Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[aussienscale]

I don't think Dutton would raise the possibility of an overseas buy or lease unless there was some contingency plan.

If you are referring to the interview on Skyy

@3.35 the question was raised by the interviewer, of which Dutton gave a basic comment saying "The short answer is yes, there is all that discussion to take place over the next 12-18 months"

Rather different to Dutton raising the possibility of a buy or lease of boats in the water as a narrative of what the plans are or what has been discussed, he is just saying we are looking at all avenues, he also said, and rightly so, there is no such thing as MOTS when it comes to nuclear submarines. These guys have spent the last 18+ months negotiating access to the tech let alone what we are then going to do.

This is not a magic pill, we have scrapped the last few years and started again, there is no quick fix, this will be a long process. The idea of just leasing a boat from the US or UK is not realistic, the time alone to get a crew trained up to operate the sub is huge, we would have to draw on the respective countries personnel for the nuclear engineers, both the US and UK take minimum 10 years to train up a fully qualified nuclear engineer, these people don't grow on tree's.

We would be better off concentrating on our build and transition and just invite the UK and US to base a boat out of FBW to provide the strategic deterrent we are seeking, the less distractions the better.

 

[John Newman]

Meanwhile....... quick phone shot of the newly opened Oil & Cruiser wharves at FBE in full use with HMAS Hobart and Supply alongside. Taken from our first outing on the harbour in 13 weeks.
View attachment 48509

Good to see.

How much room is left between the bow of Supply and the mouth of the dry dock?

Cheers,

 

[DDG38]

Good to see.
How much room is left between the bow of Supply and the mouth of the dry dock?
Cheers,

Still the east wall wharf between Supply and the CCDD.

 

[SD67]

Dear All, first post on this great site (which I've been following for years)

I was at Barrow for the best part of year a little while back - a few notes from memory :

- In terms of production the reactors were always the limiting factor. BAE's challenges ramping up at the time were not nearly as bad as Rolls were experiencing. This is the real reason Astute was cut from 8 to 7 boats, it wasn't to save cash, it was that Rolls/AWE couldn't get the reactors out

- The new PWR3 is not an evolution of PWR2, it's all new, based heavily on US technology. There were questions in parliament on this point - is Britain giving away too much sovereignty by going for PWR3. The answer was that BAE is taking the lead on the Common Missile Compartment, and RR on pump jet technology which will be shared for Dreadnought and Colombia, so it's quid pro quo.

- The new reactor is seen as a major step forward in longevity and performance - they're looking at 35 years + vs "25 if you're lucky" for PWR2.

- As the Dreadnoughts are over twice the size of Astutes they'll be keeping BAE busy bashing metal for the next decade and a half, but here's the thing they only have one reactor each. So reactor output for the RN is going to fall from 7 to 4 over a comparable timescale. Just speculating that this may well be where Australia comes in.

- The reactor assembly operation (called "Warspite") is like a self-contained separate business, no foreign nationals get anywhere near it

- A general point for any poor sod from Adelaide who gets seconded to Barrow in winter, lock yourself in an ice box before you go for about a week to acclimatise! 20 hours a day of darkness, 50 mph horizontal rain, enjoy....

 

[KiwiRob]

You forget to mention the Russians Rob on your name and shame your list of the big bad guys. Why is that? It is the EU's business who Germany buys gas from and many in the EU countries they were not happy.

I would disagree with that, Western Europeans weren't happy with the US interference, it was mostly former Warsaw pact Europeans, Poland and Baltic countries who got upset. Poland mainly because they will loose income from transit fees and the Baltic states because they always like to take issue with anything Russia does. Nord Stream feeds into the OPAL and NEL piplines which will feed Russia gas to Westerns and Central European countries, the UK will also take Russian gas via Nord Stream and the NEL pipeline.

 

[KiwiRob]

How about Naming them after famous Australians? Russel Crow, Sam Neil.......

Sorry guys, I couldn't help myself.

I've never heard of Australia claiming Sam Neil, even through he was born in Ireland he's more kiwi than most, I think we'll let you have Russell, even though you don't want him and continually deny him citizenship. I'm looking forward to the day he punches someone and is extradited to NZ as a 501.

