Australia Navy Australia SSN Program

Glass🚬

Contributor
Messages
1,388
Reactions
2 3,159
Nation of residence
Germany
Nation of origin
Turkey
Do you have any idea why the French aren't really targeting the British?

I think they are aware that the British have long term the longer hand and can cause much more trouble to them if they refuse to know their place, "officially" they say that the British are just secondary players here with little saying lol

“Great Britain intervened only in a secondary way” and carries “less responsibility,” he said.

Benjamin Haddad, director of the Europe Center at the Atlantic Council, told The Washington Post that France pulled a “cheeky move” — dismissing Britain as a not a “front-row player in this story.”

Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, told The Post that the French government purporting to “snub” Britain might merely be spin.
It’s much more difficult for France to stir up a spat between nearby Britain than with Australia or even the United States, he said. “It’s much less damaging to day-to-day interests. You don’t have the same volume of practical things to manage on a daily basis,” he said.

“It’s just a much thicker relationship than the relationship between Paris and Washington,” he said. “Britain and France are sort of joined at the hip in a way that France isn’t joined to the U.S.”
 

mulj

Experienced member
Messages
1,989
Reactions
3,243
Nation of residence
Bosnia & Herzegovina
Nation of origin
Bosnia & Herzegovina
I think China is going to be creating a network of sensors, radars and bases as planned and beef up military presence. The AUKUS might be quite slow unless they're able to relocate necessary ressources and vessels to slow down the progress.

I still believe that to strengthen western values would require to actually strengthen the democratic countries in the region such as grant 12 corvette/OPV/LDP to Philippines and help build lasting presence in the west philippine seas
Cool strategy and reasonable but west is not known as someone who gives anything for free beside garbage equipment, it is kind of oximoron to strentghten western values with giving away while the primary western value is greed and profit.
 

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,125
Reactions
21 18,699
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey
That is because of the greed in their politics. Turn it around and look at SK and Japan look at what was accomplished with the amount of support and backing they got. I would have said Philippines could end up there too, but I guess the dictator kinda wasted away what were given in the past. But I see a necessity of strengthening PH and not keep them scrambling. US needs to work on it’s image.

I imagine that Austel vying for contracts could be indicator that France could get PH as customer though it’s a developing country struggling with defense budgets
 

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,024
Reactions
110 14,682
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
All this is because China is getting too powerful to keep under reins. But just look at the current Nuclear submarines operated by 6 countries in the World:
According to the latest developments, Australia will become the seventh country with Nuclear powered attack submarines. They will not have the nuclear ballistic missile capability though. Australia cancelled buying of 12 subs from France. If the quantity stays the same, this will give the anti Chinese pact 12 new nuclear powered attack subs. And it will tip the nuclear submarine balance heavily to the detriment of the Chinese. Aussies have confirmed that at least 8 nuclear powered subs will be built in southern Australia.
Since UK and US submarines share a great deal of sub systems and are almost of the same ilk there is a lot of synergy and logic to join in.
The “Astute” class 7700 ton subs UK operate are probably the best hunter killer subs there are. They contain the latest tech of US‘s Virginia Class with the addition of a superlative Sonar. Astutes have been able to penetrate US Carrier Groups and been able to sink Carriers in NATO war games. This may be the class that Australia will go for.
How much of this technology Aussies will get is another story. The nuclear reactor tech used in UK subs are based on US tech and normally not exportable. But now that the road to building them in OZ is opened, US and UK will share certain degree of the tech with Australia.
But the personnel of these subs will present quite a different issue as to what Australian subs use. For example, each Astute class employs 4 times more personnel than current Aussie subs. So there will have to be very significant changes in numbers of personnel employed.
But considering the level of high tech involved and the superior performance of these subs it is a no brainer.

