Australia to Get Nuclear Submarines

[Adam_S]

10 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Thanks for that Adam, that makes sense to put it near populated areas. Nobody wants families to live in the middle of nowhere.

Yeah, I just cant see how that could work without building a diesel electric as big as an SSN. At which point the arguement for SSN's is unassailable. The only problem they had was getting the tech to build it.

In a sense, its all the PRC's fault. If they had trod carefully, Australia would probably have carried on with the Barracuda's and be far less of a threat. They made their own problem by pissing off Australians, which history has proven is not a really great idea....

Perth is where the Collins class are based out now so there's a fair amount of infrastructure there already to support submarine opps. There's not a lot else in that part of Australia until you get around to Darwin, but there's not a lot of infrastructure there to be anything other than a forward operating base.

Personally, I'm glad to see all this happening. The Chinese government has been quietly buying up land, infrastructure, businesses and, to be frank, politicians here for a while. Then they pulled all this kind of crap (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-03/heres-what-happened-between-china-and-australia-in-2020/13019242) basically blocking all sorts of Australian trade goods because our PM dared to call for an international investigation into the origins of covid. It's good to see the West standing up for itself, frankly, because I don't want the Chinese government (as very distinct from the Chinese people) anywhere near here.

[Adam_S]

5 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Sorry, my brain is in a complete fuzz this morning. I thank you for pointing that out, so I dont look an even bigger fool than people already assume.

No problem, but as a maths teacher I was kind of triggered

[Stuart Galbraith]

Quite so, I should know better, even with my remedial maths skills.

3 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Perth is where the Collins class are based out now so there's a fair amount of infrastructure there already to support submarine opps. There's not a lot else in that part of Australia until you get around to Darwin, but there's not a lot of infrastructure there to be anything other than a forward operating base.

Personally, I'm glad to see all this happening. The Chinese government has been quietly buying up land, infrastructure, businesses and, to be frank, politicians here for a while. Then they pulled all this kind of crap (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-03/heres-what-happened-between-china-and-australia-in-2020/13019242) basically blocking all sorts of Australian trade goods because our PM dared to call for an international investigation into the origins of covid. It's good to see the West standing up for itself, frankly, because I don't want the Chinese government (as very distinct from the Chinese people) anywhere near here.

And there is going to be other benefits too. From what was dropped in the other day, there seemed to be reference to cooperating on Cyberattacks, and false media.

We all need to do more. We have been selling off our economic leadership to China for frankly very little in return. They are not liberalizing with all their new found wealth. Quite the opposite, they are just following the standard Communist format of pissing it all away on weaponry. Mao would be so proud.

[Adam_S]

Some quick back of the envelope calculations and a bit of googling suggest that Perth is approximately the same distance from the South China Sea as Guam is, so the US and UK are potentially getting a very valuable base out of this.

Something else to consider is that if they're going to go with Virginias, then that potentially provides a very powerful strategic strike capability too. The block Vs are packing close to 50 VLS cells each IIRC so two Aussie SSNs on station could potentially park 100 cruise missiles right off the coast of China.

[Adam_S]

11 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

We all need to do more. We have been selling off our economic leadership to China for frankly very little in return. They are not liberalizing with all their new found wealth. Quite the opposite, they are just following the standard Communist format of pissing it all away on weaponry. Mao would be so proud.

I couldn't agree more. Their government there seems to be using 1984 as some kind of how-to guide and frankly they scare the crap out of me.

I had an interesting conversation with a colleague recently who taught in a school in Shanghai for a couple of years. She had a great time but she also told me a couple of stories that made my hair stand on end. Apparently one time she was on the phone to her parents back home and they made some kind of joke about Tienanmen Square. Instantly the phone line went dead. They phoned back, obviously and said the same thing again. The line dropped out a second time. Then there was the colleague who said something he shouldn't have online and was told that he needed to leave the country right now as in tonight or else he'd find himself in serious trouble...

Edited September 18, 2021 by Adam_S
.

[DougRichards]

21 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Some quick back of the envelope calculations and a bit of googling suggest that Perth is approximately the same distance from the South China Sea as Guam is, so the US and UK are potentially getting a very valuable base out of this.

