nup, runs out after the 5th ssn aukus in the mid 2050s.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0
- Thread starter OPSSG
- Start date
nup, runs out after the 5th ssn aukus in the mid 2050s.
If the Japanese can pump out a Taigei submarine for under a billion dollars every four years, why would we not look at that option overMaybe they'll become our version of Taiwan's WW2 era subs
11 billion for a refurbished Collin’s and all the challenges that go with such an endeavour.
I’m sure it’s not as simple as the above but the above needs a very very good answer.
Upgrading Collin’s also makes us very subservient to two much larger players in the UK and USA.
The Collins Class cannot escape the reality of age.
Sure everyone is playing nice at the moment with the aim of the greater good; but realpolitik can bite you in the bum.
To Quote Don Chip
“If ever there was a need to keep the bastards honest, now is the time”
Our transition to HMAS AUKUS needs some leverage from our end.
Spend money on a Colin’s refit , or buy some insurance, options and stop gap capability with a modest number of new build submarines.
Cheers S
The $11 b is probably the life of type through to retirement, including workforce and infrastructure that can and will pivot to AUKUS. An interim type will cost a lot more than the sticker price, and could easily workout to be more expensive.
I can imagine the logistics and training burden required to operationalise a 3rd submarine type, all for the introduction of a Japanese type only being a stop-gap measure pending arrivals of first Virginias etc.
What an absolute nightmare that would be to try to organise, fund and crew.
In the meantime we would still be operating Collins, unchanged.
If anything, the introduction of an interim far more modern conventional sub, even though it’s suboptimal in the Australian operational context, would detract commentators and motivations to follow thru and get the SSNs. -
The Band-Aid would default to the lesser standard.
Nah, IMO don’t get distracted.
upgrade what we have and prep for the arrival of the actual solution.
What an absolute nightmare that would be to try to organise, fund and crew.
In the meantime we would still be operating Collins, unchanged.
If anything, the introduction of an interim far more modern conventional sub, even though it’s suboptimal in the Australian operational context, would detract commentators and motivations to follow thru and get the SSNs. -
The Band-Aid would default to the lesser standard.
Nah, IMO don’t get distracted.
upgrade what we have and prep for the arrival of the actual solution.
Going Boeing
Well-Known Member
Every article from official sources has stated that the RAN is to acquire 8 SSN AUKUS vessels with the 3 Virginia’s to be only interim boats.
The only articles that state that the RAN is only getting 5 SSN AUKUS vessels have been from journalists who haven’t researched the available information sufficiently and didn’t plot the timeline to realise the Virginia’s are only being used as interim capability until the locally built SSN’s are available in sufficient numbers.
If you have information from a reliable source that contradicts this, would you please post the links?
I have learned not to count chickens when it comes to ship and submarine numbers. In my opinion the American’s will honour their commitment to sell us Virginias although there maybe some slippage on the timeline. The AUKUS subs are also likely to happen but once again we really don’t know when they will commence construction. The Collins class will probably serve as long as they need to, but I suspect they will be withdrawn from service as soon as we have sufficient SSNs.
Realistically the life extension of the Collins subs will give us some breathing space until the SSNs enter service but they will be very much an interim capability.
Realistically the life extension of the Collins subs will give us some breathing space until the SSNs enter service but they will be very much an interim capability.
The cost of ssn aukus 6-7-8 is outside the $368 billion.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Adam Bandt?
Yes, he made the request.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Figures. What does he know about defence?
There is an enormus amount in contingency. $122 billion, a third of the total program.
Some of this will be to fund the two optional Virginias if required, but there should still be a lot left over. The funding could be extended to cover the remaining three AUKUS SSNs if everything goes well.
Even though the program is only funded to 2055, whereby the fleet will have reached its full size, one would think new funding will be provided for fleet renewal. Can't see the yard shutting down after so much effort to create it.
The Greens have a policy of scrapping the AUKUS arrangement and cancelling the SSNs. Understanding the funding will be of interest to them.
He made a simple request for aukus info, I’m just showing you the cost to 2055.
He may know nothing about defence, but that’s not the point…
Chances it funds 3 more boats and everything else (sustainment, salaries etc) are almost 0.
No doubt they build more than 5.
Agree. One would think that there are a lot of ways the budget can go off track over 30 years to consume some or all of that contingency.
iambuzzard
Well-Known Member
Not to be political, but the Greens are the last people to have any idea about defence!
The PBO response does not mention numbers of submarines; it is stated to be total program cost to the date and is heavily caveated as to accuracy and the need to adjust in light of circumstance so it is difficult to make deductions about limitations on numbers from it.
I mean, inflation since 2000 is about 100%. Anyone want to get out the crystal ball and guess what its likely to run at over the next 30?
I was selling gold at $1500 an oz in 2016, now im selling at $6500 an oz, gold is a good real indicator of inflation.