Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and expectations

Hello, and welcome to the forums at the Nautilus Drydocks, formerly Sub-driver.com!

We welcome anyone with a passion for submarines and a desire to learn and share knowledge about this fascinating hobby. Use of these forums indicates your intention to abide by our code of conduct:


1. No spam. All automated messages, advertisements, and links to competitor websites will be deleted immediately.

2. Please post in relevant sub-forums only. Messages posted in the wrong topic area will be removed and placed in the correct sub-forum by moderators.

3. Respect other users. No flaming or abusing fellow forum members. Users who continue to post inflammatory, abusive comments will be deleted from the forum after or without a warning.

4. No threats or harassment of other users will be tolerated. Any instance of threatening or harassing behavior is grounds for deletion from the forums.

5. No profanity or pornography is allowed. Posts containing adult material will be deleted.

6. No re-posting of copyrighted materials or other illegal content is allowed. Any posts containing illegal content or copyrighted materials will be deleted.
See more
See less

Australia is going to buying 9 Virginia Class block 5 SSNs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Halcyon66
    replied
    https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/mark...edgdhp&pc=U531

    As said previously, who really benefits from the issues the Australian Govt makes up?

    Regards,

    Gregory

    Leave a comment:


  • Halcyon66
    replied
    https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/austr...?ocid=msedgntp

    The US will not want anything to do with Australia after the ongoing PM actions over this issue.

    The current Govt seems to enjoy making issues with other countries and then trying to blame it on them.

    Regards,

    Gregory

    Leave a comment:


  • Slats
    replied
    another vantage point - build them all overseas
    https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/au...lt-in-america/

    Leave a comment:


  • Halcyon66
    replied
    There is a higher chance for me to win a beauty contest than Australia getting nuclear subs.

    If China is such a threat then why don’t we stop all trade with them?

    Over 800 million tonnes of iron ore a year are heading north or ~500 million tonnes of finished steel. In other words an amount that would be equivalent to approximately 5,000 Nimitz class aircraft carriers.

    Also with numerous other metalogical products and even lithium, seems rather inept to supply your so called enemy? And even complain when they don’t buy from you?????

    Again all this blustering and who is actually getting the direct gain that comes from it? Have a look for yourself, don’t take my work for it and see which country benefits from increased trade with China (USA) when Australia’s trade is reduced?

    https://www.spglobal.com/marketintel...spute-66154595

    https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blog...oth-countries/

    From a business point of view they are helping their own manufacturers and so I have little concern and cudo’s for the USA doing that. If China is a common threat then why is the US increasing their trade while this so called solidarity with Australia is a ongoing narrative. So how will nuclear Subs affect the Aust/China relationship.

    This has never been about subs or threats or anything, countries are turning inwards and focusing on their economics. The USA is putting themselves first as they should, we should do the same yet we don’t have the management skills. We dropped the French in a heart beat and yet still have not learnt anything from it.

    Money makes the world go around.

    Regards,

    Gregory
    Last edited by Halcyon66; 10-18-2021, 12:46 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slats
    replied
    Not a leaky boat at all. Just local medias assessment to what will probably happen next. Local yards in Adelaide here are quiet rightly to ask official sources what is likely to be built here and when. Rome wasn't built in a day and billions planned to be spent its only natural for industry and the state govt to ask what when and how. Thats not espionage thats basic common sense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Halcyon66
    replied
    Are we living in the same country?

    “China's posturing, constant retaliatory actions against our freedom and trade”, last I looked our freedoms were taken by our govt, and citizens from other country that were permanent residents were banned from leaving? 200 odd yrs ago we were a penial colony, and for the last 2 we have been again.

    In the real world when you have a trading partner, the relationship is based on mutual satisfaction and co-operation. We have just dropped the French and how is our EU trade deal going? We have attacked the Chinese on multiple occasions for nothing more than political gains and then run off to the WTO and complained they have stopped buying our goods? And yet somehow they are taking our freedom and trade?

    Energy Australia, which has 1.7 million customers, is owned by the China Light and Power Company after being sold off by the NSW government for $1.4 billion in 2011. And Alinta Energy, which has 1.1 million customers, was sold by its private owners to Chow Tai Fook Enterprises for $4billion in 2017. They were not forced takeovers they were approved foreign transactions.

    The Port of Darwin was leased to the Chinese in 2015 and supposedly no one in the federal govt at the time knew? Even now no one actually knows exactly what transpired. Yet none of these occurred by military threats? The US operates in that area so now the Govt is taking about cancelling the lease. Obviously China will again drop more trade, go figure?

    The new narrative and therefore belief is that Australia faces a perpetual military threat. How do you perpetuate that, by making more and more military treaties. ANZUS was penned when Turman was in power, it is a treaty and in Article IV it states, in which each party "declares that it would act to meet the common danger". This is not a security guarantee and the US has never said it was.

    NZ was removed from the treaty when it refused US nuclear powered vessels in 1986? So not sure how well it would hold up in crunch time.

