Australian navy's hunt for new sub to replace Collins class

[dimsum]

But to your point a significant number of ships were sunk within the confines of the Gulf of St Lawrence but we Canadians seem to conveniently forgot about this.

I'm just spitballing here, but maybe the difference is that after WWII, Australia knew that the chance of it happening again in a future conflict is pretty high, as they're the big "western" power in that region. Canada knew it has the US next door.

Why is defence procurement not as much of a political football? Why do we understate or minimize our past exposure to danger?

My guess - because of our proximity to the US, it can be.

I think any country would do the same - if Australia and Canada were reversed (ie. we're in Oceania, they were in North America) they would do exactly the same thing to save $ for other efforts. NZ does the same thing with Australia - even to a larger extent since NZ dismantled its fighter force, so Australia literally provides their air cover.

It's human complacency on a national scale.

 

[KevinB]

While I would prefer to see the country run by someone other than the current Prime Minister, context is important even if the comment itself was stupid:

"You know, there’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say ‘we need to go green fastest…we need to start investing in solar.’ I mean there is a flexibility that I know Stephen Harper must dream about of having a dictatorship that he can do everything he wanted that I find quite interesting."

"But if I were to reach out and say which … which kind of administration I most admire, I think there’s something to be said right here in Canada for the way our territories are run. Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and the Yukon are done without political parties around consensus. And are much more like a municipal government. And I think there’s a lot to be said for people pulling together to try and solve issues rather than to score points off of each other. And I think we need a little more of that.”



Underway is 100% correct here. While I am consistently impressed by your ability to ram a random rant about Trudeau Jr or Snr into almost every thread on this forum that wouldn't otherwise be discussing politics, it's very tiresome.

The main thing that separates this forum from every other disgruntled boomer vet Facebook group out there is the fact that the threads about technical and strategic issues are civil, mostly on-topic, and bring people to the table with subject-matter expertise and interesting perspectives of the matters being discussed. Please don't ruin it for the rest of us.

Context being key here -- you must also realize that JT loves to spew garbage just to here himself talk.
The fact that he mentioned China at all with their "fantastic" human rights records as a model to do anything is appalling at the very root.
The next that he said "Green" and "China" in the same sentence makes me wonder what planet he's on.

 

[OldSolduer]

When you say you have a "basic admiration" for a dictatorship then I don't think you're fit to be the PM. Just my opinion and if you don't like it tough luck.

 

[CBH99]

"You know, there’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say ‘we need to go green fastest…we need to start investing in solar.’ I mean there is a flexibility that I know Stephen Harper must dream about of having a dictatorship that he can do everything he wanted that I find quite interesting."

"But if I were to reach out and say which … which kind of administration I most admire, I think there’s something to be said right here in Canada for the way our territories are run. Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and the Yukon are done without political parties around consensus. And are much more like a municipal government. And I think there’s a lot to be said for people pulling together to try and solve issues rather than to score points off of each other. And I think we need a little more of that.”


I am by no means a fan of our current PM. And by now, he should understand that what is said to the public, while in public office, will absolutely follow them - and to choose their words wisely.

That being said, he does make a valid point in what is quoted above. He isn't wrong in the fact that China does have the ability to make decisions faster, and execute those decisions faster, than most countries in the west. In terms of how quickly our governments in the west can make a decision, negotiate a warped version of it with the other parties, and then execute on the action points - China does have a very clear advantage at the strategic level.



Admiring a country that is currently committing a genocide in all but name, and doesn't even try to hide the fact that they have a very dark agenda planned for the rest of the world? Probably not the best thing to say there Justin...

But, in terms of their ability to focus their efforts more long term, decide a course of action, and execute on it (which is what the above quote seems to be about - I don't have the context of what the overall conversation was) he isn't wrong.



P.S. We should get back on topic lads?

 

[KevinB]

P.S. We should get back on topic lads?

