Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[ADMk2]

Being widely reported.

Australian nuclear subs will be banned from New Zealand waters: Ardern

WELLINGTON (AFP) - New Zealand will not lift a decades-long ban on nuclear-powered vessels entering its waters in the wake of key ally Australia's decision to develop a nuclear submarine fleet, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said on Thursday (Sept 16). Read more at straitstimes.com.

www.straitstimes.com

It doesn't look good for NZ.
Clearly the relationship between NZ and AU needs to evolve or devolve.

Stuff

www.stuff.co.nz

Check out the comments section.. familiar faces.. NZ defence policy was heavy with apathy. This changes that.. NZ will have to make a decision on which team they are with. While very theoretical at this stage, its a coming.

I’d argue it already has. NZ has chosen to be irrelevant to the ANZUS treaty and was not invited to the AUUKUS arrangement because of this.

Enjoy your moral position. That’s all you’ll have, Jacinta. You certainly won’t have a military or strategic one…

 

[JohnJT]

Congratulations Australia on the excellent decision to acquire SSNs. A few "experts" who said Aus would never and could never operate nuclear submarines with egg on their faces. Australia is fast becoming a major player in defence and I'm ecstatic to see this new alliance between old friends.

I can't wait to see the details of the new boats.

 

[KiwiRob]

I’d argue it already has. NZ has chosen to be irrelevant to the ANZUS treaty and was not invited to the AUUKUS arrangement because of this.

Enjoy your moral position. That’s all you’ll have, Jacinta. You certainly won’t have a military or strategic one…

Everyone has known since 1987 that nuclear powered and nuclear armed vessels are banned from NZ, the US threw it's cookies out of the pram and had a temper tantrum at the time, a time which is long past. I doubt NZ's stance on nuclear issues had anything to do with not being invited to AUUKUS, to be frank I'm happy we're not, I don't like the idea of being sub servant or dare I say it a vassal state to the US, which is where Australia and the UK appear to be headed.

 

[hauritz]

Things have gone very quiet on what's happening with the Hunter class. There has been talk of the increased weight but not much else. Of course, Defence Minister Dutton has pretty much put a silence on many Defence related matters, so it is difficult to know what is really happening. I'd like to think the weight growth mentioned is indicative of extra VLS but we will have to wait and see. After todays announcement, nothing seems impossibe.

In all the excitement of nuclear subs we shouldn't overlook that Australia is developing its own Guided Missile Production Industry. The argument has been that we shouldn't bother with more VLS because we didn't have enough missiles to put in them. In recent weeks we seem to have addressed that problem. Now the argument may be how can we possibly fit adequate numbers of ESSM, SM-2, SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles into just 32 or even 48 VLS?

 

[ADMk2]

Understandably not much focus today on the Tomahawk acquisition but 2 points:
1. Taking VLS cells away for tomahawks from the Hobarts will severely effect their ability to perform area air defence as intended. Hence, probably better to put more cells on the Hunter Class and a VPM on any future SSN.
2. Is the Tomahawk a redundant technology? It’s now getting to 40 years old.

Tomahawk Block I and Tomahawk Block V (Va) are very different weapons. There is no comparison in the capability between the two. I’d be careful in assuming capability differences between 2 variants of a missile system, nearly 40 years apart as you say.

Sidewinder was introduced in 1956. I assume most understand there is some significant differences in capability between the latest AIM-9X Block II and the original model available from 1956, as an example of this…

 

[ADMk2]

Everyone has known since 1987 that nuclear powered and nuclear armed vessels are banned from NZ, the US threw it's cookies out of the pram and had a temper tantrum at the time, a time which is long past. I doubt NZ's stance on nuclear issues had anything to do with not being invited to AUUKUS, to be frank I'm happy we're not, I don't like the idea of being sub servant or dare I say it a vassal state to the US, which is where Australia and the UK appear to be headed.

Vassal state is quite a pejorative term, indeed. If that is how you see an ally on the basis of the likelihood they are buying a UK built submarine, then I wonder what that says about those who have decided to use such pejorative terms…

I wonder how such would react if it were to be pointed out that NZ herself buys at least as many major defence platforms from the USA as Australia does…

P-8A
C-130J
NZLAV
T-6 Texan II
SH-2G
MARS-L rifles
Javelin missiles

I guess I could go on, but the point is made I think.

 

[ADMk2]

In all the excitement of nuclear subs we shouldn't overlook that Australia is developing its own Guided Missile Production Industry. The argument has been that we shouldn't bother with more VLS because we didn't have enough missiles to put in them. In recent weeks we seem to have addressed that problem. Now the argument may be how can we possibly fit adequate numbers of ESSM, SM-2, SM-6 and Tomahawk missiles into just 32 or even 48 VLS?

