Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

MrConservative

Super Moderator
Staff member
You do realise that all the Horses Mr C named are Kiwi Horses don't you? I will agree with him on one condition, I could be a Fly on the wall when Jacinderella found out.:D
I know the lady has big choppers and a long swishy ponytail and kind of looks a bit horsey but .... hang on the 7th boat could be called HMAS Jacinda Belle which is a 5yr old mare out of Bel Esprit and Ludo Rock and trained by Barry Lockwood and races out of Eagle Farm. :p
 

Oberon

Member
Did Defence and the National Security Committee of parliament ever consider converting the contract with Naval Group from an order for Shortfin Barracudas (Attack Class) to a regular nuclear powered Barracuda? Seems much of the problems experienced with the Attack Class centred on the problems associated with putting a diesel electric power plant in a boat designed for a nuclear power plant. At least then the French wouldn’t be p!ssed off.
 
Last edited:
Did Defence and the National Security Committee of parliament ever consider converting the contract with Navy Group from an order for Shortfin Barracudas (Attack Class) to a regular nuclear powered Barracuda?
Yes they did:

“We looked at what options were available to us. The French have a version which was not superior to that operated by the US and the UK,” Dutton said.

The government has consistently described the Naval Group submarine as “regionally superior”. A spokesperson for Dutton said the French nuclear technology had to be removed and reinserted, while the US reactor didn’t.

“The US tech has evolved and is far more superior to the point where the reactor is sealed and put into the submarine for the life of the submarine.”
Source: Australia considered buying nuclear submarines from France before ditching deal, Peter Dutton says
 

Bob53

Well-Known Member
You'd hope so. Another 20 years is a long time to keep Collins running and relevant in our part of the world. The last of her kind will be positively geriatric by the time they're all divested(!).
Cant understand that it’s 20 years to get one in the water. Most of the people on this forum will be dead.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Cant understand that it’s 20 years to get one in the water. Most of the people on this forum will be dead.
With three partners coordinating on a build, hopefully the timeframe can be reduced. There might even be a remote possibility of getting a boat from off the current production queue.
 

Geddy

Member
I don’t think it’s going to be 20 years. My bet is it will be the Astute class and it will be underway in 18 months and in the water by 2032. There is an urgency to this.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I don’t think it’s going to be 20 years. My bet is it will be the Astute class and it will be underway in 18 months and in the water by 2032. There is an urgency to this.
I tend to think at least one will be partially / mostly built elsewhere this time as well. That manufacturing process will be a steep but invaluable learning curve for our own workforce and will significantly shorten the entry to service timeframe I would have thought...

Plus this delay and perhaps overseas early build, may help us devote resources to accelerate the build of the Hunter Class too, in it’s early stages… (fingers crossed).
 
Last edited:

hauritz

Well-Known Member
Cant understand that it’s 20 years to get one in the water. Most of the people on this forum will be dead.
I suspect I might be decommissioned in around 20 years myself.

The leaders are aiming to bring the submarines into service at the earliest achievable date which I hope will be sooner rather than later.

The main problem with the Attack class was that there wasn't a final design and it is quite possible that the capabilities expected for that boat were never going to be deliverable.

Both the the US and UK designs are mature and provided we don't naff around too much with them I can't see why there should be any great delays in bringing them into production. The main problem will be the learning curve but really, apart from the nuclear bits, it probably won't be much more complex than a conventional boat.

I see the UK has announced preliminary work of replacing the Astute Class.
Announced a day after Australia said it wanted new subs. I wonder if that is a coincidence.

Actually I hope Australia just sticks with the existing candidates and doesn't get sucked into signing on for a paper boat.
 
Last edited:

Rudeboy

New Member
I suspect I might be decommissioned in around 20 years myself.

The leaders are aiming to bring the submarines into service at the earliest achievable date which I hope will be sooner rather than later.

The main problem with the Attack class was that there wasn't a final design and it is quite possible that the capabilities expected for that boat were never going to be deliverable.

Both the the US and UK designs are mature and provided we don't naff around too much with them I can't see why there should be any great delays in bringing them into production. The main problem will be the learning curve but really, apart from the nuclear bits, it probably won't be much more complex than a conventional boat.

I see the UK has announced preliminary work of replacing the Astute Class.
Announced a day after Australia said it wanted new subs. I wonder if that is a coincidence.

Actually I hope Australia just sticks with the existing candidates and doesn't get sucked into signing on for a paper boat.
SSN(R) is a paper boat at present, for obvious reasons, but its near certain that the entire propulsion section (the most complicated part) will be from the Dreadnought programme with the new PWR3 reactor. Dreadnought has already been in build for 4 years, with c£10bn spent already (cAUS$19bn) so thats definitely not paper...the first PWR3 is also in build.

The biggest advantage with going with SSN(R) is that Australia could get its own requirements inserted into the design. She'll be a big one, likely just under 10,000 tonnes. Lots of space for nice things...

In particular the one thing that should concern anyone opting for the Virginia or Astute right now is how well they will cope (without serious alterations to their design) with the rapidly developing world of unmanned underwater vehicles. Underwater interfaces for UUV's are lacking at present.

