Australia goes sub nuclear

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
So our Prime Minster, Scotty from Marketing, has added another blunder to his bag-o-blunders by scrapping an existing 90 billion dollar diesel based submarine fleet upgrade (on which several billion has already been spent and who knows how many billions more will be paid for the contract break) to maybe in 10-20 years get us some nuclear powered (but not armed) submarines which we will be unable to service (since we have no nuclear industry), man (since we have no sailors with nuclear sub experience) and which will be less agile and more unwieldy in our coastal waters....but hey, we can wander off an spook China, so hurray.

Morrison has gone nuclear — and there's no turning back

That's quite a long read, but the best (prophetic given when it was made) summary can be found here
 
  • Informative
Reactions: wing2000

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Isn't australia one of many foreign nations that drastically cut its military and defense spending.

nope.

Assuming the united states would always be there to protect them from russia and china.

Protect us from what, exactly?

This response is too little, too late.

You seriously have no understanding, not even a little bit, of our geopolitical position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gene2memE
Upvote 0
Sep 8, 2012
385
211
✟14,978.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
nope.

Protect us from what, exactly?

You seriously have no understanding, not even a little bit, of our geopolitical position.



Maybe you missed past history when the USA was tasked with building a missile shield around russia to contain it. Maybe you missed past history when russia threatened to invade either switzerland or sweden.

Maybe you missed china's announcement when they redrew maps which made hawaii and the entire pacific their future territory.

Maybe you missed china's attempts to wage a passive war on taiwan, japan and hong kong. In order to push their expansionist future plans. Which could include an expansion into taking over australia.

Maybe one of us doesn't entirely understand the geopolitical positions present.

(But somehow I don't think that person is me.)

China is building 3 or 4 aircraft carriers right now. Have you ever wondered why they're being built?
 
Upvote 0

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Maybe you missed past history when the USA was tasked with building a missile shield around russia to contain it. Maybe you missed past history when russia threatened to invade either switzerland or sweden.

I sure did! Please provide evidence of Russia doing this (as opposed to the now non existent USSR). And then explain how that is relevant to Australia.

Maybe you missed china's announcement when they redrew maps which made hawaii and the entire pacific their future territory.

Sure did. Missed the part where that is relevant to Australia as well.

Maybe you missed china's attempts to wage a passive war on taiwan, japan and hong kong. In order to push their expansionist future plans. Which would likely include an expansion into taking over australia.

Missed that too. Evidence would be nice at this point, perhaps start with the definition of a "passive war", and then move on the Japan and likely take over of Australia bit.

Maybe one of us doesn't entirely understand the geopolitical positions present.
Well that's definitely true.

But somehow I don't think that person is me.

You think incorrectly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sparagmos
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟377,931.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
So our Prime Minster, Scotty from Marketing, has added another blunder to his bag-o-blunders by scrapping an existing 90 billion dollar diesel based submarine fleet upgrade (on which several billion has already been spent and who knows how many billions more will be paid for the contract break) to maybe in 10-20 years get us some nuclear powered (but not armed) submarines which we will be unable to service (since we have no nuclear industry), man (since we have no sailors with nuclear sub experience) and which will be less agile and more unwieldy in our coastal waters....but hey, we can wander off an spook China, so hurray.
Well, you have two allies with 60 to 70-ish years of experience with these that you would likely be able to train with in some capacity (though likely limited). And the US Navy built its first nuclear sub before there was a nuclear power plant attached to our power grid.

Enjoy the subs, I think your navy will like them once they are built to meet your countries defense needs. Just don't embarrass yourselves like Russia did.
 
Upvote 0

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Enjoy the subs, I think your navy will like them once they are built to meet your countries defense needs. Just don't embarrass yourselves like Russia did.

I'm 56, not sure I'll even be alive by the time they are built. The only way to meet our defense needs is to make them small diesel subs.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
38,978
9,399
✟377,931.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I'm 56, not sure I'll even be alive by the time they are built. The only way to meet our defense needs is to make them small diesel subs.
Reactors can be made much smaller and cleaner now. And, they're better when it comes to climate change.
 
Upvote 0
Sep 8, 2012
385
211
✟14,978.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Australia will never receive these subs.

For the same reasons the eurofighter typhoon was a disaster.

US healthcare will never be fixed.

And california will never see a completion to their high speed rail project.

Someone bump this post years from now, when this is confirmed, so people can know its not hard to anticipate or predict future outcomes for those who pay attention and bother to learn the basic facts on things.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Petros2015

Well-Known Member
Jun 23, 2016
5,088
4,321
52
undisclosed Bunker
✟287,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
  • Haha
Reactions: Occams Barber
Upvote 0

wing2000

E pluribus unum
Supporter
Aug 18, 2012
20,763
17,062
✟1,388,805.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So our Prime Minster, Scotty from Marketing, has added another blunder to his bag-o-blunders by scrapping an existing 90 billion dollar diesel based submarine fleet upgrade (on which several billion has already been spent and who knows how many billions more will be paid for the contract break) to maybe in 10-20 years get us some nuclear powered (but not armed) submarines which we will be unable to service (since we have no nuclear industry), man (since we have no sailors with nuclear sub experience) and which will be less agile and more unwieldy in our coastal waters....but hey, we can wander off an spook China, so hurray.

