Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[John Fedup]

Except for this HUGE caveat: "While industrial delays might affect the delivery of the submarines, no political decision had been made to alter the schedule."

As everyone knows US yards can't deliver on time* that seems like a polite way of saying "don't expect your first SSN in 2032".

* 13 Virginias currently building to be delivered between 2025-2032. However both 2025 deliveries have already been pushed into 2026. Also even if the planned production rate increase from 1.3 to 1.6 SSNs/year is achieved, this is still far below the 2.3 SSNs/year that the USN has stated it needs to turnaround its shrinking fleet and have 2 Virginias to spare for Australia
** The DoD plan critically hinges on the refueling and life extension 5-7 older SSNs. This plan is not going well, with the first hull (SSN Cheyenne) now 5 years into a planned 2.5 year overhaul.
*** Meanwhile, ~20 SSN/SSGNs are being retired during the same time period (16 Los Angeles + 4 Ohio SSGNs) having reached the end of their reactor lives, so no way to extend them further

Some real issues with new production of both submarines and surface ships in the USA (and elsewhere) but wrt submarines, SSN and SSGN retirements absolutely complicate things. IMHO, submarine production should be the priority, even at the expense of the surface fleet given the rapid advances in anti-ship missiles (and lets not forget torpedoes). A reduction in CVNs, not sure if this allows for increased SS/N/GN/BN production but perhaps the F/A XX delay isn't only due to a concern about industrial capacity for producing two 6th GEN fighters. Just my two cents....

 

[Stampede]

Except for this HUGE caveat: "While industrial delays might affect the delivery of the submarines, no political decision had been made to alter the schedule."

As everyone knows US yards can't deliver on time* that seems like a polite way of saying "don't expect your first SSN in 2032".

* 13 Virginias currently building to be delivered between 2025-2032. However both 2025 deliveries have already been pushed into 2026. Also even if the planned production rate increase from 1.3 to 1.6 SSNs/year is achieved, this is still far below the 2.3 SSNs/year that the USN has stated it needs to turnaround its shrinking fleet and have 2 Virginias to spare for Australia
** The DoD plan critically hinges on the refueling and life extension 5-7 older SSNs. This plan is not going well, with the first hull (SSN Cheyenne) now 5 years into a planned 2.5 year overhaul.
*** Meanwhile, ~20 SSN/SSGNs are being retired during the same time period (16 Los Angeles + 4 Ohio SSGNs) having reached the end of their reactor lives, so no way to extend them further

Chief of Navy Vice Admiral Mark Hammond is very much an ambassador for the current AUKUS road map.

I thought he made an interesting comment when in discussion about the challenges of the Virginia class delivery, he stated that this is America. This is the country that put Man on the moon. They can do engineering stuff..
All well and true , but it must be remembered that that was the America of the 1960s and politically, economically and from a manufacturing point of view the USA today is a very different country.

Australia and the RAN live with that reality and I guess it is fair to say many are guarded by the expectations of AUKUS been delivered to schedule and timetable.

Plan B is not Ghost Shark.
That is a developmental capability that is a compliment not a replacement for a manned submarine.

Plan B appears to be Plan A which is increasingly looking like denial.

Cheers S

 

[Volkodav]

I just want to make a point in regard to the discussions on OPVs for the RAN.

Not so long ago the plan was for three Hobart class DDGs, nine Hunter Class FFGs, and twelve Arafura Class OPVs with no PBs and possibly replacing MCMVs and Hydros with modified, additional OPVs. There was not a small amphib in sight.

Now it's three DDGs, with replacements penciled in, six FFGs, eleven GPFs (each individually more capable than anything preceding the Hobart's and Hunters), six OPVs and several/a dozen PBs and lots of amphibs.

Why would we possibly even consider more OPVs of a different design?

We have gone from twelve majors, twelve OPVs and no PBs, to twenty majors and six OPVs plus lots of PBs and amphibs.