AUKUS

Skybird · 09-15-21, 05:46 PM

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-58564837

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/15/p...nes/index.html

The US and the UK have agreed to form a pact with austrlia that enables it to have access to extremely sensitive technologies related to the construction of nuclear submarines.

An older deal with France to build Diesels for the Australian navy seems to be floating dead in the water, therefor.

If Australia continues to attract the anger of Bejing like it did in recent months, it will need a much stronger muscle indeed.

Clever move by Biden. Subtle, but effective.

Aerial stealth drones for Australia should be next, me thinks.

ET2SN · 09-15-21, 08:15 PM

This is a really big deal (especially for this forum).

Having an Oz-UK-US organization makes a lot of sense for Australia and the US and UK. We could also call it the "High fiving white guys club" or "Operation Wonder Bread" but you get the idea.

Some initial take-aways:

-Australia is going Nuke (powered). This will require some lead time. There isn't a keel in a shipyard, yet. There isn't even a name for the program, let alone the first boat or its seal.
Nuclear subs need a crew.

The RAN isn't set up for this, as of today. This will require nuke-trained officers, enlisted, and support personnel. Think lots of cross-deck assignments with the US and RN for several years to build up the experience level for a boat that isn't even in its design phase, yet. Think about drinking from a fully changed fire hose.

Nuclear training isn't a walk in the park.

-This is all aimed at China. Unless the PRC backs down and gives up the "If we can see it, we own it" philosophy, there is going to be a war. Its hard to sell crap to your enemies, let alone your friends, during and after a large war.

Likewise, the last thing you want to do during a sea-based conflict is send your boomers on patrol in hostile (or potentially hostile) waters. Either park them or lose them.

Now, discuss.

Otto Harkaman · 09-15-21, 09:01 PM

Well I guess that is great, for the long term but wouldn't some AIP SSGs using a combination design of the latest Japanese and South Korean subs be more prudent?

3catcircus · 09-15-21, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Harkaman

Well I guess that is great, for the long term but wouldn't some AIP SSGs using a combination design of the latest Japanese and South Korean subs be more prudent?

Prudent for whom? AIP and diesel-electric are fuel-limited. Nuclear powered boats are limited by how much food they can carry. In case you aren't aware, China and Australia aren't actually all that close - 5500 miles or so by air. That's a lot of ocean to patrol in a non-nuke boat where you'll need to divert to fuel.

Otto Harkaman · 09-15-21, 11:42 PM

Skybird · 09-16-21, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Harkaman

Well I guess that is great, for the long term but wouldn't some AIP SSGs using a combination design of the latest Japanese and South Korean subs be more prudent?

Note that they had a deal or declaration of intention signed with France providing them with nonnuclear subs. Thats gone, I think. So there has been a competion program some years agp. I recall the Germans had hopes to win it, but didnt.

The now announced deal is big because it ends a long prohibition of making US key technology available to others, because Australia will probably dont buy ready blats, but build them under license or license for key components itself. That has been a demand for the SS competition before, too. In other words, we speak of technology and knowhow transfer.

ET2SN · 09-16-21, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Note that they had a deal or declaration of intention signed with France providing them with nonnuclear subs. Thats gone, I think. So there has been a competion program some years agp. I recall the Germans had hopes to win it, but didnt.

The now announced deal is big because it ends a long prohibition of making US key technology available to others, because Australia will probably dont buy ready blats, but build them under license or license for key components itself. That has been a demand for the SS competition before, too. In other words, we speak of technology and knowhow transfer.

The devil is in the details.

The deal with France was going nowhere fast. It exists on paper (as a signed contract) but France was being, well, France and wasn't planning to do anything until there was enough cash on the table.

Australia has traditionally been a close ally with the UK (naturally) and the US. While Australian military hardware was traditionally made up of second hand UK-based fighter planes and ships, they have also relied on US-sourced aircraft (the F-111 and F/A-18 fighter bombers) plus some smaller warships.

