Australia to Get Nuclear Submarines

[RETAC21]

19 hours ago, Josh said:

Not at all true. Look at the installed power of any SSK's diesel's versus its electric motors. My understanding is that even the Collins is limited to ~12 knots rate of advance, assuming a high indiscretion rate, using all three of its diesels. The installed diesel power of most SSKs is literally an entire order of magnitude lower than a nuke plant, and the power generation of an AIP system another order of magnitude lower than that - which is why Collins doesn't use one; it wouldn't have generated enough power for the short patrol cycle to be worth the power and complexity.

What isn't true? a typical SSN will make 15 knots on transit, that's hardly an order of magnitude over 12 knots. Yes, a SSN has enough power to make a lot more (which is what I said) but usually they don't because the sea is not empty and bad things can happen at high speed:

[Nobu]

Wondering how quietly Australia will be able to run its Virginias into the hot zone at 15kts. If not quietly enough...

  

34 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Reintroduce the Rum ration.

They might need to reintroduce the other two as well  

 

34 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

And buried within this announcement was confirmation that the UK and the US will be sharing with Australia their expertise in cyber, AI and even quantum computing.

Jesus.

I get Australia is a member of 5 Eyes, but this is like giving a med school scholarship to someone who has never really wanted to be a doctor.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Nobu

[Stuart Galbraith]

13 minutes ago, Nobu said:

They might need to reintroduce the other two as well  

 

Jesus.

I get Australia is a member of 5 Eyes, but this is like giving a med school scholarship to someone who has never really wanted to be a doctor.

This is the nation that gave the world Mad Max, Stone, Wolf Creek, Katherine Knight and Rupert Murdoch. I'd be more worried if I was Chinese.

[Nobu]

I was going to call Australia the prodigal son personified, but that puts me in the role of his brother Envious 

Giving the world Rupert Murdoch should be grounds for expulsion, not inclusion.

ETA: I see your point about Rupert. A powerful man, worthy of respect.

Edited September 21, 2021 by Nobu

[BansheeOne]

6 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Here is the thing. France agreed to develop Eurofighter with its European allies. Then it opted out, ostensibly because the aircraft could not operate from a Carrier, but just as likely because they realised it would erode French market share in the lighweight fighter market. So we have had them eroding market share from Typhoon, something which Europe could never accuse of us of not being full European players in.  The French have been directly competing with it for orders for decades, eroding pan European defence which is so in vogue these days. Did we complain? No, we sucked it up and put it down to French being French.

And its not just France doing it. When Germany dumped a couple of thousand used leopard2's on the second hand market, and destroyed any small chance of Challenger 2 or Leclerc securing export markets, we didnt whine and wail and complain to the EU about Germany being a poor ally. No, we sucked it up and got on with it.

Well you have certainly whined about normal market competition like the above frequently and loud enough round here. And your attempt to conflate nations developing and procuring considerable numbers of their own systems, then marketing them successfully with what now has repeatedly been pointed out to be a matter of the way and style allies interfere with each others' strategic concepts for certain regions frankly doesn't speak of intellectual honesty.

You also disregard again that for everyone else in Europe, this comes on the heels of being blindsided about the speed of the American Afghanistan pullout. Just because you happen to be on the other side this time doesn't mean this doesn't reinforce what you said a month ago when everyone in the UK complained that Biden didn't notify even his closest ally and actually evaded your calls, and demanded a more independent foreign policy:

On 8/19/2021 at 6:34 PM, Stuart Galbraith said:

I value the relationship with America, but there is no saving a relationship that only works one way. A Rubicon has been crossed.

For the outsider, both the French and British hysterics when they don't feel their bygone power appreciated enough are in fact hard to distinguish, particularly when directed against each other. But then the UK left the EU in its last major fit and doesn't currently enjoy the best reputation as a trustworthy negotiation partner around the continent over all the recent "on reflection, we're not going to honor this part of the agreements, and want to renegotiate that one", etc.

So again, Europeans are gonna side with the club member vs. the non-member. Which doesn't mean they're going to put French national interest in security politics over their own, and if France doesn't modify its own wannabe leadership approach, its not going to present a credible alternative to a US-led NATO. But this widens the crack you noted yourself.

Though speaking of the trouble over Brexit agreements, the more immediate sense behind the joint offendedness is probably to exact amends in areas other than defense - the Northern Ireland Protocol, the EU-Australia trade agreement negotiations and the next World Climate Conference have been mentioned. Having the US try to make nice with furious partners is always useful for the latter, particularly when the Americans can lean on the other parties they just did a major favor which caused the indignation. 

Edited September 21, 2021 by BansheeOne

[Adam_S]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/britains-nuclear-submarines-to-use-australia-as-base-for-indo-pacific-presence-rw6mz0p03

Britain’s nuclear-powered submarines are to use Australia as a base so that they can have a more persistent presence in the Indo-Pacific region under plans discussed by ministers.

