Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[StevoJH]

Having so many people embedded into the USN and RN training and crew complements does make me wonder how active the Collin’s class are actually going to be over the coming years.

Maybe keeping them in service a bit longer won’t be such a problem, because unless the RAN significantly increases the number of service members they are probably going to struggle to crew both the surface and sub-surface assets.

 

[hauritz]

Having so many people embedded into the USN and RN training and crew complements does make me wonder how active the Collin’s class are actually going to be over the coming years.

Maybe keeping them in service a bit longer won’t be such a problem, because unless the RAN significantly increases the number of service members they are probably going to struggle to crew both the surface and sub-surface assets.

A recent video posted by Sender suggested the LOTE could blow out to 4 years per vessel meaning most of the Collins fleet could be sitting up on hard stands before the first Virginia is delivered. As I see it the Collins LOTE is very much an insurance policy against the delivery of the Virginia class. If three of these vessels are delivered by the late 30s then you might see the remaining Collins class withdrawn from service around the same time. If the US back out of the deal, or there are delays you may well see the Collins class soldiering on until the mid to late 2040s.

Problem is that you can't really predict what will happen over the next 10 to 20 years.

Actually I think the next indication of how things are progressing will be if the UK manages to start construction of the first AUKUS sub before the end of this decade.

 

[John Fedup]

A recent video posted by Sender suggested the LOTE could blow out to 4 years per vessel meaning most of the Collins fleet could be sitting up on hard stands before the first Virginia is delivered. As I see it the Collins LOTE is very much an insurance policy against the delivery of the Virginia class. If three of these vessels are delivered by the late 30s then you might see the remaining Collins class withdrawn from service around the same time. If the US back out of the deal, or there are delays you may well see the Collins class soldiering on until the mid to late 2040s.

Problem is that you can't really predict what will happen over the next 10 to 20 years.

Actually I think the next indication of how things are progressing will be if the UK manages to start construction of the first AUKUS sub before the end of this decade.

I'd say predication times are problematic on a much smaller time frame. Just look at the gong show in the US after 2 months.

 

[Volkodav]

Planning for replacing Collins should have begun in the mid 2000s. Successive governments dithered and sat on their hands, now we are where we are.

If we were building the replacements for Collins now, first of class approaching completion, or even in trials, there would be no need for Virginia's, just plan and build AUKUS asap.

 

[downunderblue]

TOPIC- mitigating risk of Virginia class SSN export delay

I was on Twitter (will never call it anything other than that) and watching and responding to the excellent Alex Luck @AlexLuck9 who was fielding off some reactionary criticism of AUKUS inspired by recent Guardian articles by Peter Briggs and Chris Barry etc, in part saying we need a plan B etc (going back to a Suffren etc) and it got me thinking.

Yes a smart government (big assumptions here, yes I know) should have plans mitigating all strategic risk. Whilst I don't think our relationship with the US is remarkable effected by the Trump Administration (as yet), the greater risk IMO is our dependency on improvements in US shipbuilding to sustain USN and AUKUS needs.

So whilst I don't advocate going back for a Suffren (almost out of spite as I don't want to give Macron ammunition to repeat his line "I don't think, I know", mind you I still don't know why our then PM Morrison concluded that a Suffren would be "obsolete by the time it hit the water" per his recent commentary- who briefed him that or did he make it up???), I am puzzled why we cant consider other options inside of AUKUS to mitigate the risk of US Shipbuilding issues, namely:

1. Conduct a feasibility study whether we can commence SSN Aukus construction at Osborne at a much earlier date (on the knowledge that Barrow is tied up with the Dreadnaugh class before it can commence any SSN Aukus construction and furthermore we only receive delivery on the 3rd boat off that line); or
2. Conduct a feasibility study whether Osborne can commence a build for either an Astute SSN or even a Deadnaught class in an SSGN capacity at the first available opportunity?

There are clear pro's and con's for each idea. The obvious is that Osborne will be tied up with the Collins LOTE (hmmm) and additionally may have real difficulty getting the yard up to scratch for an SSN or SSGN build/ is likely to stuff it up (needed time to learn more from Barrow etc).

The real scarcity here IMO is the industrial capacity to build a SSN. CoA is really limited in their options here, so why are we not advancing Osborne on the knowledge that whilst there is some risk here, its a risk we are always going to face regardless of timings, and to develop our own capacity ultimately improves our soverignty and mitigates risk where external factors impact our security strategy. Why do we need to be reliant upon a Virginia delivery when ultimately other avenues within Aukus may suffice?