The only real problem was that Australia has never really used a "platinum card" budget to buy its hardware (much like Canada). I'm guessing part of the new deal involves some financial support from either the US or UK.

As far as tech transfers, this part isn't that big of a deal. The US was already working closely with the UK in terms of nuke propulsion (the US Columbia class SSBN and the UK's next-gen SSBN are rumored to share a lot of the same tech if not the same hardware). All that's really happening is the US and UK allowing Australia into the same club house. The bigger news (IMO) is Australia "rethinking" its anti-nuclear-power stance.

Reece · 09-16-21, 02:32 AM

Quote:

The bigger news (IMO) is Australia "rethinking" its anti-nuclear-power stance.

I certainly hope so!!

Skybird · 09-16-21, 02:34 AM

Yes, the collaboraiton with the UK is 70 years old (on SSNs), but the US has been very shy to give away technology of such a sensitive nature to other countries, propellers for example, sonar etc. Traditionally the US does not like that, and it is understadable. On the other hand today they trade stealth technology in aircrafts... A decade or longer ago there even was an American attempt to buy the German shipyard building the Type 212 to get access to the boat'S technology, because the German offer to trade quid pro quo and exchange, trade sensitive tech secrets between the two states, was rejected. One wanted to know the tech of the 212, but did not want to give data on own tech. Needless to mention this, but the Germans said No, too.

Your last sentence, do you mean this military deal indicates a move away from coal-based power production in civilian industry, too? Australia takes plenty of Flak currently due to its rejection to stop mining coal and joining the climate appeasement choire.

ET2SN · 09-16-21, 03:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Your last sentence, do you mean this military deal indicates a move away from coal-based power production in civilian industry, too?

Ask Reece, I don't live in Australia.

I served on one of the last US diesel boats and a 688 class nuke, I know the best way to go to sea.

I'm concentrating only on the SSN part in this thread.

Aside from the start-up cost, Nuclear is the best way to power a sub. There's some risk if you screw it up and its a pain when you have to refuel, but that's at least twenty years down the road.

I got to know some folks in the RAN, they're good operators and some of our closest allies.

Exocet25fr · 09-16-21, 08:23 AM

Australian SNA ?

mapuc · 09-16-21, 08:32 AM

I knew Kapitan had a thread about this RAN going nuclear-powered. Couldn't find it here, then I remembered it was on FB, where he posted a bulletin about this:

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal...0210915-p58rzo

Back to discussing this AUKUS cooperation

Markus

ET2SN · 09-16-21, 09:15 AM

Australia is also getting Tomahawks from the US?

Exocet25fr · 09-16-21, 09:58 AM

FUKUS is more appropriate, no?

I suggest the Green Peace flag for these subs !

And a name for the first one: Rainbow Warrior !

ET2SN · 09-16-21, 10:05 AM

The truth is that France lost this deal.

Call it whatever you want, just don't let the door hit you in the back side.

09-15-21, 05:46 PM	#1
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 41,489 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	AUKUS https://www.bbc.com/news/world-58564837 https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/15/p...nes/index.html The US and the UK have agreed to form a pact with austrlia that enables it to have access to extremely sensitive technologies related to the construction of nuclear submarines. An older deal with France to build Diesels for the Australian navy seems to be floating dead in the water, therefor. If Australia continues to attract the anger of Bejing like it did in recent months, it will need a much stronger muscle indeed. Clever move by Biden. Subtle, but effective. Aerial stealth drones for Australia should be next, me thinks. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

09-15-21, 09:01 PM	#3
Otto Harkaman Grey Wolf Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Lexington, Kentucky Posts: 936 Downloads: 31 Uploads: 0	Well I guess that is great, for the long term but wouldn't some AIP SSGs using a combination design of the latest Japanese and South Korean subs be more prudent? __________________ "If you want to know the age of the Earth, look upon the sea in a storm." -Joseph Conrad USS Pompano (SS-181) https://www.oneternalpatrol.com/uss-pompano-181.htm

09-15-21, 11:42 PM	#5
Otto Harkaman Grey Wolf Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Lexington, Kentucky Posts: 936 Downloads: 31 Uploads: 0	__________________ "If you want to know the age of the Earth, look upon the sea in a storm." -Joseph Conrad USS Pompano (SS-181) https://www.oneternalpatrol.com/uss-pompano-181.htm Last edited by Otto Harkaman; 09-16-21 at 12:17 AM.

