Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates 2.0

[StingrayOZ]

Shows how hard it is to crew two different types of submarines at the same time.

Im sure the RAN will have it easy when we are operating 3 different types of submarine at the Same time.

 

[Bob53]

Anyone in the market for a used SSN in good condition, with 4-5 years of service life available? Delivery within 12 months.
The SSN Perle will be retired early this summer

(I'll head towards the exits!)

Any guess when the first Barracuda would have been delivered? Wasn’t 2026 the first delivery?

 

[Going Boeing]

Another video from BAE Systems Australia on their FB site showing the Hunter Block 4 hull section being moved to the Blast & Paint chamber. The section appears to be in very good condition with no rust evident - this is much better than what I’ve seen on videos from other shipbuilders overseas.

You may not be able to view this if you don’t have a FB account but I haven’t been able to find the video elsewhere.

38K views · 584 reactions | On the move at the Osborne Naval Shipyard. NUSHIP Hunter’s Block 4 (a keel block) recently headed into the Blast & Paint (B&P) chamber. Along the way, it was pre-washed and received a red undercoat. Both activities are part of the preparation for B&P, where the block is now undergoing an abrasive blasting process and will be finished with a new, highly durable paint job. This special coating has been designed to protect the future frigate from corrosive sea conditions. ️ Once Block 4 completes B&P, it’ll be transported to Building 22 – our Block Outfitting Hall. Here, it will be joined by other blocks to construct the first Hunter class frigate. | BAE Systems Australia

 

[thatsamguy]

Another video from BAE Systems Australia on their FB site showing the Block 4 hull section being moved to the Blast & Paint chamber. The section appears to be in very good condition with no rust evident - this is much better than what I’ve seen on videos from other shipbuilders overseas.

You may not be able to view this if you don’t have a FB account but I haven’t been able to find the video elsewhere.

It's also available on BAE Aus youtube channel if that helps anyone. They often post there first.

 

[Stampede]

Any guess when the first Barracuda would have been delivered? Wasn’t 2026 the first delivery?

I understand it was to be in the water in late 20s for entry to service in 2030.

A good conversion for ten years time as to whether it was the right or wrong decision back in the day.

Cheers S

 

[Joe Black]

I don't think it was a good move to have cancelled the project altogether, but then again, it could have been a bottomless pit given the French are infamous with project slippages. I would have loved to see an interim buy of sons of Collins (perhaps a slightly enlarged boat with some updated technology taken from the Shortfin Barracuda/and perhaps Saab's A26 class) rather than doing the MLU/LOTE on all 6 existing Collins.

 

[rossfrb_1]

I understand it was to be in the water in late 20s for entry to service in 2030.

A good conversion for ten years time as to whether it was the right or wrong decision back in the day.

Cheers S

According to this article Why Australia wanted out of its French submarine deal
(I seem to remember the same article being on the aspistrategist site but can't find it now)
The first Shortfin in the water was due 2035.

 

[iambuzzard]

According to this article Why Australia wanted out of its French submarine deal
(I seem to remember the same article being on the aspistrategist site but can't find it now)
The first Shortfin in the water was due 2035.

When is our first Virginia Class due?

 

[Reptilia]

When is our first Virginia Class due?

2032, 35, 38

 

[iambuzzard]

2032, 35, 38

So, three years before the Shortfin!!!!

 

[H_K]

According to this article Why Australia wanted out of its French submarine deal
(I seem to remember the same article being on the aspistrategist site but can't find it now)
The first Shortfin in the water was due 2035.

It was a good deal earlier than that... Attack class sea trials were scheduled for 2031-32 (see below).

The Attack program was actually progressing quite well when it was cancelled in Sept 2021. The preliminary design reviews had been completed, and the critical design review was tracking ~12 months behind the original 2017 schedule, with a plan in place to recover this delay and meet the original milestones. Costs were also under control, with the final estimate before cancellation (August 2021) of $46.4 billion in 2016 constant dollars, with a Cabinet memo noting that this "remains within the original acquisition cost estimate of $50 billion in 2016 constant dollars announced at the outset of the Attack class submarine program in April 2016".

