Royal Australian Navy Submarines to go Nuclear

Even the Australian press are flagging up the diplomatic implications of this, if you guys want to have a French hate-fest you crack on but Australia is hardly clean in all of this.


You might want to pick a be a better measure. The Australian press is a joke and will bag PM Morrison no matter what he does.
 
Now i don't pretend to be knowledgeable about current affairs and geopolitics etc.

But... i fail to see how this is in the UK interest being part of this pact? Money for UK industry with respect to participating in design, build, training of the submarines i can see. But that is a very small outcome vs trade with China.

Oz procuring 12 Nuclear subs actually means them buying 1.5 as they wont actually have the resource or funding for 12 (The UK only has funding for 6 attack?). Which possibly means as mentioned above, the US basing subs in Oz.

I'm not sure what benefit the UK will get here. Why does the UK need to help the US be world sea police? Why does the UK need to antagonise the Chinese?

I personally think we should play both sides for us only. The South China seas issue is a for the local countries to deal with, and maybe with US assistance by request.

Nothing to do with the UK. We should focus on more business with the Chinese, US and Oz?
I'm sure the UK comes off worse financially with these things. Maybe the great EU would like to get involved instead? As an independent nation, the UK should remain impartial and sell everyone else the tools (thinking Lend lease but for UK...!).
It shows that we are capable of making strategic decisions to safeguard our own interests. The trade with China is a bit of a red herring because the trade is mainly one way, in that we import cheap Chinese goods and export our money.

China will do nothing to put that at risk.

Oh, by the way, Rolls-Royce in Derby manufactures what they euphemistically call "marine propulsion systems". In other words the nuclear reactors that power the UKs submarines. I hope that the Australians will engage with the good folks at Rolls-Royce to buy propulsion systems for their nice new submarines.

I would rather see a number of good quality jobs in the East Midlands (where we need some) than us buying some cheap tat from a Chinese sweatshop.

Why should we not be part of the "world sea police"? If we put your question slightly differently, you are asking why should we be part of the enforcement process for international law. Well the answer is because it is the right thing to do.

Why should we want to avoid antagonising the Chinese? If they take offence because we believe they are a threat to our own interests in the area as well as others, then that is their problem. We should not step back from doing the right thing just because it "antagonises" the Chinese. Are we expected to give them some sort of free-pass to do what they want?

The South China Sea issue is not simply for local countries to deal with. It is a very important part of the world with lots of countries having an interest in it including us. We have stood up to be counted. If others choose not to do so then that it their issue. We have a moral duty to help to enforce international law. Why should we stand back instead of actually doing something about it?

You seem to be frightened of China. I see no reason to be.

But you are correct in one thing; you are not knowledgeable about current affairs and geopolitics etc
 
. . . I'm not sure what benefit the UK will get here. Why does the UK need to help the US be world sea police? Why does the UK need to antagonise the Chinese?

I personally think we should play both sides for us only. The South China seas issue is a for the local countries to deal with, and maybe with US assistance by request.

Nothing to do with the UK. We should focus on more business with the Chinese, US and Oz?
It is now a much smaller world . . .

Image result for far far away of which we know nothing

In this broadcast, Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain speaks about his efforts to obtain a peaceful solution to the Sudeten dispute, which he refers to as a

"quarrel in a far away country, between people of whom we know nothing".
 

endure

GCM
It shows that we are capable of making strategic decisions to safeguard our own interests. The trade with China is a bit of a red herring because the trade is mainly one way, in that we import cheap Chinese goods and export our money.

China will do nothing to put that at risk.

Oh, by the way, Rolls-Royce in Derby manufactures what they euphemistically call "marine propulsion systems". In other words the nuclear reactors that power the UKs submarines. I hope that the Australians will engage with the good folks at Rolls-Royce to buy propulsion systems for their nice new submarines.
There's nothing euphemistic about RR in Derby...

 
Yesterday evening on BBC R4's "PM" programme, Evan Davis was discussing the situation, and the reaction from France, with Carl Bildt . . . who commented,

"Well France hasn't declared war . . . "
;) !!
 
Then you are a fairly petty man, you crack on with whatever you want to do.
National security doesn’t leave room for niceties. The French didn’t appear to treat their customers well enough to keep them. The contract was lost for something better, and the Aussies will have more Americans on their soil to act as a tripwire. The Aussies should be able to have something akin to a Block V Virginia. Eventually they might be armed with hypersonic weapons that can reach out and touch people from a good distance and help strangle the mainland with a naval blockade.
 
Niceties of international diplomacy would be a good start why. We are getting details of this now, Australia started negotiations for AUKUS in March yet Morrison met Macron in June at the Elysée Palace where the Attack class programme was discussed....pretty underhand behaviour by Australia and Morrison.

You clearly hate the French so I doubt there is much worth me discussing this further with you.

Was it diplomatic nicety when the French blocked the export of Covid vaccines to Australia?
 