1632055877072.jpeg
 

Zapper

Experienced member
Messages
1,648
Reactions
10 799
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
All this is because China is getting too powerful to keep under reins. But just look at the current Nuclear submarines operated by 6 countries in the World:
According to the latest developments, Australia will become the seventh country with Nuclear powered attack submarines. They will not have the nuclear ballistic missile capability though. Australia cancelled buying of 12 subs from France. If the quantity stays the same, this will give the anti Chinese pact 12 new nuclear powered attack subs. And it will tip the nuclear submarine balance heavily to the detriment of the Chinese. Aussies have confirmed that at least 8 nuclear powered subs will be built in southern Australia.
Since UK and US submarines share a great deal of sub systems and are almost of the same ilk there is a lot of synergy and logic to join in.
The “Astute” class 7700 ton subs UK operate are probably the best hunter killer subs there are. They contain the latest tech of US‘s Virginia Class with the addition of a superlative Sonar. Astutes have been able to penetrate US Carrier Groups and been able to sink Carriers in NATO war games. This may be the class that Australia will go for.
How much of this technology Aussies will get is another story. The nuclear reactor tech used in UK subs are based on US tech and normally not exportable. But now that the road to building them in OZ is opened, US and UK will share certain degree of the tech with Australia.
But the personnel of these subs will present quite a different issue as to what Australian subs use. For example, each Astute class employs 4 times more personnel than current Aussie subs. So there will have to be very significant changes in numbers of personnel employed.
But considering the level of high tech involved and the superior performance of these subs it is a no brainer.

View attachment 31474
India currently has or planned the following nuclear subs

  • 1x Akula-II SSN dubbed INS Chakra leased from Russia in 2012 with the option to buy at the end of the lease
  • Another deal for an additional Akula Class SSN has been signed in 2019 which is supposed to be delivered in 2024/5
  • 4x Indigenously designed and built Arihant Class SSBN. One (INS Arihant) has been commissioned while the other (INS Arighat) is undergoing sea trails. 2 more are under construction
  • Project 75 Alpha for 6x indigenously designed and constructed SSNs. The initial design phase is completed with detailed designs ongoing. Construction is scheduled to start in 2023
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yasar_TR

Experienced member
Staff member
Administrator
Messages
3,024
Reactions
110 14,682
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
Turkey
India currently has the following nuclear subs

  • 1x Akula-II SSN dubbed INS Chakra leased from Russia in 2012 with the option to buy at the end of the lease
  • Another deal for an additional Akula Class SSN has been signed in 2019 which is supposed to be delivered in 2024/5
  • 4x Indigenously designed and built Arihant Class SSBN. One has been commissioned while the other is undergoing sea trails. 2 more are under construction
  • Project 75 Alpha for 6x indigenously designed and constructed SSNs. The initial design phase is completed with detailed designs ongoing. Construction is scheduled to start in 2023
This is all, will/shall/ future projects.
According to BBC news and below site India has only one indigenously built Nuclear submarine; Arihant!
On lease Chakra is apparently on it’s way back to Russia.
There is a big program of submarine building in effect. But nothing has materialised yet. But India is renewing it’s old and outdated/obsolete submarine fleet of 15, with brand new modern indigenous subs.
 
Last edited:

Zapper

Experienced member
Messages
1,648
Reactions
10 799
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
India
This is all, will/shall/ future projects.
According to BBC news and below site India has only one indigenously built Nuclear submarine; Arihant!
On lease Chakra is apparently on it’s way back to Russia.
There is a big program of submarine building in effect. But nothing has materialised yet.
I believe the picture you posted is of SSNs and SSBNs of every country

There are no confirmed reports that INS Chakra has gone back to Russia yet but it's confirmed that IN isn't utilizing the buy option. We'll be getting it's replacement for another Akula class lease we signed in 2019

INS Chakra SSN
1632067827812.png


IN currently has two indigenously built SSBNs, INS Arihant which has been commissioned while INS Arighat is in the final stages of sea trails

INS Arihant SSBN

1632068346339.png


INS Arighat SSBN undergoing sea trails

1632067942127.png


Ballistic missile submarine Arighat in final stages of trials

The rest are under construction or planned as mentioned in my previous post. Since these are nuc subs and extremely secretive, not a lot of picutres have been released
 

Attachments

  • 1632067894489.png
    1632067894489.png
    861.8 KB · Views: 107
Last edited by a moderator:

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,301
Reactions
96 18,873
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
I say that given the British underlying core RnD in the domain is largely stuck to HEU....whereas the US since the 1980s has come up with robust LEU alternatives but just have chosen to forego them as the costs/changes needed in existing naval doctrine, retrofit and convention were deemed too high.

