Royal Australian Navy Submarines to go Nuclear

riksavage

War Hero
This article sums up the situation very nicely IMHO. In France’s world, they're the only ones allowed to act in self-interest and throw toys.


I also read the current grand exhibition in Paris celebrating all things Napoleon has been a flop with low attendance numbers.
 
Just listened to a rather interesting interview with one of Australia's better informed journalists who commented that it has become known that in the light of the redesign problems that were being experienced, the French offered to sell the Australians the nuclear version. This was supposedly a few months ago but the French offer did not receive a response.

Now I understand that the French boats require refuelling during their lifetime which would be a distinct disadvantage for Australia and I presume that the fire control and communication systems would require a total refit which would also be a disadvantage to the offer. However, I always suspected that it was the preferred option for the French.
 
Just listened to a rather interesting interview with one of Australia's better informed journalists who commented that it has become known that in the light of the redesign problems that were being experienced, the French offered to sell the Australians the nuclear version. This was supposedly a few months ago but the French offer did not receive a response.

Now I understand that the French boats require refuelling during their lifetime which would be a distinct disadvantage for Australia and I presume that the fire control and communication systems would require a total refit which would also be a disadvantage to the offer. However, I always suspected that it was the preferred option for the French.
In one of the news stories which I posted earlier it was stated that the Australian government had right from the beginning been considering switching the French order to nuclear at a later date if the political situation in Australia made if feasible. This apparently was one of the attractive features of the French offer as opposed to the others.

However, switching to nuclear now wouldn't address the things which were the main issues Australia were concerned over, which were commercial. Switching to nuclear while staying with DCNS would just add another set of complex contract negotiations which would make the commercial problems more difficult, not less. Australia didn't like the way the contract was progressing and so wanted to pull the plug on it instead of persisting. The contract was written to allow for this at various points in the project.

As I understand it, in order to go through the next "gate" in the project Australia had to make a big payment to DCNS for design work. This forced the Australian government to sit down and really think about whether they wanted to continue forward on this path and it put a time limit on when they needed to come to a conclusion.

Having decided "no", then the government revisited their previous assumptions about new submarines and decided that perhaps nuclear was an option after all. Having decided that, they approached the UK and inquired about whether some sort of deal was possible.


What's wrong with the French narrative on all this is that according to the press reports the Australians were already set on cancelling the French contract before the deal with the UK and US was made. If Australia hadn't changed their mind about nuclear then the country that would currently be on the receiving end of French wrath would likely be either Sweden or Japan.
 
On the BBC website at the moment. An interesting Ensign flying on that boat. The RFA has nuclear submarines. Who knew? Surely the BBC wouldn't be that lazy with their photoshop?
Fullscreen capture 28092021 111227.bmp.jpg
 
Should be Oz naval ensign
 
I've not read the whole thread, so apologies if already covered, but have the Australians included a plan on how they will deal with the submarines once they reach the end of their service life?
 
I've not read the whole thread, so apologies if already covered, but have the Australians included a plan on how they will deal with the submarines once they reach the end of their service life?

Probably the same as us. Just leave them loafing around and do nothing.

The article is 2015, but I, doubt much has changed.

 
Last edited:

lert

LE
On the BBC website at the moment. An interesting Ensign flying on that boat. The RFA has nuclear submarines. Who knew? Surely the BBC wouldn't be that lazy with their photoshop? View attachment 607073
That's not an RFA Ensign. The RFA have the anchor in the vertical orientation.

The pic is a Government Service Ensign which is, I believe, flown when a vessel is owned by Govt but not in commission. So on trials or similar before joining the Fleet.

Surely the BBC couldn't be that lucky could they?
 
Being reported on France 24 that Greece are to buy three frigates from France.
Have they handed the cash over yet?

Greece has been gifted 2 x type 23s from the U.K.

Lose a $50 billion contract and win a $5 billion contract…..which incidentally was the most expensive offering from all country’s offering including the U.K., Netherlands and the US.


So, Greece buys expensive warships from its second biggest creditor. Anybody suspect that Greece’s largest creditor may step in at a later date and offer up one of their designs.

Anybody else get the feeling that the Richer country’s in the EU are just trying to get the poorer country’s of the EU further into debt?
 
Anybody else get the feeling that the Richer country’s in the EU are just trying to get the poorer country’s of the EU further into debt?

No, because they’ve never had any expectation of the loans being repaid - it’s simply a creative way for them to subsidise their own domestic shipbuilding industries without breaching EU subsidy/state aid rules.
 
No, because they’ve never had any expectation of the loans being repaid - it’s simply a creative way for them to subsidise their own domestic shipbuilding industries without breaching EU subsidy/state aid rules.
I was more thinking along the lines of getting German tax payers to pay for Greek ships to be built in French yards.

Ironically, Greece has a semi reasonable organic ship building and design capacity. You’d have thought that the Greeks would’ve wanted to invest in that seeing as most of their requirements are for fast patrol boats.

Ever get the feeling that Macron is pushing for an EU military so he can try as force French equipment on it?
 
Have they handed the cash over yet?

Greece has been gifted 2 x type 23s from the U.K.

Lose a $50 billion contract and win a $5 billion contract…..which incidentally was the most expensive offering from all country’s offering including the U.K., Netherlands and the US.


So, Greece buys expensive warships from its second biggest creditor. Anybody suspect that Greece’s largest creditor may step in at a later date and offer up one of their designs.

Anybody else get the feeling that the Richer country’s in the EU are just trying to get the poorer country’s of the EU further into debt?
Is this to the design that came out of the ashes of the Common New Generation Frigate fiasco (aka Project Horizon)?
 
I've not read the whole thread, so apologies if already covered, but have the Australians included a plan on how they will deal with the submarines once they reach the end of their service life?
So far as I know end of life disposal hasn't been in the news yet, at least not any part that I've read. I expect the question will come up in parliament in Canberra though.

I suspect that part of the defence agreements that go along with the submarine deal state that the reactors along with various other bits of sensitive kit must return to the originating country (US or UK) once the boats go out of service in Australia.

News reports have suggested that the entire section of the submarine containing the reactor will be built in the US or UK as an assembled "plug" and Australia will weld on the rest of the submarine fore and aft of that. If so then that whole "plug" may be cut back out and returned for storage and eventual disposal.

In this case "security concerns" would address both security issues from the supplier's point of view and practical problems from Australia's point of view.

A few years ago I was in a former Oberon class submarine in Canada which had been hauled out of the water and turned into a museum. There were certain parts of the boat which we were not allowed to take photographs in. All sensitive kit had been removed from the boat, but we were not to take photos of even the empty spaces where that kit used to be. I ended up not taking any photos inside at all anyway even where allowed because the space was simply too cramped to make that practical.
 
Is this to the design that came out of the ashes of the Common New Generation Frigate fiasco (aka Project Horizon)?
It’s all to boost EU defence.


Basically general purpose frigates much in the vein of a corvette.


Designed for the export market and to keep French ship yards open.

I’m struggling to see the Hellenic Navy’s need for them though.
 

Latest Threads

Top