One could argue that it is the topic -- 1) China is THE major reason for the Aussie about turn on the subs - and 2) Your leader and his admiration and focus are a reason as to why Canada hasn't made the same conclusion.

 

[CBH99]

One could argue that it is the topic -- 1) China is THE major reason for the Aussie about turn on the subs - and 2) Your leader and his admiration and focus are a reason as to why Canada hasn't made the same conclusion.

Both very fair points that I completely agree with.

With both Michael’s now released, I’m sincerely hoping he changes his tune. I can understand ‘being the nice guy’ if it means securing their release, especially with the media coverage on it.

But now that they are back? Time to put your game face on Justin, stiffen up that spine, and prove to the country you aren’t as cozy with the CCP as you seem…


(I would say China is ‘part’ of the topic, re the reason WHY Australia is stepping up it’s game to a whole other level. But the general topic is their quest to replace their boats. Our PM doesn’t factor into that really. I keep posting in the wrong submarine thread - all of my JT stuff was meant for our own ‘Replacing the subs’ thread.)

 

[suffolkowner]

No room for delay in Australia’s transition to nuclear-powered submarines | The Strategist

When journalists used to ask me whether I thought we should continue with the Attack-class submarine program, I’d answer with the old joke about the American tourist lost in the back blocks of Ireland. After ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

the attached graphic from above article, details one possible plan going forwards. I hope for Australia's sake they manage to accelerate it with some agreement with the UK either building over there or lend/lease and build a Australian Astute with the "Australianization" kept to a minimum while moving in concert with the UK on the Astute replacement

 

[suffolkowner]

I dont know what happening to build plan graphic

 

[YZT580]

Assuming that the first nuclear boat for the Australians is produced offshore can either the Brits or the Yanks increase production rate to accommodate an Australian purchase without throwing a wrench into their own procurement schedule?

 

[KevinB]

Assuming that the first nuclear boat for the Australians is produced offshore can either the Brits or the Yanks increase production rate to accommodate an Australian purchase without throwing a wrench into their own procurement schedule?

US yards can accelerate, there have been open source releases that the boat works are running about 25% capacity.

 

[Grimey]

Assuming that the first nuclear boat for the Australians is produced offshore can either the Brits or the Yanks increase production rate to accommodate an Australian purchase without throwing a wrench into their own procurement schedule?

Two Astutes still in build in Barrow with work started on Dreadnought and long lead items ordered. Can't see how they could squeeze an Aussie Astute in.

 

[Good2Golf]

Two Astutes still in build in Barrow with work started on Dreadnought and long lead items ordered. Can't see how they could squeeze an Aussie Astute in.

Virginia it is, then…

 

[daftandbarmy]

US yards can accelerate, there have been open source releases that the boat works are running about 25% capacity.

The starter pistol for the Utah was just cracked off this month:

EB Marks Keel Laying of Virginia-Class Submarine UTAH (SSN 801)

GROTON, Conn. (September 01, 2021) - Electric Boat held a keel laying ceremony for the 28th ship of the Virginia class, the submarine Utah (SSN 801), at Quonset Point. EB senior staff, including President Kevin Graney and Vice President for QP Operations Sean Davies, joined Navy leadership, EB employees, and members of the Utah commissioning committee to mark this important construction milestone.

Utah will be the second Navy vessel named after the “Beehive State,” the first being a Florida-class battleship (BB-31) commissioned in 1911. BB-31 served during the Mexican Revolution, World War I, and provided a covering force for Allied convoys near Britain in 1918.

General Dynamics Electric Boat - 2021 Press Release Archives

www.gdeb.com

 

[CBH99]

US yards can accelerate, there have been open source releases that the boat works are running about 25% capacity.

I remember reading about a year or two ago that the US was trying to do 3 submarine builds a year, rather than the current 2.

When I tried to Google it, all I find are the same articles talking about US plans to increase, but nothing really concrete on progress.

If the US was able/is able to increase production (which sounds like it could) - providing the Aussies with a few boats to get them started down the path may be the best option for them.

