TLAM can be fired from a tube, this is how the UK deploys its TLAM capability. Only from its submarines, only from the torpedo tubes.Examples of which can't fit in a standard torpedo tube like TLAM, and that's exactly why the US has gone down the VLS path.
Tomahawk Cruise Missile - Think Defence
The Tomahawk Land Attack Cruise Missile (TLAM) is a precision weapon that launches from ships and submarines and can precisely strike targets from 1000 miles away.
www.thinkdefence.co.uk
The US has VLS in submarines for a different reasons. CONOPs, design and capability. US submarines have only four tubes mid ship, since skipjack build back in the 50's early 60's. It makes sense for them to separate torpedo's and missiles, particularly given it uses otherwise unused space. IMO its not really a huge issue for Australia. We don't currently deploy TLAM on Collins.
Hypersonics and future weapons and drones are a different issue. VPM are super neat and flexible. The US is a whole generation beyond normal VLS.
The nuclear submarines is bipartisan, labor would be included on the meetings going forward and AFAIK fully supports the concept. It has to be, this isn't something you can toilet just because the other guys get in. It needs to survive multiple changes on all sides. That doesn't mean there aren't differences in timelines, funding execution etc, just core concepts.
AUKUS is one of the few totally bipartisan things going around at the moment. AU-UK-US collaboration is pretty much completely bi-partisan in each country (although elements in UK labour are a bit flakey).
AUKUS caucus: Republicans and Democrats find a topic they can agree on
Despite political divisions, there is “high interest” among both Democrats and Republicans to make AUKUS succeed in the face of a more aggressive China.
www.smh.com.au
There are really two things:
- What submarine are we getting (and how is it getting here)?
- What are we doing until they get here?
I kind of giggle that. Choules will be too old to serve by ~2030.. You may be right, but the comment is a bit odd. Meanwhile, currently, we are likely to have Anzac and Collins serving until mid 40's as front line combatants both with limited growth potential. All of the Collins boats and all the Anzac ships are older than Choules. Both HMAS Collins and HMAS Anzac are 10+ years older than Collins. Using that logic, we should be retiring them now.Choules won’t ever become the PSV, by the time she is replaced by one of the JSS, she’ll be too old and off for scrapping or sold to a 2nd tier navy.