I know Governement and wonder if anyone is looking how to mitigate risk WITHIN Aukus, not outside of it. Would it be considered taboo to even consider a plan B (what you are saying here is hereacy ... witch, wiitch! ... burn them at the stake!!!) ???

For me, contingency planning is crucial to good performance. Surely it's reasonable to ask the question whether Osborne is up to an advanced role mitigating the Virginia risk and see what's possible?

Thoughts?

 

[Stampede]

Planning for replacing Collins should have begun in the mid 2000s. Successive governments dithered and sat on their hands, now we are where we are.

If we were building the replacements for Collins now, first of class approaching completion, or even in trials, there would be no need for Virginia's, just plan and build AUKUS asap.

Interesting the what if we started a replacement Collin’s much earlier with a conventional powered submarine wether we would of been content with that propulsion system over a nuclear powered alternative.

Cheers S

 

[downunderblue]

TOPIC- mitigating risk of Virginia class SSN export delay

For me, contingency planning is crucial to good performance. Surely it's reasonable to ask the question whether Osborne is up to an advanced role mitigating the Virginia risk and see what's possible?

Thoughts?

Just think ... if we can get Osborne up to scratch we can export the Canadians a SSK version of the SSN Aukus ...

Too soon for humour ... ?!!

 

[downunderblue]

Interesting the what if we started a replacement Collin’s much earlier with a conventional powered submarine wether we would of been content with that propulsion system over a nuclear powered alternative.

Cheers S

If you follow Scott Morrison's recent public statements, NSC-Cabinet received information suggesting any SSK proposal (and the Attack class and Suffren SSN for that matter too) would be "obsolete by the time it hit the water", so they clearly were 'forced' to look in one direction only.

 

[Volkodav]

If you follow Scott Morrison's recent public statements, NSC-Cabinet received information suggesting any SSK proposal (and the Attack class and Suffren SSN for that matter too) would be "obsolete by the time it hit the water", so they clearly were 'forced' to look in one direction only.

I think most Australians, including Morrisons former cabinet members, realise he is pretty much stuck at the peak of mount stupid. He knows enough to think he knows it all, but lacks the intellect to realise there is anything else to know.

 

[Reptilia]

Hopefully lots of Ghost Sharks, Speartooths and Bluebottles in the interim.

 

[StevoJH]

1. Conduct a feasibility study whether we can commence SSN Aukus construction at Osborne at a much earlier date (on the knowledge that Barrow is tied up with the Dreadnaugh class before it can commence any SSN Aukus construction and furthermore we only receive delivery on the 3rd boat off that line); or
2. Conduct a feasibility study whether Osborne can commence a build for either an Astute SSN or even a Deadnaught class in an SSGN capacity at the first available opportunity

Astute is unlikely to be an option as the reactor is out of production and from commentary online, PWR3 is bigger and will not fit in an Astute hull.

It would be very interesting to know where Rolls Royce are up to with their factory upgrade and what their production capabilities are for reactors both now and going forward.

Similarly, how far along is the design process for the next SSN?

Then there is another elephant, what damage occurred to the Devonshire dock hall from that fire? And what was the impact on the hulls under construction inside?

 

[Reptilia]

Astute is unlikely to be an option as the reactor is out of production and from commentary online, PWR3 is bigger and will not fit in an Astute hull.

It would be very interesting to know where Rolls Royce are up to with their factory upgrade and what their production capabilities are for reactors both now and going forward.

Similarly, how far along is the design process for the next SSN?

Then there is another elephant, what damage occurred to the Devonshire dock hall from that fire? And what was the impact on the hulls under construction inside?

SSN-AUKUS or SSNR design was 70% complete before we joined the program.
Vice Admiral Mead said it will be over 10,000tons.

Probably will look like a shortened dreadnought.

Our Best Look Yet At Britain’s New Dreadnought Class Ballistic Missile Submarine Design

A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal Navy’s forthcoming Dreadnought class SSBN. A highly streamlined hull, x-shaped stern, pumpjet propulsion, and conformal missile carriage are all features of the Royal...

www.twz.com

 

[downunderblue]

I think most Australians, including Morrisons former cabinet members, realise he is pretty much stuck at the peak of mount stupid. He knows enough to think he knows it all, but lacks the intellect to realise there is anything else to know.

I think in some circles there has been a rehabilitation of image, so much so that given a Coalition govt, one would see him as the new Ambassador to the US.

