australian Institute of Nuclear Science and Engineering
Silex - /
ANSTO | Science. Ingenuity. Sustainability

Post such as this are unacceptable noting the negative connotations you expressed based on no research. The post is lazy and adds nothing to the discussion except aggravation. I would at least expect you would make an attempt to determine what capability exists noting this has been alluded, and referred specifically to, in previous posts on this issue.

Any further ill informed commentary is likely to result in action. You have been warned.

Alexsa

OPAL was built by INVAP (the Argentinean company that designed it - & some other small reactors for research & making medical isotopes & the like) under a turnkey contract, incorporating parts from Russia, France & Hungary.

Possessing such a reactor does not give you a nuclear industry.

 

[swerve]

OPAL | Opal multi-purpose reactor | ANSTO

The Open-pool Australian lightwater reactor (OPAL) functions as a neutron factory, producing radioisotopes for cancer detection and treatment, and neutron beams for fundamental materials research.

www.ansto.gov.au

The ANSTO facility at Lucas Heights on the outskirts of Sydney is the home of Australia’s only Reactor.

Yes - an imported small reactor for research & making medical isotopes. There are quite a few such reactors around the world.

 

[Git_Kraken]

I was digging around and noticed that the Dutch Submarine Replacement Project (aka Walrus Replacement) has a requirement for a larger, long-range submarine in the 3000+ ton range.

The contenders have been narrowed down to three. A type 212 variant, A26 variant, and the Shortfin Barracuda.

Based on these articles Naval Group is crowing their IP transfer chops. It might just be glossy brochure stuff but I'm happy to be wrong about Naval Group and whatever sticking point Australia has with them regarding the contract.

I also mention this here (as it's Dutch news) as the other options Australia might be considering to put the squeeze on Naval Group would likely be similar if not the same as for the Walrus Replacement competition.

Of course, if Naval Group wins the contract, then there becomes a friendly country that operates the same submarine. No longer would Australia's submarine be an orphan class. (of course one could argue the Barracuda and Shortfin are in the same family).

It would be nice to see O-boat information sharing return.

 

[John Fedup]

Assuming good progress in Australia and if they manage a Dutch order, this would certainly enhance their chances for a future RCN order providing Canada isn’t bankrupt by 2035.

 

[ADMk2]

ADF was (eventually) asked if they were conducting studies on a TKMS boat last week at Senate Estimate and CoN said no. They also denied studying the Kockums offering and the Dutch submarine program or reaching out to the Dutch Navy on submarine matters, beyond officer training.

But they are actively studying a whole range of undersea warfare capability options for Australia which are all so highly classified, they aren‘t even allowed to talk openly about what broad strokes types of undersea warfare they are studying…

 

[alexsa]

OPAL was built by INVAP (the Argentinean company that designed it - & some other small reactors for research & making medical isotopes & the like) under a turnkey contract, incorporating parts from Russia, France & Hungary.

Possessing such a reactor does not give you a nuclear industry.

No argument there. The suggestion that research be done was in response to the original post which suggested zero capability .... including having any medical Isotope reactors and research reactors. Which was fundamentally wrong and a small amount of research would have found that.

 

[swerve]

I missed that.

IIRC OPAL replaced an older research/medical etc. reactor.

 

[Stampede]

I thought I'd share this Pic

Training manoeuvres with Brunei Navy a success - Defence Review Asia

?? ⚓ ?? HMAS Parramatta joined Royal Brunei Navy ships Darulehsan and Syafaat for shared training during a recent visit to Brunei. The three ships conducted a range of contactless training activities, including communication exercises, replenishment-at-sea […]

defencereviewasia.com

Royal Brunei Navy ship KDB Darulehsan is similar to our future Arafura Class OPV sailing in company with our ANZAC Class frigate HMAS Parramatta .

While our Arafura Class will have some differences in fit out of weapons and sensors, the basic design will look the same.
As a visual we can expect to see this sight in Australian waters in the not to distant future.