Themanwho

LE
Book Reviewer
Niceties of international diplomacy would be a good start why. We are getting details of this now, Australia started negotiations for AUKUS in March yet Morrison met Macron in June at the Elysée Palace where the Attack class programme was discussed....pretty underhand behaviour by Australia and Morrison.

You clearly hate the French so I doubt there is much worth me discussing this further with you.
Whilst hating the French like the very devil is a good British and Christian thing to do, I don't think what @Cromarty says is untrue.

French industry is renowned as arrogant, uncooperative and dishonest in my current professional field (railway infrastructure) and there have been numerous tales of defence woes over the decades where les Grenouilles have shat the bed either on their own or as EU partners.

As for being underhand when playing with a nation who's already done you over on submarines, well you reap what you sew.
 
Quite a bit of gen in the back half of this Grauniad story:


Wallace said it was Australia that came to the UK seeking a deal in March, after a secret yearlong study programme in which it concluded it wanted to abandon the French upgrade.

Both countries then went to the US. Johnson joined the Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, and Biden for a trilateral meeting on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Cornwall in June.

There, the three discussed the pact in principle, although what began as a technology deal widened into a broader three-way alliance with plans to share other military technologies including artificial intelligence.

The submarines will be built in Adelaide, but Australian sources said they expected the nuclear-powered engines, which rely on highly enriched weapons-grade uranium, to be produced in the US or in the UK, where they are made by Rolls-Royce.

The exact manufacturing process has yet to be decided, however, pending an 18-month initial review. It is also unclear where the Australian reactors will ultimately be decommissioned.
 
To be fair, the BBC simply reported the hissy fits the Quay d'Orsai and Brussels are having. I really wonder why the EU think that the UK, US, and Australia should have consulted them before setting up a new Pact. It will be interesting to see whether France seeks legal redress for the cancellation of the contract - which also includes some sub-systems (SWIDT?) from UK manufacturers.
You would hope the contract has escape clauses re. non delivery, or failing to meet project milestones. If you have time, I'd recommend the Sub Brief video on the French Sub project as it contains interesting info about weaknesses in the Australian approach, sufficient tbh to establish some small doubt about the future success of the Oznuc sub, unless a firm grip is established by UK/US and Aus, early on.
 
The French have gone nuclear and accused the Yanks and Brits of stabbing them in the back. Perfidious Albion, nasty Anglo-Saxon’s doing what they do best. French politicians have erupted in a Twitter frenzy of anti ‘Roast Beefness’

Time for the Aussies to sign up for Tempest along with the Japoons


Oh mon Dieu, Comme c'est triste, Peu importe!
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
My money will be on lease in all but name of a couple of older Virginia boats to the RAN to get their feet under the nuclear operations table.
Then ASC welding together Block IV Virginias supplied as knock down kits under US supervision bar some local fabrication of things like fairings and the the fin.
 

philc

LE
Melbourne too. I went there c2006 to do a bit of a field trip as I fancied emigrating and wanted to get a feel for the place. I was surprised by the number of Chinese there.

want to know the largest number of immigrants in Italy, it’s Chinese, such are the numbers of Chinese around the world.
 

Yokel

LE
Canadian subs do exercise with other countries, but they don't get the public profile that surface ships do.

More importantly, the "enemy" over the past few decades has been in places such as Afghanistan or the Middle East where there hasn't been much of a role for submarines.

They have also been getting the short end of the stick in terms of manpower, with them spending much time tied up because their crews were raided for surface fleet deployments.

The submarine faction recently were involved in an operation monitoring North Korean shipping and the press were given access to this, so they do seem to be learning how to toot their own horn.

As things stand now however, unless there is a change in attitude in the RCN, any new submarines will be rammed down their unwilling throats by cabinet.

Were Canadian submarines part of the war on terror? They are not mentioned in this Canadian video, but a French one is. I first saw this in 2010, and thought that it clearly explained the naval role in interdicting terrorist supply lines.





 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs

Coincidental timing - or indication that perhaps astute replacement and OZ SSN may be a common platform

Coincidental.

That’s SSNR, it will leverage off Dreadnought.
Australia wants a boat that’s already ‘in the water’.
 
Not sure Barrow / Cammell Lairds finest were actually seaworthy during that little episode. They've had some major issues modernising / supporting them.
 

Coincidental timing - or indication that perhaps astute replacement and OZ SSN may be a common platform

The cousins have a follow-on project for the Virginias called SSN(X), so who knows but the idea might be to roll SSN(R), SSN(X), and SSN(OZ) together?

As I understand it, after the remaining two Astutes, Barrow is meant to be cracking on with the SSBNs for quite a few years. the US is still building Virginias and I think their yard is busy for a while to come, so perhaps...do the common design for SSN(OZ) and make (R) and (X) the later batches in the production run?
 

Latest Threads

Top