For a really good hypothetical idea of what is needed look at the always excellent HI Sutton's site Covert Shores for a hypothetical conversion of the Vanguard Class to 'motherships'. A lot of those features are likely to be baked into the SSN(R) design.(See below link to Vanguard SSGAN)


And of course the same sites write up on SSN(R), which is sure to be updated following todays news. If you're wondering where people get their artists impressions of subs from its always from Covert Shores. Be careful though...you'll likely lose a week or 2 of your life browsing the articles there...(see below link to SSN(R))

 

Rudeboy

New Member
Maybe Rolls Royce know something we don't.

As it turns out Australia has long been targeted by RR as a potential client for its small modular reactors.


In fact once the Australian public get over its phobia of nuclear power plants there is a huge market in Australia for this sort of reactor.

The American S9G reactor used in the Virginia class is designed specifically for submarines and uses weapons grade Highly Enriched Uranium fuel (HEU) while the commercial version of the RR reactors use Uranium Oxide UO2. I don't know whether or not the military version of the RR reactor is significantly different to their commercial version but if it isn't I can see why a UO2 fuelled reactor could be a more attractive option for the Australian government. Even more so if this reactor becomes widely used across Australia.
S9G and RR PWR3 are very close to each other, UK has had access to the S9G design. Both use HEU. The RR SMR's are a different beast, no relation to the maritime PWR's, they recently got some funding from UK Gov (and a lot of encouragement). We might actually see some built by the early 30's.
 

Rudeboy

New Member
One other thing....HMS Anson (an Astute Class Sub) was last reported docked at Busan, South Korea a week ago as part of the escort for CSG21, the HMS Queen Elizabeth deployment.

I wouldn't be shocked if she turned up at HMAS Stirling at Garden Island in the near future...wouldn't shock me if she was detached towards the end of the deployment one bit...
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
I suspect I might be decommissioned in around 20 years myself.

The leaders are aiming to bring the submarines into service at the earliest achievable date which I hope will be sooner rather than later.

The main problem with the Attack class was that there wasn't a final design and it is quite possible that the capabilities expected for that boat were never going to be deliverable.

Both the the US and UK designs are mature and provided we don't naff around too much with them I can't see why there should be any great delays in bringing them into production. The main problem will be the learning curve but really, apart from the nuclear bits, it probably won't be much more complex than a conventional boat.

I see the UK has announced preliminary work of replacing the Astute Class.
Announced a day after Australia said it wanted new subs. I wonder if that is a coincidence.

Actually I hope Australia just sticks with the existing candidates and doesn't get sucked into signing on for a paper boat.

*again*

They've been pretty specific about wanting something that's in the water so of the field available, we can rule out the DCNS nuclear option, leaving Virginia and Astute.

Astute may be cheaper to field and run.

But the Virginia is doing really well in terms of production numbers etc
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
One other thing....HMS Anson (an Astute Class Sub) was last reported docked at Busan, South Korea a week ago as part of the escort for CSG21, the HMS Queen Elizabeth deployment.

I wouldn't be shocked if she turned up at HMAS Stirling at Garden Island in the near future...wouldn't shock me if she was detached towards the end of the deployment one bit...
If she does, they'll have to chain the crew to the oars to prevent the recruiters making off with the entire crew, if the Astute build were to be true.

I suppose we're early days.
 

Rudeboy

New Member
If she does, they'll have to chain the crew to the oars to prevent the recruiters making off with the entire crew, if the Astute build were to be true.

I suppose we're early days.
There might need to be an agreement reached between the UK and Aus around poaching of crew and engineers if there is a deal....

I mean who in their right mind would swap Barrow in Furness or Faslane for Adelaide or Perth....and more money...?
 

spoz

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Not Anson, she’s only just been launched. Artful is the boat with the TG I think.
The route home of the TG as a whole hasn’t been released as yet, so it’s quite possible they could come to the west coast; the obvious way from where they are if they do is via Guam and the east coast.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
As I posted at #29,772 the only sensible names for these vessels are after Melbourne Cup winners HMAS Makybe Diva, HMAS Think Big, HMAS Empire Rose, HMAS Let's Elope, HMAS What A Nuisance and of course HMAS Phar Lap. :D

If not name a champion racehorse to represent each State and Territory. Or starting from this next Melbourne Cup day name the sub after the winner!
Naming them after Melbourne Cup winners is the only way an NZ name will ever appear on a sub so good idea ;)
 

Rudeboy

New Member
Not Anson, she’s only just been launched. Artful is the boat with the TG I think.
The route home of the TG as a whole hasn’t been released as yet, so it’s quite possible they could come to the west coast; the obvious way from where they are if they do is via Guam and the east coast.
Sorry my mistake, right you are.
I guess a lot will depend on COVID regs. I know the crew are getting some shore time at Guam, but the restrictions are pretty heavy, no more than 20% of the crew ashore at one time...they're all double vaxxed as well...pity really, a once in a lifetime deployment with plenty of great runs ashore has been pretty limited to date. Think Augusta in Sicily and now Guam have been the only ones.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top