Morrison has gone nuclear — and there's no turning back

That's quite a long read, but the best (prophetic given when it was made) summary can be found here

"We're spending 30 Billion dollars a year to protect our trade with China.....from China"

[Maybe Amazon should pitch in]
 
Upvote 0

Sparagmos

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
8,632
7,319
52
Portland, Oregon
✟278,062.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Isn't australia one of many foreign nations that drastically cut its military and defense spending.

Assuming the united states would always be there to protect them from russia and china.

This response is too little, too late.
I don’t think that Australia is a foreign nation to the OP.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gene2memE

Newbie
Oct 22, 2013
4,094
6,289
✟272,305.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
In some ways a stupid decision, and in some ways a smart one.

In the short term, rather dumb. It creates capacity gap of 10 to 15 years, potentially even more. The existing Collins class subs are outdated and weren't particularly good when new (a friend of mine was part of the engineering team in Adelaide, and he has a thing or two to tell about them). So keeping them in service beyond 2035 and potentially beyond 2045 is more than a little silly

In the long term, reasonably smart. It adds a new capacity to the RAN and (depending on the purchase) provides a sizable improvement over the planned conventional submarine. However, Australia was already going with a conventional version of a nuclear powered sub - Thales et al have got to be cheesed off that they didn't decide to just move ahead with the nuclear version.

Likelihood is that Australia will select the UK's Astute class. The other possibility is the updated Virginia class, but it's probably too much sub at better than 10,000 tons.

If we're sensible, we'll probably run with a copy of India's 'outsource-insource' defence procurement strategy: have the first couple made to requirements in the country of design, then move production locally once a lot of the hard lessons have been learned.

I suspect that once delays are announced - it's a big defense contract, there's always delays - Australia will probably end up leasing some second hand diesel-electrics from somewhere in the interim.

So, new submarine by 2040-2045, here we come.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: wing2000
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,202
5,877
✟296,775.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Take THAT Jewish Space Laser!

Both of them got huge help from USA in developing those weapons. But OZ's particle beam packs a much bigger punch, it can destroy much larger objects and the beam also packs a lethal dose of radiation and powerful EMP that can fry electrical systems. It's like getting hit by a mini nuke.

The only drawback of OZ "Death ray" is the beam produced is much slower than the speed of light and it's much more complicated to aim...

Same reason it's probably difficult to use it to destroy land or sea targets. It's ground based (too big to be put on a plane) and the beam cannot be reflected by mirrors.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,081
8,268
Frankston
Visit site
✟727,030.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
So our Prime Minster, Scotty from Marketing, has added another blunder to his bag-o-blunders by scrapping an existing 90 billion dollar diesel based submarine fleet upgrade (on which several billion has already been spent and who knows how many billions more will be paid for the contract break) to maybe in 10-20 years get us some nuclear powered (but not armed) submarines which we will be unable to service (since we have no nuclear industry), man (since we have no sailors with nuclear sub experience) and which will be less agile and more unwieldy in our coastal waters....but hey, we can wander off an spook China, so hurray.

Morrison has gone nuclear — and there's no turning back

That's quite a long read, but the best (prophetic given when it was made) summary can be found here
Australia's defence procurement is as much a disaster as everyone else's. Having spent 8-1/2 years in the RAN, I have a certain amount of experience. I don't see a problem with nuclear subs. The ranks of submariners with conventional experience are pretty thin. It may attract people to the submarine service. Conventional subs are nowhere near as comfortable as nuclear.

The biggest problem that I see is the continual waste of money. Defence is notorious for buying high value items that just don't work. Helicopters, for example. JSF may be another. There is not enough data to be sure.

I'm also concerned about recruitment. I'm not convinced that a bunch of woke, progressive snowflakes will make good servicemen and women. And whatever else the military is forced to employ. Unfortunately, Australia is headed in that direction. Thank God for God. He's bigger than all this.
 
Upvote 0

Tanj

Redefined comfortable middle class
Mar 31, 2017
7,682
8,316
59
Australia
✟277,286.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm also concerned about recruitment. I'm not convinced that a bunch of woke, progressive snowflakes will make good servicemen and women. And whatever else the military is forced to employ. Unfortunately, Australia is headed in that direction. Thank God for God. He's bigger than all this.

And yet you constantly succeed in making him appear small and petty.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pommer
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

MyOwnSockPuppet

Regeneration of myself after computer failure
Feb 22, 2013
656
315
Oxford, UK
✟180,229.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I'm 56, not sure I'll even be alive by the time they are built. The only way to meet our defense needs is to make them small diesel subs.

I thought the easiest and cheapest way to meet Australia's defense needs was the rich and glorious variety of venomous and poisonous reptiles, arthropods, gastropods, jellyfish, molluscs, insects, fish, plants and mammals.
If that doesn't deter a potential invader then the sharks and crocodiles and general uninhabitability of huge tracts of the interior might work.

If all else fails threaten to feed them to the drop bears...
Dropbear.jpg
 
Upvote 0