AUKUS

R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Hoffy said:
Now the legislation has passed both houses.

AUKUS deal approved by US Congress as backers say future presidents can be trusted - ABC News

With much more work left to do a future US President could still create an issue. But even if Trump is elected would he?

Perhaps the Australian government may be asked for a much bigger financial investment than has already been confirmed.
Click to expand...
The final signing off for the transfer will not happen until 270 days before the transfer occurs so not before 2031 for the first Sub.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
Hoffy said:
Now the legislation has passed both houses.

AUKUS deal approved by US Congress as backers say future presidents can be trusted - ABC News

With much more work left to do a future US President could still create an issue. But even if Trump is elected would he?

Perhaps the Australian government may be asked for a much bigger financial investment than has already been confirmed.
Click to expand...
Seems to be a lot riding on whether the US can increase their submarine production rate. They were targeting a production rate of 2 vessels a year to meet their own needs, To cover Australia they will need to increase that by another third of a boat per year. Current production rate is about 1.2 boats a year so they still have a way to go.

They are optimistic about hitting the 2 submarine per year rate in 5 years.

news.usni.org

Navy Estimates 5 More Years for Virginia Attack Sub Production to Hit 2 Boats a Year - USNI News

It will take five years for the two shipbuilders that build Virginia-class attack boats to deliver two submarines a year, according to the Navy’s latest estimates of the production schedule. Three officials who have been briefed on the Navy’s estimates told USNI News that General Dynamics...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
hauritz said:
Seems to be a lot riding on whether the US can increase their submarine production rate. They were targeting a production rate of 2 vessels a year to meet their own needs, To cover Australia they will need to increase that by another third of a boat per year. Current production rate is about 1.2 boats a year so they still have a way to go.

They are optimistic about hitting the 2 submarine per year rate in 5 years.

news.usni.org

Navy Estimates 5 More Years for Virginia Attack Sub Production to Hit 2 Boats a Year - USNI News

It will take five years for the two shipbuilders that build Virginia-class attack boats to deliver two submarines a year, according to the Navy’s latest estimates of the production schedule. Three officials who have been briefed on the Navy’s estimates told USNI News that General Dynamics...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
Click to expand...
Remembering they are still overcoming the chaos of sequestration, followed by COVID. Those are very substantial reasons the two per year hasn't been reached.

As the US economy continues to recover industrial capacity will rebound and rates will increase. The down side is the GOP seem determined to return to an isolationist stance, this may have a very serious impact on capacity.
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
AUKUS: Japan poised to be part of AUKUS security pact (afr.com)
Starting to look like JAUKUS for Pillar 2 onwards is a very real possibility. Japan joining makes a lot of sense, can't see any downsides and plenty of upsides. The three DEFMINs/SEC) will announce later today (Monday 8 Apr) talks on expanding AUKUS. The Japanese PM will be in Washington for talks the Biden on Wednesday.

The link above is paywalled but I got access to the article by searching Japan joining AUKUS and went to the AFR site.
 
Last edited:
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
AUKUS: Japan poised to be part of AUKUS security pact (afr.com)
Starting to look like JAUKUS for Pillar 2 onwards is a very real possibility. Japan joining makes a lot of sense, can't see any downsides and plenty of upsides. The three DEFMINs/SEC) will announce later today (Monday 8 Apr) talks on expanding AUKUS. The Japanese PM will be in Washington for talks the* Biden on Wednesday.

The link above is paywalled but I got access to the article by searching Japan joining AUKUS and went to the AFR site.
Click to expand...
Edit
*Talks with Biden.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
How will UK Labour sweeping to power effect AUKUS?

British Labour has come out in support of AUKUS but lets not pretend that that things might not change over the next few years. Much depends on the UK continuing to invest in submarine production. Cutting back investments will mean delays. Australia is dependent on the first UK AUKUS sub being delivered by 2038 with the first Australian sub following 4 years later.

Double jeopardy for Australia with Trump likely to be back in the Oval office next year.
 
M

Morgo

Well-Known Member
hauritz said:
How will UK Labour sweeping to power effect AUKUS?

British Labour has come out in support of AUKUS but lets not pretend that that things might not change over the next few years. Much depends on the UK continuing to invest in submarine production. Cutting back investments will mean delays. Australia is dependent on the first UK AUKUS sub being delivered by 2038 with the first Australian sub following 4 years later.

Double jeopardy for Australia with Trump likely to be back in the Oval office next year.
Click to expand...
For what it’s worth apparently Albo and Starmer are old mates.
 
Musashi_kenshin

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
hauritz said:
How will UK Labour sweeping to power effect AUKUS?
Click to expand...
I don't think it will be a problem. Labour are pro-jobs and have supported AUKUS publicly. Plus the Barrow constituency now has a Labour MP, who would lobby Starmer against doing anything that might disrupt work at the yards.