Something else to consider is that if they're going to go with Virginias, then that potentially provides a very powerful strategic strike capability too. The block Vs are packing close to 50 VLS cells each IIRC so two Aussie SSNs on station could potentially park 100 cruise missiles right off the coast of China.

Something that is not widely considered....but was raised in the book 'The Fragile Forts' by Peter Oppenheim, about the colonial defences of Sydney, and of course no one of Sam or of John Bull would have heard of the book:

Sydney is closer to Vladivostok than it is to San Francisco.  So the colonial government in Sydney was more worried about the  Ruskies than the Yanks. 

Brisbane to Vlad is 3000k closer to Vlad than it is to San Fran, about the same distance to Vlad from San Fran.   So really, Australia is a good place to base submarines going north to China etc, as it is obviously closer, but also means that different lines of approach have to be considered by any western Pacific adversary.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Im not aware of the book, but im aware of the concern. Thats why we sold you this, because of the concern about the Russians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Protector_(1884)

 

[sunday]

56 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Some quick back of the envelope calculations and a bit of googling suggest that Perth is approximately the same distance from the South China Sea as Guam is, so the US and UK are potentially getting a very valuable base out of this.

Something else to consider is that if they're going to go with Virginias, then that potentially provides a very powerful strategic strike capability too. The block Vs are packing close to 50 VLS cells each IIRC so two Aussie SSNs on station could potentially park 100 cruise missiles right off the coast of China.

There seems to be a number of chokepoints between Perth and the SCS.

I find remarkable Singapore sits on top of one of those choke points, and is Western-aligned.

But no news about reinforcing Singapore military.

Could it be that Singapore is going to be considered indefensible?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Singapore was too close to the problem to be a useful base, even in 1941. In an era of long range rockets and bombers, its scarcely less so.

I have to question even if Guam is going to be really useful in a conflict for much the same reasons.

[DougRichards]

23 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Im not aware of the book, but im aware of the concern. Thats why we sold you this, because of the concern about the Russians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Protector_(1884)

 

That should be HMCS Protector (Her Majesty's Colonial Ship). 

Of more significance was the HMVS Cerebrus (Her Majesties Victorian Ship).

The Cerebrus was a coastal monitor, and intended to defend the southern city of Melbourne, by being based on Port Phillip Bay.  At the time Sydney had a range of coastal artillery, but Melbourne had different geography, not actually being a harbour city.  That required a floating gun battery, hence the Cerebrus.

Some of us note that that the mythical Cerebrus was the dog that defended Hades.  So the naming of the ship to defend Melbourne was quite appropriate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMVS_Cerberus

[Stuart Galbraith]

They actually featured the Cerebus on that Abandoned Megastructures on Discovery. That was a really interesting ship, and its shame nobody has tried to recover her.

This is the modern solution to a very old problem. Except rather than wait for the problem to come to you, you intend to go to it, which is usually the best way to deal with problems. Nobody wants foreign submarines in Sydney harbour again.

[JasonJ]

27 minutes ago, sunday said:

There seems to be a number of chokepoints between Perth and the SCS.

I find remarkable Singapore sits on top of one of those choke points, and is Western-aligned.

But no news about reinforcing Singapore military.

Could it be that Singapore is going to be considered indefensible?

Singapore seems more about staying neutral and just flowing with the top guy. Their navy trains with the PlAN once in a while like with everyone else. 

[JasonJ]

16 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Singapore was too close to the problem to be a useful base, even in 1941. In an era of long range rockets and bombers, its scarcely less so.

I have to question even if Guam is going to be really useful in a conflict for much the same reasons.

There's lots of factors involved with Singapore in 1941 or for any base near or far. That xynamic doesn't need WW2 analogies.

Guam helps add to the dispersion of forces. And its not a close base. It's a mid-range base at a central location. Close is Okinawa. Far is Hawaii, Darwin, and Perth. 

[Adam_S]

1 hour ago, DougRichards said:

Brisbane to Vlad is 3000k closer to Vlad than it is to San Fran, about the same distance to Vlad from San Fran.   So really, Australia is a good place to base submarines going north to China etc, as it is obviously closer, but also means that different lines of approach have to be considered by any western Pacific adversary.

