Page 1 of 1

Subs

Posted: 17 Sep 2021 17:19
by Steventico
Hi Guys

Well the last 24 hrs have been nuts :taz: in the UK, after it, was announced AUKUS deal for Australia New nuclear power subs ,as result France is not happy and now New Zealand PM :ban: will not allow these subs in New Zealand waters and as usual the normal threats made by China against Australia having them ,
Wonder what armaments will be fitting to them


Stevie

Re: Subs

Posted: 17 Sep 2021 19:06
by RussF172
It was certainly a shock even for us down here. It sounds like there will 8 Virginia Class SSN's coming. From what Mike has looked at, probably 2 built by the Electric Boat Division in the US which will be used for getting our guys up to speed and then 6 more built in Adelaide probably with the Nuclear power plants coming from the US. Getting 2 out of the current USN Production line will get us operational much faster. Weapons will probably be the most up to date Mk49 Long Range Torpedoes, the latest Sub-Launched anti-shipping missiles and we are already buying Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles for the HOBART Class DDGs so I am sure we will get these as well for the Virginia's.

Re: Subs

Posted: 18 Sep 2021 12:05
by Spartacus01
Lots of posturing by the politicians. :taz: :taz: :taz:

Latest is the French ambassadors being recalled from Australia and the US.
They need to have their own Froggie version of a Royal Commission to see why they stuffed up so badly. :oops1:

Chinese govt has to say something negative. They are like an opposition party, but also big schoolyard bully. :crs:

Adam Bandt (Algae Green :mrgreen: ) carrying on like an idiot - "Floating Chernobyls". Really!
NZ refusing entry into their territorial waters - They would not know if the subs were there or had been.

I don't know why it should take 2 decades to get these subs operational. By then technology would have moved on.

Anyway something different from the usual daily Covid numbers and most of the power mad state premiers playing around with border controls and wads of inconsistent rules.

Re: Subs

Posted: 18 Sep 2021 15:11
by glenhowells
If the Kiwi's don't want our nuclear subs visiting them that's fine let our surface fleet do the flag waving, and let the subs do the serious work. Subs not being able to visit NZ no big deal.
cheers Glen

Re: Subs

Posted: 26 Sep 2021 20:16
by southerncrossmodels
I’m stoked that the contract with the French has been cancelled, it should never have been made in my opinion.
Their dummy spit shows that it was a good decision to get out, and makes me think………

It’s no wonder the poms fought them on and off for a thousand years! :roll:

It’s great we are going for the top shelf stuff from the US, a contract with them ten to fifteen years ago would have made more sense, we’d be getting them now. It’s Typical of governments to constantly leaving uncomfortable decisions to their successors.

What amazes me is the staggering level of hypocrisy and arrogance of the French and the Chinese.

The French didn’t give two hoots about us when they were letting off atomic bombs in the South Pacific.

China is a communist dictatorship……., that type of government practically glorifies Hypocrisy, lies, deceit, aggression, bullying and arrogance in ways which democracies can’t even hope to compete with if they wanted to,……although Trump tried. :dots:
The only answer to it is national courage, truth, integrity, honesty, transparency, conviction, compassion, etc.

Re: Subs

Posted: 26 Sep 2021 20:47
by SlatsSSN
what Tim said

yeah the Hubris of the French is unreal. There are some 46,000 Australian graves in Belgium and France - 18,000 of these have no known grave - all died in the liberation of France, yet how many of their folk are buried here in reciprocity zero? And how many would come if required? The DCN contract was nothing more than political boost for Macron and social welfare scheme for French workers. We were treated like peons from the get-go.

Then there's the Chinese - they are allowed nuke subs but we arent't


J

Re: Subs

Posted: 27 Sep 2021 09:48
by MikeJames
The reason the decision to acquire SSNs has been made now, and not earlier, is due to a confluence of events.