Besides, AUKUS will save the UK money by spreading the costs of developing the new sub class around, and also via the parts the UK will manufacture for Australia. The only way to save even more money than that would be to cancel the entire class and thereby destroy the Royal Navy's submarine force.

Double jeopardy for Australia with Trump likely to be back in the Oval office next year.
Click to expand...
The necessary authorisations have already passed Congress and been signed off by Biden.

Even if they hadn't, Trump is all about "the deal". The new submarine class is buying important components from US manufacturers. No reason he'd cancel all of that.
 
Last edited:
H

Hoffy

Active Member
Thought it might be of interest to pop this link in here:

Dreadnought Class (mod.uk)

The web site has been recently updated and a few features will probably be relevant to the SSN AUKUS design.

Obviously PWR3, and VLS, but also X Rudders etc.

Commonality of design seems likely.
 
Musashi_kenshin

Musashi_kenshin

Well-Known Member
John Fedup said:
Given the minimal R&D funding for defence companies here, I really don't see much value for other AUKUS members. Add in Canada's dismal commitment to defence in general, why bother?
Click to expand...
Yup. This feels a bit like Canada wanting to feel relevant because of Australia's involvement. But Australia spends, what, 50% more on defence than Canada in terms of cash values?

Canada can't meaningfully contribute if it's spending just 1.4% of GDP on its military.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Musashi_kenshin said:
Yup. This feels a bit like Canada wanting to feel relevant because of Australia's involvement. But Australia spends, what, 50% more on defence than Canada in terms of cash values?

Canada can't meaningfully contribute if it's spending just 1.4% of GDP on its military.
Click to expand...
Agree, but it isn’t just the pathetic % of GDP on defence. Grants and incentives for R&D defence companies in Canada is even worse which explains why many innovative startups leave or sell.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
Could be a big day for AUKUS today. Regardless of your political persuasion it would be more convenient for Australia if Harris gets up.
 
Big_Zucchini

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
John Fedup said:
The AUKUS program is being "reviewed" by the Trump administration. Could be a lot of nothing but then again, it is Trump and his number one fool Hegseth.

U.S. puts AUKUS agreement with UK and Australia under review
Click to expand...
I wouldn't base my conclusions on the notion that Trump is an idiot.
In the end, he doesn't really know what Golden Dome, AUKUS, or NATO-specific programs really are. Nor does he know the needs of the various commands.
As the chief executive power, he can direct re-orientation, perhaps to China as the main threat, and have military staff bring forward proposals on how to do it, with him being the stamp, not strategist.
A lot of other decisions or thought processes which we've heard, like reducing Army acquisitions including armored vehicles and attack helicopters, accelerating B-21 and overall larger missile buys, Golden Dome, outsourced shipbuilding etc, all seem geared toward making the Armed Forces leaner ahead of a fight and perform better vs China on a limited budget.

Australia is just that ally that's important to beef up, as well as others in the area, and it's definitely NOT unwise to re-examine if AUKUS really does what needs to be done and in a relevant timeframe.
If the current administration believes the best window (for China) for war is in 3-5 years, then they need to see how they can maximize regional capabilities within that time frame even if it comes at the expense of longer term buildup.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Big_Zucchini said:
I wouldn't base my conclusions on the notion that Trump is an idiot.
In the end, he doesn't really know what Golden Dome, AUKUS, or NATO-specific programs really are. Nor does he know the needs of the various commands.
As the chief executive power, he can direct re-orientation, perhaps to China as the main threat, and have military staff bring forward proposals on how to do it, with him being the stamp, not strategist.
A lot of other decisions or thought processes which we've heard, like reducing Army acquisitions including armored vehicles and attack helicopters, accelerating B-21 and overall larger missile buys, Golden Dome, outsourced shipbuilding etc, all seem geared toward making the Armed Forces leaner ahead of a fight and perform better vs China on a limited budget.

Australia is just that ally that's important to beef up, as well as others in the area, and it's definitely NOT unwise to re-examine if AUKUS really does what needs to be done and in a relevant timeframe.
If the current administration believes the best window (for China) for war is in 3-5 years, then they need to see how they can maximize regional capabilities within that time frame even if it comes at the expense of longer term buildup.
Click to expand...
I didn't say Trump was a idiot but I did say Hegseth was a fool. Trump may or may not be an idiot but he is a felon, a pathological liar, bully, and all-around A-H. His MAGA base isn't happy with him at the moment over the Epstein affair so trashing AUKUS for enhancing American job prospects (albeit this would be BS) might be a means to pacify the MAGA crowd. All his actions are for what's best for him, not America or the rest of the world for that matter.

Regarding AUKUS, one has to wonder if the USN sees AUKUS as a threat to obtaining delivery on their subs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top