 

[John Newman]

Dear All, first post on this great site (which I've been following for years)

I was at Barrow for the best part of year a little while back - a few notes from memory :

- In terms of production the reactors were always the limiting factor. BAE's challenges ramping up at the time were not nearly as bad as Rolls were experiencing. This is the real reason Astute was cut from 8 to 7 boats, it wasn't to save cash, it was that Rolls/AWE couldn't get the reactors out

- The new PWR3 is not an evolution of PWR2, it's all new, based heavily on US technology. There were questions in parliament on this point - is Britain giving away too much sovereignty by going for PWR3. The answer was that BAE is taking the lead on the Common Missile Compartment, and RR on pump jet technology which will be shared for Dreadnought and Colombia, so it's quid pro quo.

- The new reactor is seen as a major step forward in longevity and performance - they're looking at 35 years + vs "25 if you're lucky" for PWR2.

- As the Dreadnoughts are over twice the size of Astutes they'll be keeping BAE busy bashing metal for the next decade and a half, but here's the thing they only have one reactor each. So reactor output for the RN is going to fall from 7 to 4 over a comparable timescale. Just speculating that this may well be where Australia comes in.

- The reactor assembly operation (called "Warspite") is like a self-contained separate business, no foreign nationals get anywhere near it

- A general point for any poor sod from Adelaide who gets seconded to Barrow in winter, lock yourself in an ice box before you go for about a week to acclimatise! 20 hours a day of darkness, 50 mph horizontal rain, enjoy....

Welcome aboard, hope you enjoy your time here on DT, a good first post by the way too.

In regard to PWR2, my understanding is that it was developed for the SSBNs and as a result it’s large, which required Astute to have the hull diameter increased to be able to fit.

My question is, if you know the answer, is PWR3 larger again? Or would PWR3 fit in place of PWR2?

Cheers,

 

[SD67]

Welcome aboard, hope you enjoy your time here on DT, a good first post by the way too.

In regard to PWR2, my understanding is that it was developed for the SSBNs and as a result it’s large, which required Astute to have the hull diameter increased to be able to fit.

My question is, if you know the answer, is PWR3 larger again? Or would PWR3 fit in place of PWR2?

Cheers,

Cheers. I don't know TBH, but I do know it's not a simple plug-and-play.

 

[John Newman]

Cheers. I don't know TBH, but I do know it's not a simple plug-and-play.

Mate, thanks for the reply, yes I’m sure it’s not plug and play either too.

From what I understand Astute has a beam of 11.3m (Virginia has a beam of 10m).

From what I can see, Dreadnought is 12.8m.

If PWR3 is a tight fit for Dreadnought(?), then it may not be possible to replace PWR2 with PWR3 in a potential RAN Astute.

Interesting question to find the answer to.

Cheers,

 

[Stampede]

A view of our submarine programs over the years from Kym Bergmann at APDR

Australia stands up to China – by delaying submarine project for a decade - APDR

At least the plan to develop 12 Attack class submarines with French technology – as flawed as it was – had some chance of delivering a capability to the RAN around 2032.

asiapacificdefencereporter.com

I do wonder who the drivers were for the recent submarine change of tact.

Prime Minister and defence Minister?
Foreign Affairs Dept
Defence department public service heads?
Navy?

All of the above and more?

Small group or big group?

Interested to know.



Regards S

 

[Volkodav]

Mate, thanks for the reply, yes I’m sure it’s not plug and play either too.

From what I understand Astute has a beam of 11.3m (Virginia has a beam of 10m).

From what I can see, Dreadnought is 12.8m.

If PWR3 is a tight fit for Dreadnought(?), then it may not be possible to replace PWR2 with PWR3 in a potential RAN Astute.

Interesting question to find the answer to.

Cheers,

All good as I believe the ideal beam to length ratio for a sub is between 8:1 and 7:1. While uniform diameter tubes are the easiest structure to fabricate for pressure vessels, the smaller the diameter the better, increasing diameter, within those ratios, also increases usable internal volume far more significantly than increasing length.

I'm actually intrigued as to whether an evolved Astute could be designed with VPMs.

 

[MrConservative]

I would disagree with that, Western Europeans weren't happy with the US interference, it was mostly former Warsaw pact Europeans, Poland and Baltic countries who got upset. Poland mainly because they will loose income from transit fees and the Baltic states because they always like to take issue with anything Russia does. Nord Stream feeds into the OPAL and NEL piplines which will feed Russia gas to Westerns and Central European countries, the UK will also take Russian gas via Nord Stream and the NEL pipeline.

Hey Rob. We all still want to know. Are the Russians on your big baddie list along with the Yanks and the PRC?

And what have been your instructions regarding the AUUKUS deal?

 

[KiwiRob]

Hey Rob. We all still want to know. Are the Russians on your big baddie list along with the Yanks and the PRC?