Part of that issue is addressed I suppose by considering that not every ship need be equipped with that full range of weapons for every single scenario every time, much as tactical fighters don’t always carry the same payload...

Were a Hobart and a Hunter to be deployed on an operation for example, you’d have at least 80 vertical launch cells and 16 canister launched cells from which to employ that variety of weapons. More ships / subs would add more weapons obviously.

We aren’t planning on fighting China all alone, nor clearly considering the prospect of employing hundreds / thousands of missiles against an enemy, single-handedly, or at least not by a single service…

 

[KiwiRob]

Vassal state is quite a pejorative term, indeed. If that is how you see an ally on the basis of the likelihood they are buying a UK built submarine, then I wonder what that says about those who have decided to use such pejorative terms…

I wonder how such would react if it were to be pointed out that NZ herself buys at least as many major defence platforms from the USA as Australia does…

P-8A
C-130J
NZLAV
T-6 Texan II
SH-2G
MARS-L rifles
Javelin missiles

I guess I could go on, but the point is made I think.

A vassal state is any state that has a mutual obligation to a superior state, Australia's relationship with the US is fairly close to that, certainly far closer than NZ's to the US.

Keating somewhat agrees

Former Labor Prime Minister Paul Keating condemned the deal, saying "This arrangement would witness a further dramatic loss of Australian sovereignty, as material dependency on the United States robbed Australia of any freedom or choice in any engagement Australia may deem appropriate".

I'm more interested in reducing US influence in the Asia Pacific region rather than encouraging it. To be really blunt what shared interests in the Indo Pacific region do the UK and America actually have? You can make somewhat of an argument for the US but the UK, no, not there region, not there sphere of influence. All this will do is further provoke China.

China's response is spot on

The US, UK and Australia are engaging in cooperation in nuclear-powered submarines that gravely undermines regional peace and stability, aggravates the arms race and hurts the international non-proliferation efforts,

@KiwiRob

You are entitled to your option but I suggest that supporting China in the way you have is aimed at being inflammatory. A balanced argument would also recognise that China's actions may be part of the reason for this dramatic change. Also to suggest the US have no role in Indo Pacific ignores the fact they are part of the pacific.

It seems you support Chinese influence but not US. This could be construed as an intentional step to rile posters from states that have been somewhat bullied by China.

Just a suggestion that you be a bit careful in your discussion.

alexsa

 

[John Fedup]

A vassal state is any state that has a mutual obligation to a superior state, Australia's relationship with the US is fairly close to that, certainly far closer than NZ's to the US.

Keating somewhat agrees



I'm more interested in reducing US influence in the Asia Pacific region rather than encouraging it. To be really blunt what shared interests in the Indo Pacific region do the UK and America actually have? You can make somewhat of an argument for the US but the UK, no, not there region, not there sphere of influence. All this will do is further provoke China.

China's response is spot on

The only country negatively influencing the Indo Pacific is China. The SCS BS and the recent clash on the Indian border along with trade retaliation against nations objecting to their provocative actions on human rights and debt trap via the belt and road initiatives.

 

[StobieWan]

Congratulations Australia on the excellent decision to acquire SSNs. A few "experts" who said Aus would never and could never operate nuclear submarines with egg on their faces. Australia is fast becoming a major player in defence and I'm ecstatic to see this new alliance between old friends.

I can't wait to see the details of the new boats.

I have to say, when I saw the first release, I thought "it's not even fricking April yet" - totally out of the blue decision. There were a number of really solid reasons most people (and the moderator team were foremost in this) thought a nuclear boat was out of the question - but if the announcement has been made, I'm going to have to assume that all the nuclear elements will be handled off-shore for Australia - we're currently sitting on 40 decommissioned boats I think - 4 Polaris and 36 SSN's of various classes - adding another six to the pile in 30 years isn't really a "now" problem.

We really should get around to coming up with a plan to tackle the work mind.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

I'm more interested in reducing US influence in the Asia Pacific region rather than encouraging it.

Rob, I honestly have no idea why you think a reduced US prescence in Asia would be good for anyone other than China - except maybe pro-China members of the business community who are only interested in $$$ in the short term.

The region has really struggled to stand up to China. They've all tried the "let's be nice to China" approach and got shafted at one time or another.

If the US leaves or only keeps a token position there, China will become more aggressive and come to dominate the region or kick off a war when someone fights back. How is that good?

To be really blunt what shared interests in the Indo Pacific region do the UK and America actually have?

You mean apart from the fact it's where the heart of the global economy is and that what happens there will define what happens in the rest of the 21st century for the whole world?

All this will do is further provoke China.

Only because China's gameplan is to pick off countries one by one until they've all fallen under its economic and diplomatic control, even if they're not under military occupation.