- They would all be stationed fairly close to China

- Australia is a very friendly ‘western nation’ with similar concerns/goals

- They wouldn’t take away entire submarine crews from the Yanks, allowing the US to more or less carry on with their own plans

- If Australia is paying them a decent chunk of money, the costs of the boats themselves could be very much offset


Basically, the US could drastically increase their force posture in the Pacific more or less ‘for free’ - it could be an absolute game changer for the entire theatre, in our favour.

 

[KevinB]

I remember reading about a year or two ago that the US was trying to do 3 submarine builds a year, rather than the current 2.

I'm trying to find the article - but there is a paper article I have that says that 2 builds is barely enough to keep the doors open - and the potential at current capability (it didn't go into that in depth) to go to 8 - I'm not sure again if that is class dependent.
Worst case I will try to scan - but my son has hockey tonight (and I coach) and on the ranges tomorrow - so I will probably need to do it Thursday.

When I tried to Google it, all I find are the same articles talking about US plans to increase, but nothing really concrete on progress.

If the US was able/is able to increase production (which sounds like it could) - providing the Aussies with a few boats to get them started down the path may be the best option for them.

I suspect the USN has no interest in kicking a new boat to the Aussies immediately - as we have seen here (and other threads on this board) that SSN's aren't something you just buy and drive off the lot -- I suspect a mix crew would be needed for quite some time - as there are requirements that non nuclear Navies just don't have to run a nuke boat.

- They would all be stationed fairly close to China

- Australia is a very friendly ‘western nation’ with similar concerns/goals

- They wouldn’t take away entire submarine crews from the Yanks, allowing the US to more or less carry on with their own plans

- If Australia is paying them a decent chunk of money, the costs of the boats themselves could be very much offset


Basically, the US could drastically increase their force posture in the Pacific more or less ‘for free’ - it could be an absolute game changer for the entire theatre, in our favour.

Agreed - but I think baby steps are best for fledgling nuclear navies.
Kicking up production would be welcome - and I think be good for all the good guys.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I remember reading about a year or two ago that the US was trying to do 3 submarine builds a year, rather than the current 2.

Basically, the US could drastically increase their force posture in the Pacific more or less ‘for free’ - it could be an absolute game changer for the entire theatre, in our favour.

Sounds a bit like Canada showing up at the party bringing no food or drinks yet expecting to eat and drink for free….

 

[Good2Golf]

…well…maybe at least bringing a small bag of stale chips and dip past its best-before date…

 

[CBH99]

Sounds a bit like Canada showing up at the party bringing no food or drinks yet expecting to eat and drink for free….

When I said ‘our favour’ I was referring to the collective west KevinB is right, baby steps will be needed when transitioning from a non-nuclear navy to a nuclear one.

But once that transition has been completed, having an extra 8 to 12 RAN nuclear boats available to deter China is great for the good guys.

…well…maybe at least bringing a small bag of stale chips and dip past its best-before date…

We might not bring any hot dogs to the BBQ. Or any burgers. Heck we might not even bring any stale chips, they don’t even taste good when crunched up & put on top of the burger for extra crunch.

But you can be damn sure we’ll bring the coleslaw. Every BBQ needs coleslaw… right? (Gosh I hate coleslaw…like really really hate it.)

Hopefully a few CSC hulls are online by the time things kick off, otherwise I don’t see us contributing anything kinetic in a coalition ‘dust up’ against China.


0.02

 

[KevinB]

Hopefully a few CSC hulls are online by the time things kick off, otherwise I don’t see us contributing anything kinetic in a coalition ‘dust up’ against China.


0.02

My belief is a strong and capable Military deters hostile actors -- I would rather pay a larger tax burden for that -- than having to send more young people off to fight.

Not only is the "Price of Peace Ever Vigilance", it's also supporting a Military that can act as a deterrent.

 

[Remius]

Reminder and explanation of Australian Defence policy.