Perth is also much handier than Guam or Okinawa for any naval units coming from the UK too.

[JasonJ]

3 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Perth is also much handier than Guam or Okinawa for any naval units coming from the UK too.

I agree with that. Guam gets lots of naval traffic already. Any more hosting goes counter to force dispersion. Okinawa already host a lot of USMC and USAF. Hosting more would piss the locals off.

[sunday]

44 minutes ago, JasonJ said:

Singapore seems more about staying neutral and just flowing with the top guy. Their navy trains with the PlAN once in a while like with everyone else. 

Well, they have a strategic location, quite important for China's maritime trade, so neutrality would be better for them. Of course, if they go neutral in a PRC-USA conflict, that means SGP has seen the writing in the wall and is going to change alignment.

[JasonJ]

18 minutes ago, sunday said:

Well, they have a strategic location, quite important for China's maritime trade, so neutrality would be better for them. Of course, if they go neutral in a PRC-USA conflict, that means SGP has seen the writing in the wall and is going to change alignment.

They'll go either way if one falls on itself, thus leaving the other standing. For the time being, they just gain benefits from both by not choosing sides. Something funny that happened while all thus sub stuff was grabing attention, was that a few days ago the PRC foreign minister visited Singapore. The following day, the PRC made a formal application to join the CPTPP.

[Ssnake]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I have to question even if Guam is going to be really useful in a conflict for much the same reasons.

It might capsize anyway, if the US keep piling up military equipment at the current rate, I heard.

[Adam_S]

Tomohawks for the RAN apparently, and the RAAF are getting JASSM-ER and LRASM.

https://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/tomahawk-confirmed-for-hobart-class

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

55 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

It might capsize anyway, if the US keep piling up military equipment at the current rate, I heard.

Yeah, it will be another billion dollar point.

30 minutes ago, Adam_S said:

Tomohawks for the RAN apparently, and the RAAF are getting JASSM-ER and LRASM.

https://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/tomahawk-confirmed-for-hobart-class

 

Yep, thought so. It will be Astute with VLS, if they can figure out how to fit it.

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

In a sense, its all the PRC's fault. If they had trod carefully, Australia would probably have carried on with the Barracuda's and be far less of a threat. They made their own problem by pissing off Australians, which history has proven is not a really great idea....

I doubt the Chinese are that concerned with a few more Western nuclear submarines coming 20 years from now would be my guess.  They can't effectively deal with the ones that exist now. 

 

Quote

What is surprising is how the Americans were ambushed on it, when they would know from the history of Polaris the French always handle being left out of tech transfer badly. I would not be all that surprised to see the French elbow their way into this relationship, although for the sake of unfortunate acronyms, I hope not

The first tangible success of "Global Britain", and sticking it to the French and the EU at the same time.  A good day for Boris.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Oh, I think they will be VERY concerned. It means if they dont take Taiwan now, they never will. And right now they cant. Its a prize slipping slowly out of reach. For stirring all this up, I think XI probably needs to watch his back, im sure the sharks are circling.

It wasnt up to Boris, it was purely down to the Aussies. I think he was just catching a ride on coattails. OTOH, it does seem a bi embarrassing that the EU keep talking about a global military capability, to do more in the Pacific, and suddenly the boring old Anglo's just go ahead and do it.  I kinda feel sorry for them.

[lucklucky]

This an article by an Australian newspaper  about the deal with French. So it is not even the French side of the deal.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/lost-the-plot-how-an-obsession-with-local-jobs-blew-out-australia-s-90-billion-submarine-program-20210913-p58r34.html

[Stuart Galbraith]

Thats very interesting, thanks for sharing.

[seahawk]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

It wasnt up to Boris, it was purely down to the Aussies. I think he was just catching a ride on coattails. OTOH, it does seem a bi embarrassing that the EU keep talking about a global military capability, to do more in the Pacific, and suddenly the boring old Anglo's just go ahead and do it.  I kinda feel sorry for them.

To be honest nobody in the Eu cares - maybe except the French. The idea to get involved in a conflict with China in the Pacific is simply mind boggling stupid.