1. The actions of the Chinese government, particularly since Xi became maximum leader for life
2. The Western democracies realising the existential threat China places on the global order.
3. The behaviour of the French, which has been to see the contract as a massive wealth transfer to support French industry and jobs.
4. The Australian government seizing the moment with both hands.

The actions of the Chinese over the last five years have made it abundantly clear to everyone that China cannot be reasoned with.

Their absurd 'Nine Dash Line' territorial claims, backed up by the blatant theft of other people's territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zones have shown everyone that China ignores the rules and makes its own up as it goes along.
Their line that 'China is a big country and everyone else is a small country' is 'might makes right' elevated to national policy.
The whole Taiwan situation happily bubbled along for 70 years, but now Xi declares it intolerable and at his direction China rewrites its constitution to make it necessary to invade Taiwan to reunify it with China if it won't submit otherwise.

5 years ago, the world was different.
The US and UK would not have shared nuclear technology.
The Australian government would not have asked.

Xi has changed both calculations.

No matter your politics, you have to give Morrison and Dutton their due for seeing the faults in the French Shortfin Barracuda contract, looking for an alternative, asking the question 'why not nuclear' and then approaching the US and UK quietly, getting a positive response and being prepared to wear the heat from the French and business (for cancelling the contract) and the left of politics (for selecting nuclear power).

The Barracuda project was seen as the best non-nuclear option for a country with our tactical and strategic requirements at the time, but it has become more and more obvious that the French have not been operating in good faith, and the vast majority of the work was going to be outsourced to French companies, French shipyards and French workers, making a mockery of the contracts provisions.

For that alone the Australian Government had every right to terminate the contract. The fact that the French had failed to meet milestone after milestone, while the price kept increasing with nothing whatsoever to show for it, just underlines that cancelling the contract was not just the right decision, but the only decision.

You have to also acknowledge the bravery of the federal ALP senior leadership for agreeing that the PM has made a choice they can live with, has met their three conditions (no nuclear weapons, no local nuclear industry and no proliferation) and staring down their noisy Green left wing.

This could not have happened five years ago, irrespective of which party was in power, but the world has changed in five years.

The RAN should name the first of the Virginia's the HMAS President Xi, because he made everything possible.

Mike

Re: Subs

Posted: 27 Sep 2021 11:05
by SlatsSSN
Mike, - I think you are wasted not directly working in defence in some sort of analytical reporting role- I'm seriously enjoying these insights.

I'm no fan of Morrison or his Ministers but this is one very big thing that has been put right.

J

Re: Subs

Posted: 27 Sep 2021 22:20
by littoralcombat
Gents,
We should also not neglect to mention the vital part played by senior Naval Brass (as the SME's), who pushed the Government to review one last time, before it was too late, whether the Nuclear Propulsion option was truly still out of reach. This, combined with the quickly changing strategic situation saw the end of the Naval Group contract.
Nige

Re: Subs

Posted: 27 Sep 2021 22:59
by MikeJames
Sorry Nige, but Navy brass were pretty much out of the loop on this decision.

Chief of Navy was apparently not part of the decision, and was told to cancel his planned trio and be in Canberra on the day, but not told why until the morning the decision was announced.

Have a look at the video of Noonan announcing the decision, he is basically a wooden figure reading something off a teleprompter and presents no excitement or enthusiasm for a decision that is the biggest capability increase in the RANs history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WYuGu5QNDA

I suspect Dutton has little confidence in either Chief of Navy (Barracuda, the absurd growth margin in the Hunters due to Navy's gold plating, the manpower retention crisis and other decisions) and the CDF (for his blatant attempts to make the Special Forces Afghanistan issue one where the junior officers, NCOs and enlisted men wear the blame, and senior officers, including him, are insulated from the fall-out).

Dutton has overridden CDF multiple times, indicating a lack of confidence in Campbell's decision making.

I doubt either of them will last much longer, at best they will be waved out the door at the end of their terms.

Mike