Senior government sources said that the AUKUS pact could lead to the Royal Navy’s £1.4 billion Astute-class attack submarines undergoing deep maintenance in the region so they can stay deployed for longer rather than returning to the Faslane naval base in Scotland

I bet the RN crews are going to hate that. I mean who would want to be based here?

 

 

[Simon Tan]

Unvaxxed tradies, skin cancer, lockdowns and killer arachnids. 

[sunday]

And snakes. Do not forget the snakes. Nor the crocs.

[KV7]

On 9/20/2021 at 3:37 AM, BansheeOne said:

Let's face it, this will be an American show from leading actor to ticket puncher. The UK is just along to spread the political cost around. 

The UK leadership want that political cost, it is part of their post-Brexit 'global Britain' theatrics.

The more crazy ones probably have dreams of putting troops back into Singapore, even better if they can have an Australian contingent under UK command.

[Simon Tan]

Im trying to understand how you run a SSN off a beach.

[Josh]

8 hours ago, RETAC21 said:

What isn't true? a typical SSN will make 15 knots on transit, that's hardly an order of magnitude over 12 knots. Yes, a SSN has enough power to make a lot more (which is what I said) but usually they don't because the sea is not empty and bad things can happen at high speed:

So your example of the fact that nuclear submarines don't travel at speed is an example of a submarine traveling at speed? Every public source I've read about this incident indicated it was hardly poking around at 10 knots, which is what an SSK would be doing.

I would also point out that while ships move around, geography generally doesn't. I don't know what caused this particular accident, but it should generally be avoidable with accurate sea maps and an accurate INS system, updated occasionally by GPS.

I believe there have been acknowledged collisions with whales that caused damage though.

[Josh]

8 hours ago, Nobu said:

Wondering how quietly Australia will be able to run its Virginias into the hot zone at 15kts. If not quietly enough...

  

They might need to reintroduce the other two as well  

 

Jesus.

I get Australia is a member of 5 Eyes, but this is like giving a med school scholarship to someone who has never really wanted to be a doctor.

I think you're missing the point. Australia is being invited into the back room of the Five Eyes Club. The US, with the UK blessing, is inviting Aus to have a special relationship, albeit one that doesn't involve sharing nuclear delivery systems.

[Josh]

2 hours ago, Simon Tan said:

Unvaxxed tradies, skin cancer, lockdowns and killer arachnids. 

I'd go back.

[Josh]

2 hours ago, KV7 said:

The UK leadership want that political cost, it is part of their post-Brexit 'global Britain' theatrics.

The more crazy ones probably have dreams of putting troops back into Singapore, even better if they can have an Australian contingent under UK command.

The UK shares its only nuclear delivery system with the US. The missiles literally switch sides between boats and aren't coded for any specific country. I'm not sure why you would think this is a new thing; nuclear weapons put the 'special' into special relationship.

[Rick]

I must have missed this, but why does Australia need nuclear powered submarines?

[sunday]

30 minutes ago, Rick said:

I must have missed this, but why does Australia need nuclear powered submarines?

Large sea portions to monitor, great distances to cover, limitations in manpower...

[Adam_S]

4 hours ago, Simon Tan said:

Unvaxxed tradies, skin cancer, lockdowns and killer arachnids. 

Feed the tradies to the crocs, snakes and spiders. Problem solved.

[sunday]

28 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Feed the tradies to the crocs, snakes and spiders. Problem solved.

You need to repress those genocidal tendencies, at least until there is a government of with a proletariat dictatorship, in which case you will be among the first to be sent to the eucalyptus plantations, if you are lucky.

Edited September 22, 2021 by sunday

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 hours ago, Adam_S said:

I bet the RN crews are going to hate that. I mean who would want to be based here?

 

 

Yeah, going to have to qualify for hardship post funding...

[Simon Tan]

Help us please, President Xi, you are our only hope...... The Chicoms can't believe how lucky they are!

[Stuart Galbraith]

11 hours ago, BansheeOne said:

Well you have certainly whined about normal market competition like the above frequently and loud enough round here. And your attempt to conflate nations developing and procuring considerable numbers of their own systems, then marketing them successfully with what now has repeatedly been pointed out to be a matter of the way and style allies interfere with each others' strategic concepts for certain regions frankly doesn't speak of intellectual honesty.

You also disregard again that for everyone else in Europe, this comes on the heels of being blindsided about the speed of the American Afghanistan pullout. Just because you happen to be on the other side this time doesn't mean this doesn't reinforce what you said a month ago when everyone in the UK complained that Biden didn't notify even his closest ally and actually evaded your calls, and demanded a more independent foreign policy:

For the outsider, both the French and British hysterics when they don't feel their bygone power appreciated enough are in fact hard to distinguish, particularly when directed against each other. But then the UK left the EU in its last major fit and doesn't currently enjoy the best reputation as a trustworthy negotiation partner around the continent over all the recent "on reflection, we're not going to honor this part of the agreements, and want to renegotiate that one", etc.

So again, Europeans are gonna side with the club member vs. the non-member. Which doesn't mean they're going to put French national interest in security politics over their own, and if France doesn't modify its own wannabe leadership approach, its not going to present a credible alternative to a US-led NATO. But this widens the crack you noted yourself.