I have an archive of papers related to this I can post regarding this if members request it. Bunch of book volumes are copyrightedpaywalled however....I have to check later what's what....this was years ago.

In fact LEU reactors in submarines are deployed + used only by the French and Chinese AFAIK.

Seems little interest in picking this up here.

I will give the tl;dr conclusion from purely technical + rational + "cultural" standpoint.

The researched, deployed and proven HEU cycle of the USN (and RN given the UK heavily borrowed/cooperated from it) requires about a 30 year frequency for a refuel (when too much by-product accumulates and new fuel rods needed, precipitating the deepest opening of the reactor - a delicate yet intensive task).

The LEU cycles so far (researched + deployed) like the one France employs.... need refuelling about every 7 years I believe....due to the very nature of LEU regarding this (i.e by-product issue surfaces lot quicker given less source flux ratio).

This would have increased costs for Australia (w.r.t a French SSN) given this increased need to see a french shipyard (every 7 years) or offshoring all that to an aussie shipyard....

If the former option was opted for, there would be things like (French) shipyard labour strike frequency (this is known issue), other issues with French shipyards, EU bureaucracy and all associated costs/issues relative to how they are found w.r.t US and UK.

All part of the larger "cultural" issue stuff coming to bear that @BordoEnes mentioned earlier. There was also a certain way French apparently handled a lot of negotiation and concerns and requests the Aussies put forward.....that put off lot of Aussies involved (though French side of story is largely inaccessible to me it must be said).

Aussie contact of mine told me this did play a big role in this decision to not simply transmute French shortfin back to regular barracuda (SSN).....but opt for HEU + anglo saxon tech/shipyards.

@Anmdt @MisterLike @Nein2.0(Nomad) et al.
 

Saithan

Experienced member
Denmark Correspondent
Messages
8,125
Reactions
21 18,699
Nation of residence
Denmark
Nation of origin
Turkey

Australia made 'huge mistake' over submarine deal: French envoy​

BY REUTERS​

MELBOURNE EUROPE
SEP 18, 2021 1:56 PM GMT+3
In this photo provided by U.S. Navy, the Virginia-class fast-attack submarine USS Missouri (SSN 780) departs Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam for a scheduled deployment in the 7th Fleet area of responsibility, Sept. 1, 2021. (AP Photo)
In this photo provided by U.S. Navy, the Virginia-class fast-attack submarine USS Missouri (SSN 780) departs Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam for a scheduled deployment in the 7th Fleet area of responsibility, Sept. 1, 2021. (AP Photo)



The French ambassador to Australia said Saturday that Canberra has made a "huge" diplomatic error after the country ditched a multi-billion dollar order for French submarines in favor of an alternative deal with the United States and Britain, prompting his being recalled to Paris.

"I think this has been a huge mistake, a very, very bad handling of the partnership – because it wasn't a contract, it was a partnership that was supposed to be based on trust, mutual understanding and sincerity," Ambassador Jean-Pierre Thebault told journalists in Canberra.

Australia said on Thursday it would scrap the deal signed in 2016 for France's Naval Group to build a fleet of conventional submarines and would instead build at least eight nuclear-powered submarines with U.S. and British technology after striking a trilateral security partnership.

France called the cancellation of the deal – valued at $40 billion in 2016 and reckoned to be worth a lot more today – a stab in the back and recalled its ambassadors from the United States and Australia.

"I would like to run into a time machine, if possible, and be in a situation where we don't end up in such an incredible, clumsy, inadequate un-Australian situation," Thebault said.

"I'm very sad to be forced to leave, albeit there needs to be some reassessment."

Australia said it regretted the recall of the French ambassador, and that it valued the relationship with France and would keep engaging with Paris on other issues.

