AUKUS News, Views, Analysis.

E100 said:

They should outsource the work to China.

Click to expand...

Australia doesn’t have a robust pipeline of candidates ready to study Pillar 2 technologies. It probably can’t even supply enough

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to support Pillar 1. So where will Australia find these students? Most likely from

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

Click to expand...

RobertC said:

ASPI agrees

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

... So, if the strategic guarantee offered by an AUKUS fleet is greater than the sum of the parts of the participant nations, would the partners be better served by a fleet of SSNs flying AUKUS flags?
...
The nationality of the submarine command shouldn’t be fixed to specific submarines.
...
Flexibility will be key and AUKUS partners will need to find ways to expand the partnership from a crewing perspective. Specifically, pathways for like-minded [English-speaking] nations (Canada, New Zealand and others) to join the partnership must be envisaged.

Click to expand...

RobertC said:

You can't get there from here

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Australia can barely man its Collins-class. So for AUKUS manning the goal post would be moved from AU sovereign nuclear submarines to shared sovereignty



This proposal is another folly of a nation that can't afford, build or deploy its maritime fantasies.

Click to expand...

So, not only does the U.S. have to invest between 31 and 40 per cent more per annum into its programs, it needs to lift production capacity to over 3.5 times the current rate of 1.4 boats a year. That’s without counting the even greater industrial capacity required on top of this to meet the AUKUS demand of producing 3-5 extra Virginia subs for Australia (backfilling ones provided out of the existing U.S. Navy fleet and building new ones sold to Australia before SSN AUKUS (Snorkus) arrives.

The numbers understate the difficulty of doing this. It’s not just running a production line faster or replicating the existing production line with a new one. Nuclear submarine building relies on highly skilled shipyard workers that are hard to recruit and retain, and the builders depend on 100s – 1000s – of small suppliers for all the components and subsystems that go into each boat. Expanding the capacity or variety of this supply chain is harder than growing the skilled submarine construction workforce. So, the CBO and CRS reports, in their measured, quiet but authoritative way raise real doubts about the U.S. capacity to do what it needs to do – for itself – and on top of this deliver for AUKUS.

Click to expand...

The

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

is from the U.K.’s National Audit Office – the equivalent of Australia’s ANAO, which brought us

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on Defence’s Hunter frigate program.

It has assessed the U.K. Ministry of Defence’s 10-year Equipment Plan2023-2033 and found that it is unaffordable, with costs for key programs growing rapidly because of inflation and a better understanding by the U.K. defence ministry of the actual costs involved.

Click to expand...

[The US and UK reports] also show that both the U.S. and U.K. face cost spirals in their submarine programs, with forecast costs rising owing to inflation and supply chain troubles that are making everything more expensive. Those costs have not stabilised. This experience means that Australia’s stated cost of $268-368 billion for the eight AUKUS submarines now must be considered to be understated—or at the very least fall at the upper end of that band–as it will be affected by the rising costs faced by the U.K. and U.S.

Click to expand...

Asking for plans or mentioning real world challenges is received here as bordering on un-Australian.

Public understanding and support is critical to the sustainability and delivery of AUKUS. That begins with openness about the eyewatering challenges faced by each nation in the partnership – and credible plans that match the scale of the challenges, starting now.

Click to expand...

RobertC said:

Australia’s stated cost of $268-368 billion for the eight AUKUS submarines now must be considered to be understated—or at the very least fall at the upper end of that band–as it will be affected by the rising costs faced by the U.K. and U.S.

Click to expand...

sndef888 said:

In case anyone needed proof that Australia is a colony of the US.

Imagine being an Australian taxpayer and being forced to spend 300 billion dollars on 8 submarines to fight an imaginary enemy thousands of kms away lol. There is no clearer example of exploitation and transfer of wealth. Modern day colonialism.

Click to expand...

The US Congress has passed legislation allowing the country to sell Virginia class submarines to Australia under the Aukus security pact.

However, the transfer would still require certification from the president of the day. Under the plans, two of the submarines to be transferred to Australia would be secondhand while one would be new and come off the production line.

The NDAA – which must next go to the president, Joe Biden, to sign into law – also allows the maintenance of US submarines by Australians in Australia. It creates the ability for Australian contractors to train in US shipyards.

The legislation contains other measures to free up the sharing of advanced defence technology among the US, Australia and the UK. This includes exempting Australia and the UK from US defence export control licensing.

Both countries will also be added to Title III of the US Defense Production Act, giving their firms access to incentives to produce and supply critical materials and goods.

The legislation passed the Senate with a strong 87-13 vote. In the Republican-controlled House, the result was 310 in favour and 118 opposed.

Click to expand...

The United States has asked Australia to send a warship to the Red Sea amid ongoing attacks on commercial shipping from Iran-backed militia.

The request, made recently, came from the US navy which wants the vessel to join an international taskforce, of which Australia is one of 39 member nations. The US-led CMF aims to combat smuggling, piracy and narcotics in international waters around the Middle East.

“When we get these kinds of requests from time to time, the usual practice would be for the defence minister to consider that, to recommend to colleagues whether [and] how we respond to that request,” he told the ABC on Thursday.

“As I understand it, there has been a request made and we’ll consider it in the usual way.”

Click to expand...