And what have been your instructions regarding the AUUKUS deal?

It's AUKUS, not AUUKUS.

I don't have an issue with Russia, they are no threat to NZ sovereignty. Without mostly Russian crews we wouldn't have a fishing industry.

 

[MrConservative]

It's AUKUS, not AUUKUS.

I don't have an issue with Russia, they are no threat to NZ sovereignty. Without mostly Russian crews we wouldn't have a fishing industry.

Good for you Rob. No threat to NZ sovereignty eh .... no threat to Australia too I suppose.

But I ask again are they on your baddies list with America and China?

And what are you instructions regarding the Australian Sub deal which the thread is discussing at this time?

 

[KiwiRob]

Good for you Rob. No threat to NZ sovereignty eh .... no threat to Australia too I suppose.

But I ask again are they on your baddies list with America and China?

Why would Russian be on my baddies list, I've already said they are no threat to NZ. They aren't a major trading partner, Russia threatening us with sanctions wouldn't cause NZ any sleepless nights, whereas the US and China could very easily cripple our economy.

And what are you instructions regarding the Australian Sub deal which the thread is discussing at this time?

I have no issues for or against Australia buying nuclear submarines. I will be surprised if any are actually built to be honest, a lot can change politically between now and when the first steel is cut.

 

[alexsa]

It's AUKUS, not AUUKUS.

I don't have an issue with Russia, they are no threat to NZ sovereignty. Without mostly Russian crews we wouldn't have a fishing industry.

Sorry ... how is this true. Russia are certainly a major power and have a coastline in the the Asia Pacific region. They are following their own agenda to support states to give them greater influence. Not os pervasive as China in the Indo-Pacific at the moment but not an insignificant influence.

If we look at history then should we consider the Crimea and Ukraine as an indication of intent. This is as intrusive as any US intervention (actually I would say more so) so I fail to see how you judge them differently.

The subject of fishing crew are interesting. Are these folk being cared for in accordance with ILO norms. If not your argument appear to be supporting sub par treatment of fisher men to support an industry.

I normally avoid the impassioned political views but I find some of your comments in regards to fishermen potentially inconsistent with ILO and IUU requirements and would be pleased if you could explain this position to me.

 

[ASSAIL]

A view of our submarine programs over the years from Kym Bergmann at APDR

Australia stands up to China – by delaying submarine project for a decade - APDR

At least the plan to develop 12 Attack class submarines with French technology – as flawed as it was – had some chance of delivering a capability to the RAN around 2032.

asiapacificdefencereporter.com

I do wonder who the drivers were for the recent submarine change of tact.

Prime Minister and defence Minister?
Foreign Affairs Dept
Defence department public service heads?
Navy?

All of the above and more?

Small group or big group?

Interested to know.



Regards S

From my imperfect memory, Bergman has a history of being quite anti the the Defence efforts re SEA 1000.
He was wined and dined by various suppliers, criticised the choice of Naval Group then applauded it, thought the TKMS a offerings were worthy and now he’s been taken by surprise by the NUC announcement and is peeved.
if some of these were not the case, his article above simply gets some bile from his system.

 

[aussienscale]

From my imperfect memory, Bergman has a history of being quite anti the the Defence efforts re SEA 1000.
He was wined and dined by various suppliers, criticised the choice of Naval Group then applauded it, thought the TKMS a offerings were worthy and now he’s been taken by surprise by the NUC announcement and is peeved.
if some of these were not the case, his article above simply gets some bile from his system.

Kym is a nice enough old fella, but he is more concerned about where his next dinner is coming from, what junket he gets to go on next and how many clicks he can get, although I am pretty sure he does not really understand what the "clicks" actually do !!

 

[SD67]

How about Naming them after famous Australians? Russel Crow, Sam Neil.......

Sorry guys, I couldn't help myself.

Is Joh Bjelke-Petersen going too far back ;-)
But seriously it will surely be 6 states + 2 territories = 8?

 

[Geddy]

Why would Russian be on my baddies list, I've already said they are no threat to NZ. They aren't a major trading partner, Russia threatening us with sanctions wouldn't cause NZ any sleepless nights, whereas the US and China could very easily cripple our economy



I have no issues for or against Australia buying nuclear submarines. I will be surprised if any are actually built to be honest, a lot can change politically between now and when the first steel is cut.

Hmm. Perhaps the Greens are going to form government in your world, given that Labor has signed off on the deal? Now that would make life interesting.