"Australia understands France's deep disappointment with our decision, which was taken in accordance with our clear and communicated national security interests," a spokesperson for Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne said in a statement.

U.S. State Department spokesperson Ned Price said that France was a 'vital ally' and that the United States would be engaged in the coming days to resolve the differences.

The row marks the lowest point in relations between Australia and France since 1995 when Canberra protested France's decision to resume nuclear testing in the South Pacific and recalled its ambassador for consultations.

 

Nilgiri

Experienced member
Moderator
Aviation Specialist
Messages
9,301
Reactions
96 18,873
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
India
Seems little interest in picking this up here.

I will give the tl;dr conclusion from purely technical + rational + "cultural" standpoint.

The researched, deployed and proven HEU cycle of the USN (and RN given the UK heavily borrowed/cooperated from it) requires about a 30 year frequency for a refuel (when too much by-product accumulates and new fuel rods needed, precipitating the deepest opening of the reactor - a delicate yet intensive task).

The LEU cycles so far (researched + deployed) like the one France employs.... need refuelling about every 7 years I believe....due to the very nature of LEU regarding this (i.e by-product issue surfaces lot quicker given less source flux ratio).

This would have increased costs for Australia (w.r.t a French SSN) given this increased need to see a french shipyard (every 7 years) or offshoring all that to an aussie shipyard....

If the former option was opted for, there would be things like (French) shipyard labour strike frequency (this is known issue), other issues with French shipyards, EU bureaucracy and all associated costs/issues relative to how they are found w.r.t US and UK.

All part of the larger "cultural" issue stuff coming to bear that @BordoEnes mentioned earlier. There was also a certain way French apparently handled a lot of negotiation and concerns and requests the Aussies put forward.....that put off lot of Aussies involved (though French side of story is largely inaccessible to me it must be said).

Aussie contact of mine told me this did play a big role in this decision to not simply transmute French shortfin back to regular barracuda (SSN).....but opt for HEU + anglo saxon tech/shipyards.

@Anmdt @MisterLike @Nein2.0(Nomad) et al.

Another easter egg in this saga to consider is the American Combat system used by the Aussies in the naval domain and military at large.

The trouble with buying (or leasing) even British subs (in the past) is the RAN being wedded to this CS....and it played some part in decision making for collins (kockums sweden tech) in replacing the oberon class previously.

This was a major sticking point in the current program....as installing the CS into a sub needs certain extensive details, and getting the US to tell France (an issue it seems between the "tier A" force structure guys) about these "crown jewels" was AFAIK an unsolved problem.

This is confirmed now by two Aussies I trust.
 

Bogeyman 

Experienced member
Professional
Messages
8,270
Reactions
60 29,056
Website
twitter.com
Nation of residence
Turkey
Nation of origin
Turkey

'AUKUS aims to consolidate US alliances in Indo-Pacific against China's hegemony'​


International experts said the AUKUS defense pact formed by the US, UK, and Australia aims to counter China's hegemony in the South China Sea, while governments of Southeast Asian countries consider this alliance a trigger of conflicts in the region.

Speaking to Anadolu Agency on Tuesday, Rizal Hidayat, an international security expert from Indonesia's Al Azhar University, said that according to the formation of the alliance, Australia and the UK are members of the Five Power Defense Arrangements (FPDA), while the US is the main ally of the two countries.

Consolidating US power in Indo-Pacific

Hidayat said the alliance was deliberately formed as a consolidation of the strength of the US alliance to compete with China, which is currently the hegemonic power in the Indo-Pacific region.

“FPDA (members) has the principle to protect each other. If its members are attacked they must protect each other. Moreover, China is assertive in Southeast Asia," he said.

The FPDA is a defense alliance formed by Australia, UK, New Zealand, Singapore, and Malaysia.

Since it was signed in 1971, the FPDA countries have agreed to help each other in the event or threat of an armed attack.

Hidayat said that although the UK seems to be unaggressive in the region, it would still stand by force when it came to the US and Australia’s interests in the South China Sea.