When people say "this will provoke China" it's like blaming children for agreeing to stand up together against the school bully.

 

[alexsa]

The other issue would be, can the RN provide the Trg Cadre needed, its own requirements for personnel qualified on the Trafalgars are slowly winding down. We would actually probably be better off taking over one as it nears decommissioning with some RN Crew staying with the Sub as a Trg Cadre but we are still a few years away from being ready to do that.

If the Astute is to be the sub we get then I can see a bunch of Australian submariners being sent on exchange to the RAN for training and service at sea.

This is precisely what we did with the Oberon until the mid 80’s (I got my training in the UK with 6 months in HMS Dolphin).

Some of the training in this case will be much more intense given the propulsion system. I also think that exchange will be ongoing and we may leverage of the command training (again as we used to do).

This is just speculation but would be sensible if the Astute is the basis of the ‘new’ Attack Class.

 

[ASSAIL]

There’s been a plethora of posts commenting about yesterday’s AUKUS announcements and it’s way too premature for me add anything meaningful.
However, there is other news around for the RAN which has passed us by,
HMAS Diamantina has been doing a great impression of an RN Type 45. She’s been stuck in Vanuatu with a recurring engine defect and will probably need to be towed home, possibly by MV Sycamore.

My apologies if this has already been posted but I’ve lost track after the last 6 pages or so of comment and speculation.

Recurring engine defect strands HMAS Diamantina - Australian Defence Magazine

HMAS Diamantina is currently stranded in Vanuatu following the detection of a recurring 'defect' in the main engine.

www.australiandefence.com.au

 

[ASSAIL]

Everyone has known since 1987 that nuclear powered and nuclear armed vessels are banned from NZ, the US threw it's cookies out of the pram and had a temper tantrum at the time, a time which is long past. I doubt NZ's stance on nuclear issues had anything to do with not being invited to AUUKUS, to be frank I'm happy we're not, I don't like the idea of being sub servant or dare I say it a vassal state to the US, which is where Australia and the UK appear to be headed.

Seeing that you brought up the subject of “vassal” states there are some who would think that is exactly where your left leaning PM has taken my Kiwi cousins.

New Zealand will become ‘vassal state’ of China if it continues to snub Australia

The “socialist” New Zealand government has turned its back on Australia as a partner and instead signed up with the Chinese Communist Party, according to Bronwyn Bishop.

www.news.com.au

 

[Sideline]

Throwing this out there for my SA mates
Astute Class Submarine Owners Workshop Manual

Astute Class Nuclear Submarine – Owners Workshop Manual uses the well established Haynes technical manual format, to provide a detailed and comprehensive guide that explains the design, construction and operation of the RN’s and most likely Australia's newest submarines.

For the Army types there are good selection of photographs, the diagrams are easy to read, with a pull out "coloring in" section

 

[Geddy]

Speculation: Why would the British be involved in this announcement if the plan wasn’t leaning towards the Astute Class vessels? No point in training on a boat you’re not going to get. Further… it’s a pity the Attack Class name was wasted on the French design. Would be pleasing to me if the nuclear vessels could use it. But we haven’t got the Australia Class in use so…..

 

[MrConservative]

I don't like the idea of being sub servant or dare I say it a vassal state to the US, which is where Australia and the UK appear to be headed.

Rob. In Australia's case it actually is now the opposite of being a vassal state, in that finally the penny in the US and indeed other liberal democracies has dropped, that the US cannot be the great protector alone. It is in my view an act of self-confidence by Australia.

 

[old faithful]

Giddy, the training would be more about operating a boat that does not need to surface for the entire mission, maintaining a nuke vessel etc, not about the systems them selves.

 

[alexsa]

Speculation: Why would the British be involved in this announcement if the plan wasn’t leaning towards the Astute Class vessels? No point in training on a boat you’re not going to get. Further… it’s a pity the Attack Class name was wasted on the French design. Would be pleasing to me if the nuclear vessels could use it. But we haven’t got the Australia Class in use so…..

I would not assume they will give up on the name. Let’s wait and see as they may retain it. It matches well with the ‘A’ naming of the Astute if that is the path we take.

If we are going to change then a return to the ‘O’ boat names would be an idea. The Otway and Oxley name have been used twice for Australian submarines. There are a bunch of very good ‘o’ names to follow the initial 6. Alternatively you use the Australian P names that have been associated with submarines and some small Australian cruisers.

But lets face it, that is a political decision

 

[Depot Dog]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

www.bloomberg.com

Given yesterdays speculation as to which type of reactor will power the new sub. Rolls Royce share price rose last night after Aukus announcement. Maybe the markets know something we don't.

Regards
DD