AUKUS News, Views, Analysis.

Strangelove

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

‘Cold feet’: Big problems emerge in controversial US-Australia submarine deal​

The US seems to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons, with a new report revealing eight critical, unanswered questions.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


May 29, 2023 - 9:11AM


US Congress appears to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons.

Meanwhile, it’s pressing ahead with plans to redesign its nuclear submarines to suit America’s specific needs – not Australia’s.
The Congressional Research Service report,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, pulls no punches about the core project behind former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s 2021 defence collaboration announcement.

United States Navy Virginia Class submarine USS Mississippi arrives at Fleet Base West in WA for a routine port visit.

United States Navy Virginia Class submarine USS Mississippi arrives at Fleet Base West in WA for a routine port visit.

The document, issued late last week, specifies eight critical unanswered questions of concern.

• When will the deal be authorised?
• Will it approve the sale of two, or “some other number” of US submarines?
• When will these submarines be removed from the US Navy?
• Will they be old submarines? Newly-built submarines? Or a mix of both?
• How much will Australia pay? And how much will it subsidise the upgrade of US shipyards?
• Can the US meet its own submarine needs as well as those of Australia?
• Will the project make any difference in deterring China?
• What are the risks versus the benefits of giving Australia such immensely secret nuclear and submarine technology?
“Selling three to five Virginia-class boats to Australia would reduce the size of the US Navy’s SSN force by three to five boats,” the report states.


Seller’s remorse?

The report says sceptics of the deal believe “it could weaken deterrence of potential Chinese aggression if China were to find reason to believe, correctly or not, that Australia might use the transferred Virginia-class boats less effectively than the US Navy would”.
That’s not just a matter of the skills and training of Australian submariners.

It’s also an admission of concern that this may effectively mean the US had lost two to five submarines if Canberra doesn’t automatically participate in US conflicts.

“Australia might not involve its military, including its Virginia-class boats, in US-China crises or conflicts that Australia viewed as not engaging important Australian interests,” the report warns.

Defence Minister Richard Marles said as much in March when he revealed Australia had “absolutely not” promised to do Washington’s bidding when it came to Taiwan.

And that would diminish US Naval fleet numbers even further, unless the Australian submarines were replaced.

“Sceptics of the SSN AUKUS pathway might argue that it would be more cost-effective for US SSNs to perform both US and Australian SSN missions while Australia invests in other types of military forces, so as to create a capacity for performing other military missions for both Australia and the United States.”

But behind the debate is a simple equation of supply and demand.
“In a nutshell, the challenge for the industrial base – both shipyards and supplier firms – is to ramp up production from one ‘regular’ Virginia-class boat’s work per year … to the equivalent of about five ‘regular’ Virginia-class boats’ work per year.”

It adds that no such additional purchase orders have yet been made and that doubts surround the ability of US naval yards to meet the extra demand. The US has only two shipyards capable of building nuclear-powered submarines.

The report warns that – even under pre-AUKUS plans – the US Navy’s desire to sustain a minimum of 66 nuclear attack submarines is likely to be unachievable.

The current number of 49 is expected to fall to 46 by 2028, with existing building programs only lifting this number to 60 by 2052.

Buyer beware?

The first USS Virginia-class submarine entered service in 2004. Since then, another 37 have been built or ordered. And an unknown number of those completed before 2017 incorporate low-grade steel supplied under a quality-control corruption scandal.

But the US Navy has since shifted production towards a bigger version of the submarine. A 25m-long hull section will be added to carry four large vertical launch tubes. This allows the design to carry extra Tomahawk cruise missiles or drones.

The Congressional report puts the cost of these at $US4.3 billion ($6.5 billion) each.
And the US Navy has this year requested another modified version of the submarine.

Designated the “Modified VIRGINIA Class Subsea and Seabed Warfare (Mod VA SSW) configuration”, this design is no longer optimised for the attack submarine role.

Instead, it will be equipped to conduct seabed sabotage operations against infrastructure such as undersea internet cables.
This version will cost about $US5.4 billion ($8.1 billion).

Australia may offset some of the cost of buying US submarines and upgrading US submarine facilities by providing a new base for US and UK operations.

London and Washington hope to begin basing nuclear attack submarines at HMAS Stirling, near Perth, in 2027.

This “Submarine Rotational Forces – West” facility will play host to year-long visits from both nations to provide training for ADF personnel and a support base for operations in the Indian Ocean, Andaman Sea and South China Sea.

“This rotational force will help build Australia’s stewardship,” a senior Biden administration official said earlier this month.
“It will also bolster deterrence with more US and UK submarines forward in the Indo-Pacific.”

High stakes game

The Beijing-controlled South China Morning Post news service has released previously secret details of a submarine incident in January 2021. [Comment: no the SCMP isn't controlled by Beijing]

Quoting a Chinese military research paper, it says three US surveillance planes had engaged in a “hunt” for People’s Liberation Army submarines.