"So, I see AUKUS as efforts to strengthen the political security agenda of the three countries," he said.

In July, China claimed to have expelled a destroyer belonging to the US near the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea.

Beijing said the destroyer USS Benfold entered the waters of the Paracel Islands without the Chinese government's authorization.

Hidayat said China has a big influence in Southeast Asia as the country prioritizes bilateral relations, while the US emphasizes multilateral diplomacy.

"China uses soft power approach, but behind that, it will offer mutualistic symbiotic cooperation between countries," he explained.

Meanwhile, international relations observer from the University of Indonesia Hikmahanto Juwana said the US seemed to build the pact to share the burden in dealing with China's power.

Juwana said the current US capability is different than it used to be when dealing with the Soviet Union, so it is unable to face China by itself.

“In the past, the US had economic power, was able to provide debt and others, and its defense equipment was sophisticated. Now, it still has sophisticated defense equipment, but no economic power," he told Anadolu Agency on Monday.

Member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have emerged to become the number one trading bloc with China in 2020, with their trade volume jumping to 4.74 trillion yuan ($731.9 billion) or growing 7% year-on-year, according to Chinese customs data.

The US and China have recently competed to exert influence in the region. US Vice President Kamala Harris toured Southeast Asia in August and emphasized that Indo-Pacific is the top priority for Washington’s diplomacy at the time.

Two weeks later, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also visited Vietnam, Cambodia, Singapore, and South Korea to strengthen cooperation and discuss regional issues.

ASEAN countries consider AUKUS a trigger for conflict

Despite being a part of the FPDA, Malaysia has rejected the formation of the AUKUS defense pact that plans to arm Australia with nuclear submarines.

In a phone conversation with Australian Defense Minister Peter Dutton on Monday, Malaysian Defense Minister Hishammuddin Hussein emphasized that the establishment of AUKUS will potentially disrupt peace and stability in the region, particularly in the South China Sea.

"Although Australia has distinguished between nuclear weapons and nuclear-powered military assets, Malaysia's stance remains consistent - all parties must refrain from using military actions that are deemed provocative, as well as potentially escalating tensions and triggering conflict in the region," Hussein said in a statement.

At the end of the conversation, Hussein said he conveyed Malaysia's commitment to bilateral defense relations with Australia, including through the FPDA.

In 1995, ASEAN established the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon Free Zone agreement to ensure peace and stability in Southeast Asia.

Meanwhile, Indonesia expected that AUKUS will further enhance the dynamics in the South China Sea.

Head of Indonesian Maritime Security Agency (Bakamla) Vice Adm. Aan Kurnia said the direct impact of AUKUS on the defense sector would be an increase in the presence of large military forces in the South China Sea’s waters.

Speaking at a hearing with parliament on Monday, Kurnia said the defense pact can cause disruption and increase the risk of conflict in shipping traffic.

"If it goes to the security economy, insurance will increase, logistics costs will rise, so it will lead to energy and economic crisis, that's the security impact," he said.

"The rivalry at sea will also encourage the countries involved to increase their war capabilities so there will be a risk of war," he added.

Indonesia can stop US-China rivalry

Juwana said Indonesia could play a significant role in stopping the rivalry between the US and China, which had a direct impact on the region.

He said what Indonesia can do is make a request to ASEAN to hold a special session to oppose Australia's plan, suggesting that the country can approach China, as a US competitor, to reject Australia's plan.

"What is expected is that the US will be worried that Indonesia will form an alliance with China and therefore will stop Australia's plans to build nuclear-powered submarines," added Juwana.

He also noted that Indonesia can also encourage France to bring this issue to the UN Security Council.

Australia has joined the US and UK to form the new Indo-Pacific security alliance. The formation of AUKUS means Australia will discard its Future Submarine Program with France, an EU member, and assemble eight nuclear-powered submarines with its new allies.

Several countries have expressed their concern over the formation of the pact and called on Australia to give up the power game and nuclear weapons development in the Indo-Pacific region.
 
Top Bottom