09-16-21, 02:34 AM	#9
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 41,489 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	Yes, the collaboraiton with the UK is 70 years old (on SSNs), but the US has been very shy to give away technology of such a sensitive nature to other countries, propellers for example, sonar etc. Traditionally the US does not like that, and it is understadable. On the other hand today they trade stealth technology in aircrafts... A decade or longer ago there even was an American attempt to buy the German shipyard building the Type 212 to get access to the boat'S technology, because the German offer to trade quid pro quo and exchange, trade sensitive tech secrets between the two states, was rejected. One wanted to know the tech of the 212, but did not want to give data on own tech. Needless to mention this, but the Germans said No, too. Your last sentence, do you mean this military deal indicates a move away from coal-based power production in civilian industry, too? Australia takes plenty of Flak currently due to its rejection to stop mining coal and joining the climate appeasement choire. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

09-16-21, 08:23 AM	#11
Exocet25fr Grey Wolf Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Paris/France Posts: 891 Downloads: 255 Uploads: 0	Australian SNA ? __________________ \"Le Triomphant\" listens you !

09-15-21, 08:15 PM	#2
ET2SN Ocean Warrior Join Date: Oct 2017 Posts: 2,579 Downloads: 60 Uploads: 0	This is a really big deal (especially for this forum). Having an Oz-UK-US organization makes a lot of sense for Australia and the US and UK. We could also call it the "High fiving white guys club" or "Operation Wonder Bread" but you get the idea. Some initial take-aways: -Australia is going Nuke (powered). This will require some lead time. There isn't a keel in a shipyard, yet. There isn't even a name for the program, let alone the first boat or its seal. Nuclear subs need a crew. The RAN isn't set up for this, as of today. This will require nuke-trained officers, enlisted, and support personnel. Think lots of cross-deck assignments with the US and RN for several years to build up the experience level for a boat that isn't even in its design phase, yet. Think about drinking from a fully changed fire hose. Nuclear training isn't a walk in the park. -This is all aimed at China. Unless the PRC backs down and gives up the "If we can see it, we own it" philosophy, there is going to be a war. Its hard to sell crap to your enemies, let alone your friends, during and after a large war. Likewise, the last thing you want to do during a sea-based conflict is send your boomers on patrol in hostile (or potentially hostile) waters. Either park them or lose them. Now, discuss.

09-16-21, 08:32 AM	#12
mapuc Fleet Admiral Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 19,603 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	I knew Kapitan had a thread about this RAN going nuclear-powered. Couldn't find it here, then I remembered it was on FB, where he posted a bulletin about this: https://www.afr.com/politics/federal...0210915-p58rzo Back to discussing this AUKUS cooperation Markus __________________ My little lovely female cat

09-16-21, 09:15 AM	#13
ET2SN Ocean Warrior Join Date: Oct 2017 Posts: 2,579 Downloads: 60 Uploads: 0	Australia is also getting Tomahawks from the US?

09-16-21, 09:58 AM	#14
Exocet25fr Grey Wolf Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Paris/France Posts: 891 Downloads: 255 Uploads: 0	FUKUS is more appropriate, no? I suggest the Green Peace flag for these subs ! And a name for the first one: Rainbow Warrior ! __________________ \"Le Triomphant\" listens you !

09-16-21, 10:05 AM	#15
ET2SN Ocean Warrior Join Date: Oct 2017 Posts: 2,579 Downloads: 60 Uploads: 0	The truth is that France lost this deal. Call it whatever you want, just don't let the door hit you in the back side.