Hopefully Nuship Arafura will still be launched Q4 this year with commissioning in 2022.


Regards S

 

[hauritz]

Submarines aren't the only game in town when it comes to Australia's undersea capabilities. Australia will also be investing in an Integrated Undersea Surveillance System (SEA 5012).

NAVY’S PATHWAY TO ENHANCED ROBOTIC AND AUTONOMOUS CAPABILITIES One of the keynote areas for future investment highlighted in the recent 2020 Defence Strategic Update is that of robotic and autonomous systems - Issuu

The document specified the greater use of such systems to ensure Australia has a “potent, networked force able to undertake a wide range of activities across huge distances”. It is also perhaps worth noting that almost every future major platform acquisition program will have some element of...

issuu.com

UUVs could be a more cost effective method of conducting surveillance of Australia’s maritime approaches regardless of the availability of manned subs. As of yet nobody really understands the full capabilities of unmanned systems or what further roles and missions could be carried out by these platforms. Any delays in the delivery of new manned submarines may result in an accelerated development of unmanned systems to fill any capability gaps and act as force multipliers by teaming with our current subs.

 

[vonnoobie]

At the moment in regards to unmanned submarines I think people are jumping to far ahead.

While I don't doubt they will one day play an important role their are physical limitations to their use primarily that if you want to truly benefit from them you need to have a long range deep water communication ability which simply does not exist. They either have to be close to a mother ship, connected via a long a** cable or operate very close to the surface. None of this stops them being of use but it severely impacts how much use they will be.

Realistically baring some amazing breakthrough in communication tech able to operate at thousands of km's and several hundred metres in depth the unmanned submarine will need to operate via an AI, potentially one more advanced then we have ever developed to date.

Outside of extending sonar range or utilising them for active sonar with out threatening the mother ship their use will be limited for decades to come.

Let's look at them, hell let's even join in on some of the programs but they won't be filling any roles performed by our submarines anytime soon.

 

[hauritz]

Even with manned submarines communications is challenging. In the end it comes down to how much automated decision making are you willing to grant to an AI system.

 

[Redlands18]

I missed that.

IIRC OPAL replaced an older research/medical etc. reactor.

Australia's First Nuclear Reactor - Australian History, Technology

dl.nfsa.gov.au

There has been at least one working Reactor at Lucas Heights since 1958

 

[alexsa]

I missed that.

IIRC OPAL replaced an older research/medical etc. reactor.

Yes OPAL replaced HIFAR which as a 10Mw research reactor. It originally ran on highly enriched rods by transitioned to low enrichment toward the end of its life. It was decommission in 2007.

There was another smaller reactor until called Moata. This 100Kw reactor operated for 34 years and was decommissioned in 2009.

ANSTO History | First National Research Reactor | ANSTO

More history on HIFAR at

Microsoft Word - HIFAR_PlaquingNomination_RevisedFinal.doc (engineersaustralia.org.au)

 

[DDG38]

Meanwhile, back in reality and the actual working Navy
"HMAS Ballarat and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Ship Murasame conduct maritime manoeuvres off the coast of Japan." Image source : ADF Image Library link

 

[InterestedParty]

Yes OPAL replaced HIFAR which as a 10Mw research reactor. It originally ran on highly enriched rods by transitioned to low enrichment toward the end of its life. It was decommission in 2007.

There was another smaller reactor until called Moata. This 100Kw reactor operated for 34 years and was decommissioned in 2009.

ANSTO History | First National Research Reactor | ANSTO

More history on HIFAR at

Microsoft Word - HIFAR_PlaquingNomination_RevisedFinal.doc (engineersaustralia.org.au)

Moata was I believe a carbon moderated reactor.
Amongst other things, they used to do radiography of explosive bolts by laying them on the top with a film. The only other way apparently was to explode them to make sure that they would work
Makes me feel old, my Dad was at the opening of the HIFAR reactor and I was at its 21st birthday party