Though speaking of the trouble over Brexit agreements, the more immediate sense behind the joint offendedness is probably to exact amends in areas other than defense - the Northern Ireland Protocol, the EU-Australia trade agreement negotiations and the next World Climate Conference have been mentioned. Having the US try to make nice with furious partners is always useful for the latter, particularly when the Americans can lean on the other parties they just did a major favor which caused the indignation. 

Banshee, I may often disagree with you, but I dont descend to accusing you of 'whining'. Its entirely up to you, but you could extend the same courtesy.

The Australians had a perfect right to end the deal due to the nature of the contract, and did. As far as pulling the plug, they were perfectly in their rights according to the gate on the contract, something the French protests obfuscate.  One might say the timing could be better, and French feelings could have been better handled, no argument. But as far as France subsequently appealing to pan European sentiment, I can point to the French never giving a damn, either about defending Europe by taking NATO seriously, or competing against weapons projects created inside Europe, and now when someone finally outcompetes them they run to mummy von der Leyen and cry about it being unfair and how Europe should rally to their corner. Im finding this less than impressive a position on their part, particularly considering how much the UK has spent in the past 70 years defending Europe, and participating in numerous and mostly failed pan Eurpopean projects (Project Foil, SPG70, MBT70, CET, Tornado, Typhoon, Common European Minehunter, Trigat).

No, Ive not forgiven the Biden for the crass stupidity of how they handled Afghanistan. if anything this fully underlines the transactional nature of how they do business these days. Once again though, this ignores what actually happened. The Americans did not start this transaction. The Australians asked Britain for access to the tech. And we, because we dont actually own the technology,  rightly asked the Americans.

Besides, what were we supposed to do, give one of our finest allies a sticky finger because we were worried about offending French sensibilities?  Do you seriously think France would have extended that civility to us if the boot had been on the other foot? All that would have happened is that Australia would have pulled the plug on a blatently failing project, and there would have been no alternative on hand to help their security. NATO admits Australia is a vital partner to help contain China, should we put that at risk just because the French Government wants to shake the Australians down for every penny they can get out of what was increasingly turning into a ponzy scheme?

 As far as Northern Ireland, there is not very much the US can do to interpose itself between the UK and one of its constituent nations, short of a blockade. But Im absolutely sure they wont try over European sausages.

 

One other point before I leave this, because you, the French and everyone else has overlooked this important point. Britain HAS actually been in this situation before.

There was an occasion in the 1980's I think, when America used the 5 eyes network to spy on the UK making an Arms deal with Saudia Arabia IIRC. The Americans listened in, found what we bid, and then undercut us. I think they sold the Sauds F15's over our Tornado ADV's if I remember.

We could have done as France did. We could have appealed to Europe for support. We could have squealed blue murder that it was a poor way to treat vital allies. We could have done all Macron did, making a big song and dance routine over it. But we did not. We handled it behind the scenes, pointed out it was unsporting, basically behaved like grown up nations do. I dont know if we got an apology, but the point was made, and to my knowledge they have not tried it again. We did it because we appreciated the Atlantic Alliance, and that it should not be damaged for purely national interests. Something neither America or France have ever done.

Once again, the French are basically putting themselves first over Europe. And still people will cheer them for it, and decry us for being poor European partners. Same as it ever was.

 

Edited September 22, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 hours ago, Josh said:

The UK shares its only nuclear delivery system with the US. The missiles literally switch sides between boats and aren't coded for any specific country. I'm not sure why you would think this is a new thing; nuclear weapons put the 'special' into special relationship.

Its even closer than that. We are designing the missile compartment on their submarines, they are helping us design our next nuclear warhead to fit on them. Personally as far as the latter, i wish we woudl not, but considering vital parts of the warhead, such as the explosives, are now sourced from France, its hardly as if we have not been approaching our security in an international sense for years.

 

[Rick]

4 hours ago, sunday said:

Large sea portions to monitor, great distances to cover, limitations in manpower...

Would not an airplane be more efficient? Lease a satellite?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Satellites cannot yet adequately monitor submarines, and besides, they are potentially themselves vulnerable to directed energy attack, and are rarely overhead when you want them anyway. They also cannot do anything when it comes to a war other than watch. For what they do, which isnt really all that much, they are expensive.

Aircraft have limited range and endurance. The P3's (and I believe the RAAF are also acquiring P8's) cannot survive in a hostile air environment (as one of your EP3 found out once upon a time), and their Hornets and F35's have no antisubmarine capability.

If you want to deny your potential opponent use of the sea, the Nuclear submarine is still the best option on offer. And if you read 'The Silent Deep', you will suddenly appreciate quite how useful they are in peacetime for intelligence purposes. Highly significant considering Australia has a significant role in 5 eyes.

[sunday]

12 minutes ago, Rick said:

Would not an airplane be more efficient? Lease a satellite?

Airplanes are not persistent, and satellites are not very flexible.

Sometimes you need a boat in the sea.