Key milestones of the Future Submarine Program are as follows:

• Preliminary Design Review – scheduled to conclude in March 2020 (actual: Feb 2021, 11 month delay partly impacted by Covid).
• Critical Design Review – scheduled to conclude in June 2022 (Note: later revised to June 2023, 12 month delay)
• Operation of the Propulsion System Land Based Test Site – scheduled to commence in 2022/23.
• Operation of the Combat System Physical Integration Facility – scheduled to commence in 2022/23.
• Construction of the first Future Submarine – scheduled to commence in 2022/23.
• Construction of the second Future Submarine – scheduled to commence in 2025/26.
• Sea trials for the first Future Submarine – scheduled to commence in 2031/32.
• Acceptance of first Future Submarine – scheduled for 2032/33.

Source: https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/down...timatesRoundId2-PortfolioId7-QuestionNumber41

 

[Wombat000]

I find this continuing re-visiting of the Attack class unhelpful, it would be good to stop picking at the same scab.

We moved on, unexpectedly following the surprising acknowledgment of the requirement for a SSN solution.
The Attack no matter how good it was ever going to be after shoe-horning a diesel into a nuclear base design, was still not going to cut it.

We didn’t select the fully French boat for reasons.

How far down the road will we need to get before we just let it go?

 

[John Fedup]

I admit I have not paid much attention to the sub issue in Australia lately. I recall the discussion about Collins2, Japanese disappointment losing the deal to France and then France’s over AUKUS. To a lesser extent Canada will disappoint either SKorea or Germany.

The attached article regarding the UK’s defence difficulties seems to minimize recent criticisms about the UK’s nuclear sub industrial limitations by a former RN admiral. However, there is no doubt the UK has significant economic issues wrt overall defence needs. The bigger AUKUS partner does not exactly inspire confidence either considering the USN’s recent C-Fs and their ability to provide Virginia boats as a stop gap….? Then there is still Trump chaos for another 1-3 years

Given the timelines for SSNs, perhaps a mixed fleet of SSNs and SSKs for all three navies is something the needs to be considered albeit the extra cost sucks but which is offset by faster delivery.

WRT Canada, a SK Pacific sub and German Atlantic sub is an expensive option but it is a CYA backup if things go pear shaped in Asia or Europe.

Britain’s submarine challenges do not spell AUKUS failure | The Strategist

As with 2025, early 2026 sees AUKUS Pillar One, Australia’s plan to acquire a nuclear-powered submarine capability, back in the headlines. This time the focus is claims by a former Royal Navy admiral and former ...

www.aspistrategist.org.au

 

[spoz]

I don’t agree with that view of how Sea 1000 was progressing. From my viewpoint there was no clear way to a successful completion. However, it is now a number of years in the past. It is not resurrectable and we are now on another path. I do agree that “what iffing” the program is unhelpful.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The attached article regarding the UK’s defence difficulties seems to minimize recent criticisms about the UK’s nuclear sub industrial limitations by a former RN admiral. However, there is no doubt the UK has significant economic issues wrt overall defence needs. The bigger AUKUS partner does not exactly inspire confidence either considering the USN’s recent C-Fs and their ability to provide Virginia boats as a stop gap….? Then there is still Trump chaos for another 1-3 year

It maybe that the AUKUS sub is more closely aligned with the US designs. I'm not against that. AUKUS means Australia has two future options for SSN. It has been stated once we are operating Virginias, and integrated into the US pipeline, people question why we would ever leave such an arrangement for the UK setup. Also while SSN are challenging for the UK to develop, its not beyond them, and Australia has a reasonable ecosystem that can also support that.

I don’t agree with that view of how Sea 1000 was progressing. From my viewpoint there was no clear way to a successful completion. However, it is now a number of years in the past. It is not resurrectable and we are now on another path. I do agree that “what iffing” the program is unhelpful.