One of the aircraft, it claims, was met with a “significant” military response when it closed to within 150km of Hong Kong.

The public dossier made available following the AUKUS nuclear submarine agreement between Australian, the US and UK. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Nicholas Eagar

The public dossier made available following the AUKUS nuclear submarine agreement between Australian, the US and UK. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Nicholas Eagar

“The PLA, which was conducting a naval exercise in the area, responded swiftly by sending out a counter force, the size and nature of which remains classified,” the Post states.

“The two forces were so close that the US military ‘self-destroyed’ its floating sonars to prevent the sensitive devices from falling into China’s hands.”

US Indo-Pacific Command told
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that one of its P-8A Poseidon patrol aircraft had been intercepted in the South China Sea. It denied it had breached any international boundaries.

“The US P-8A that flew on 5 Jan 2021 was intercepted twice in international airspace between Woody Island and Hainan Island roughly 500km from Hong Kong,” a statement reads.

“US and allied aircraft routinely fly in international airspace to maintain situational awareness and reinforce international norms.”
Hainan Island houses one of China’s main naval bases. This includes piers and dry-docks suited to its new aircraft carriers. And tunnels have been dug into the side of a rocky peninsula to house submarines.

NED-4579-NUCLEAR-V-CONVENTIONAL-SUBS_TJaAFcn9N.svg


Military analysts regard China’s submarine technology as being “decades” behind that of the US and Russia.
But Moscow’s precarious international position after its invasion of Ukraine has raised fears it may be willing to swap the technology with Beijing for material support.

And China’s newest diesel-electric “Yuan” class submarines reportedly demonstrate new levels of quietness, carry advanced sonars and “might be actually pretty good at anti-submarine warfare,” says Hudson Institute Center for Defence Concepts and Technology senior fellow Bryan Clark.
 

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

‘Cold feet’: Big problems emerge in controversial US-Australia submarine deal​

The US seems to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons, with a new report revealing eight critical, unanswered questions.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


May 29, 2023 - 9:11AM


US Congress appears to be getting cold feet over giving Australia one of its most secret weapons.



The document, issued late last week, specifies eight critical unanswered questions of concern.

• When will the deal be authorised?
• Will it approve the sale of two, or “some other number” of US submarines?
• When will these submarines be removed from the US Navy?
• Will they be old submarines? Newly-built submarines? Or a mix of both?
• How much will Australia pay? And how much will it subsidise the upgrade of US shipyards?
• Can the US meet its own submarine needs as well as those of Australia?
• Will the project make any difference in deterring China?
• What are the risks versus the benefits of giving Australia such immensely secret nuclear and submarine technology?
“Selling three to five Virginia-class boats to Australia would reduce the size of the US Navy’s SSN force by three to five boats,” the report states.


Seller’s remorse?

The report says sceptics of the deal believe “it could weaken deterrence of potential Chinese aggression if China were to find reason to believe, correctly or not, that Australia might use the transferred Virginia-class boats less effectively than the US Navy would”.
That’s not just a matter of the skills and training of Australian submariners.
All of that after Australia paid nearly one billion penalty ditching their France subarines deal? Would be hilarious if the US decide to say no after considerations...

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

sndef888

Senior Member
Registered Member
1 new, 2 used VA for RAN:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

8-sub fleet by 2050s!
So Australia is going to spend hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to help US upgrade their submarine production capability, meanwhile the US is going to dump their used submarines to Australia

Such a shit deal is truly one that can only be accepted by a non-sovereign country. Australia is not a sovereign country.
 

ACuriousPLAFan

Brigadier
Registered Member
AUKUS facing more headwinds.


@para80 made good points here. The PLAN better take note and strive to avoid the same mistakes as the USN.

... or maybe the USN should just decommission more of the earlier Los Angeles SSNs to reduce the backlogs and allow General Dynamics & Huntington Ingalls to reach 2-Virginias-per-year target quicker?
 
Last edited:

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
From what I understand the maintenance is done at separate places from the shipyards which build submarines in the US.
But yeah they showed that the maintenance facilities are not up to the task. The US needs to invest both in maintenance facilities and shipyards if they want to maintain their current number of attack submarines in the future.
 

luminary

Senior Member
Registered Member
Practice for an amphibious invasion of China.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Defence News, an industry publication, gave a chilling indication of what is being simulated. The core mission of Talisman Sabre will be “a joint logistics over-the-shore exercise where the [American] Army will take 17 M1 Abrams tanks off of its Army Prepositioned Stock Afloat ship and onto watercraft as well as 400 pieces of rolling stock, which has never been exercised at this size in the theater.”
Then the “watercraft will land on an undeveloped beach” and the Abrams, one of the premier land forces of the US army, will “roll off,” prepared to fight an enemy. According to other sources, this will be an integrated “land, air and sea incursion.”

In any language, this is plainly an invasion.
Germany is showing up for the games too.
 
Top