 

[Stampede]

If you follow Scott Morrison's recent public statements, NSC-Cabinet received information suggesting any SSK proposal (and the Attack class and Suffren SSN for that matter too) would be "obsolete by the time it hit the water", so they clearly were 'forced' to look in one direction only.

I’m no expert on subs,but around thirty nations operate submarines with only six currently having active SSNs.
Three of the SSN operators in Russia, China and India also operate and still manufacture conventional subs.

As to the future time will tell.
But clearly most maritime nations that can afford a submarine capability still see a future in conventional propulsion.

SSK , an obsolete maritime gamble?

Well I’ll leave that to the experts

Cheers S

 

[StevoJH]

I’m no expert on subs,but around thirty nations operate submarines with only six currently having active SSNs.
Three of the SSN operators in Russia, China and India also operate and still manufacture conventional subs.

As to the future time will tell.
But clearly most maritime nations that can afford a submarine capability still see a future in conventional propulsion.

SSK , an obsolete maritime gamble?

Well I’ll leave that to the experts

Cheers S

Not obsolete, however they no longer meet the operational requirements of the RAN.

The operational area is too large and the transit distances are too large.

Also, until recently I don't think Nuclear Submarines were even an option politically, let alone finding a partner willing to transfer the technology.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

Thoughts?

Thanks for the on-topic post. Always good to see constructive comments on submarine procurement.

As StevoJH says, Astute is over due to the reactors. As for a SSGN Dreadnought, I don't think that would be faster to build. As that nice YouTube guy said, SSN-AUKUS will probably be based on the Dreadnought design anyway.

On the PWR3 reactor production line, it looks like the last reactor for Dreadnought will be produced by 2028, if I've understood this article correctly.

The RN's first boat is due to be in service by 2039. The contract for the AUKUS boat reactors was awarded in January this year. So that suggests that with a 10 year construction period for boat 1, the first reactor will be ready as soon as is practicable.

In my mind this means that the real drag factor will be the hull manufacture. As we're talking about first in class I don't know that we can build within less than a decade. We'd probably need to find a way to bring the schedule forwards rather than shorten it.

Not obsolete, however they no longer meet the operational requirements of the RAN.

The operational area is too large and the transit distances are too large.

Yep. The RAN needs the ability to run submarines fast for long periods of time to get to their patrol areas.

Also on the Suffren, people forget that it has no VLS system and a limited number of racks for weapons (fewer than even Astute). That's why Virginia and AUKUS boats are so useful, they can cram in significant numbers of long-range missiles on top of torpedoes.

 

[Going Boeing]

Also, the Suffren class requires frequent reactor refuelling and the premise for the RAN to acquire SSN’s was based on ones that had sufficient fuel for the life of the submarine.

 

[MARKMILES77]

Looks like the Government may be planning to scale back the Life of Type Extension for Collins.
Has made the front page of The Australian.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=TAWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnation%2Fdefence%2Fsecret-submarine-scandal-collins-lined-up-for-liteon-refit%2Fnews-story%2F48c467dd5d98477b0f355ed8ec70a42e&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium

 

[SammyC]

Also, the Suffren class requires frequent reactor refuelling and the premise for the RAN to acquire SSN’s was based on ones that had sufficient fuel for the life of the submarine.

I never saw this as a massive problem. The Suffren's reactor lasts 10 years between refuelling, with a 30 year hull life (so two reactor changes per life cycle per boat).

The French have a program to do this, and did it for their earlier Rubis class. It could have been done, just meant that we needed to have additional systems to manage. Earlier USN and UK SSNs also did this, so I don't think its the massive risk it is made out to be.

I know the Government made a lot of commentary regarding the Virginia and SSN AUKUS long reactor life, but I don't think this was the defining reason to go with them over a nuclear Suffren.

 

[Reptilia]

I never saw this as a massive problem. The Suffren's reactor lasts 10 years between refuelling, with a 30 year hull life (so two reactor changes per life cycle per boat).

The French have a program to do this, and did it for their earlier Rubis class. It could have been done, just meant that we needed to have additional systems to manage. Earlier USN and UK SSNs also did this, so I don't think its the massive risk it is made out to be.

I know the Government made a lot of commentary regarding the Virginia and SSN AUKUS long reactor life, but I don't think this was the defining reason to go with them over a nuclear Suffren.

Refuelling required every 7-10 years.
With RAN use, it could be just 7, that’s 3-4 refuelling cycles.
Would it still be worth it?