Yeh.. What ever Sea1000 was is dead and buried. The only aspects of it that I am interested is how the Dutch go with their program. Just for curiosity sake where it ends up.

But for Australia that is not something we can brush off and establish, ever.

 

[iambuzzard]

I find this continuing re-visiting of the Attack class unhelpful, it would be good to stop picking at the same scab.

We moved on, unexpectedly following the surprising acknowledgment of the requirement for a SSN solution.
The Attack no matter how good it was ever going to be after shoe-horning a diesel into a nuclear base design, was still not going to cut it.

We didn’t select the fully French boat for reasons.

How far down the road will we need to get before we just let it go?

Well said, Wombat. Let's put it to bed and move on.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

It maybe that the AUKUS sub is more closely aligned with the US designs. I'm not against that. AUKUS means Australia has two future options for SSN. It has been stated once we are operating Virginias, and integrated into the US pipeline, people question why we would ever leave such an arrangement for the UK setup. Also while SSN are challenging for the UK to develop, its not beyond them, and Australia has a reasonable ecosystem that can also support that.

I've said this before, but I will repeat it again. The UK is going to build SSN-AUKUS.

We have to replace Astute, due to the naval threat from Russia and because we'll lose all our technical expertise if we stall again like we did after the Trafalgar class. As you said, it will be a complex design, but the fact we've got a partner in Australia giving political support means even if the Treasury wanted to they couldn't push for a delay.

EDIT: The fact we've dispatched HMS Anson to Australia, despite the continuing delays in servicing other submarines, shows the UK is serious about AUKUS. If we were rethinking it, that would have been one of the first things to change.

Yeh.. What ever Sea1000 was is dead and buried.

100%.

 

[John Fedup]

I've said this before, but I will repeat it again. The UK is going to build SSN-AUKUS.

We have to replace Astute, due to the naval threat from Russia and because we'll lose all our technical expertise if we stall again like we did after the Trafalgar class. As you said, it will be a complex design, but the fact we've got a partner in Australia giving political support means even if the Treasury wanted to they couldn't push for a delay.

EDIT: The fact we've dispatched HMS Anson to Australia, despite the continuing delays in servicing other submarines, shows the UK is serious about AUKUS. If we were rethinking it, that would have been one of the first things to change.



100%.

I no longer have the link about the industrial issues with regard to the UK’s ability to produce new SSNs by the retired RN admiral so the content is debatable. Certainly Australia will bring significant support to the AUKUS SSN which is a UK-OZ boat, not a USN boat albeit with US tech in the mix. Question is, will the UK be up to the task as Australia seems to be? The USN have their own issues so the UK-OZ boat is Australia’s only option, additional Virginia boats beyond what have been promised is unlikely.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

Question is, will the UK be up to the task as Australia seems to be?

Err, let's not get into a competition as to how "up to the task" either country is. Remember, Australia needs the UK to make the reactors, which is a big part of the project. It's easy for someone to be chuffed about their contribution to a BBQ if they're just setting up the table, whilst someone else is manning the grill.

The UK has been back on building nuclear submarines for over 20 years now. The issue is not whether we can build the AUKUS submarine, we obviously can. It's whether we can build quickly enough to supply parts for both UK and Australia production lines.

 

[John Fedup]

Err, let's not get into a competition as to how "up to the task" either country is. Remember, Australia needs the UK to make the reactors, which is a big part of the project. It's easy for someone to be chuffed about their contribution to a BBQ if they're just setting up the table, whilst someone else is manning the grill.

The UK has been back on building nuclear submarines for over 20 years now. The issue is not whether we can build the AUKUS submarine, we obviously can. It's whether we can build quickly enough to supply parts for both UK and Australia production lines.

The issue raised by the RN admiral was not the UK’s expertise wrt SSN production but rather the UK’s industrial capacity which Australia will help out on. Australia is helping on the economic side with cash and extra boats which will result in a lower cost per boat.