    And now we have AUKUS, The UK was out of EU so Johnson, Biden and Morrison met at the June 2021 G7 summit. Our partner France was not invited due to the UK not entering into a formal foreign policy and security treaty in the post-Brexit deal with the EU.

    So the twisted web we weave, we seem to make disastrous decisions based on the wind direction and then complain about it later.

    Australia has since the 60’s had a disastrous relationship with military procurement, F-111’s through to the F-35’s and Collins subs and Frigate and everything in between. Why is that?

    I have no political alliance I have always believed in elected Politian’s on either side doing their best, which is obviously an oxymoron. Yet in the last 8 years Australia has had a revolving door of defense ministers, 6 and counting or an average of 1 years and 4 months.

    https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/previous-ministers

    One minister for example, Minister for Ageing (2001-2003), Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service (2003-2007), Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2007), Minister for Social Services (2013-2014) and Minister for Defence (2014-2015), seriously?

    Let’s not forget Prof Donald Winter was on Australia’s Naval Shipbuilding Advisory Board in 2016, he served as US navy secretary from 2006 to 2009. He was advising the Govt to drop the French deal? Now he is on $6,000 per day as an direct advisor to the Govt. So much one could say on that. The Biden administration sought assurances from Australia that cancelling the French contract was not dependent on the US providing them with assistance and that cancelling was a fait accompli, so they have zero really in this anyway.

    Finally “In this regard, the word here on the ground in Adelaide is that it's very likely the first 2 boats will be 100% overseas built, with the rest of the class, save the reactor compartments, built here”, either this has been leaked deliberately to an aid in framing the debacle or are those in the loop in Adelaide be leaking what most would assume would be highly classified information if it was true?

    There is an actual thread above in regards to espionage and yet you’re telling us it seems Australia is a leaky boat?

    Regards,

    Gregory
    Last edited by Halcyon66; 10-15-2021, 09:51 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slats
    replied
    Ok so why is the RAN more likely to go with the Virgina class and not the Astute?

    There is a growing need for Australia to rapidly expand its strategic defence capability against China's posturing, constant retaliatory actions against our freedom and trade. In this regard, the word here on the ground in Adelaide is that it's very likely the first 2 boats will be 100% overseas built, with the rest of the class, save the reactor compartments, built here. It's the only way to compress time frames and credibly boost Australia's self-sufficiency to enable it to do its fair share with our US partners in the pacific and south china sea. In addition to what I mentioned previously, a considerable reason why the French boat was dumped is that things have rapidly changed in the Asia Pacific theatre. Australia needs to credibly respond to this deterioration. We have stood shoulder to shoulder with the US in every conflict since WW1, yet we don't take that partnership for granted - we need to better contribute to that partnership and that means, hardware, personnel, and our taxpayers appropriately investing in our freedom, which is never free.

    The need for a shorter delivery time frame which logically involves the first 2 boats not being built in Australia pretty much knocks an export version of the Astute off the list. The Astute production line actually needs to wind down to make way for the new UK SSBNs production. Furthermore, the RAN is seeking greater capability of conventional strike tomahawks and the block V Virginia's would be more suitable to carry more of these than the Astute.

    There is the capability for US build schedule to fit in 2 export versions, -however, it would compromise current local US delivery, but it would boost and strengthen strategically alliance in the South China Sea, where the US would have a more capable ally on the beat. While the two export versions are being built, the Australian shipyards here in Adelaide would work in partnership with the US yards to create a fit for purpose production line for the remaining boats.
    Last edited by Slats; 10-15-2021, 12:40 AM. Reason: spellin

    Leave a comment:


  • SubHuman
    replied
    Great information and conversation here, everyone. I am actually very impressed that you've managed (with some exceptions) to keep things quasi factual and related to the thread. This could easily have turned into a politically-flavored, country-bashing free-for-all. I'm glad that we have a group of grown ups playing in this sandbox.

    There was a concern raised by one of our international RC sub brothers that there was some derogatory language toward his native country, but if there is, I can't see it (at least not enough to warrant policing this thread). I'll follow up with a reminder that this is an international forum and there will be opinions from all sorts of people. A degree of thick-skinnedness is warranted when browsing.

    Thanks for that!


    Bob

    Leave a comment:


  • Halcyon66
    replied
    There is nothing on the radar that China has any interest in invading Australia, we are a huge landmass with 26 mil people on it and most of it is dirt. We sold the farm years ago to them, also our some utility companies, massive farms, islands and the like, major ports and the list goes on and on. We even sold a full on built and ready to go Airport to them in WA.

    We have sold them everything they wanted and now the current clowns what to try and take it all back because of the "threat" from china that no one can actually outline?

    The only threat they are to us is if they stop buying everything we dig up and all the never ending condo's that are being built that no one other than the Chinese want to buy.

    So we drop contracts with the French, now we will drop contracts with the Chinese, what a trustworthily trading partner.

    The Taiwan thingy has been going on forever even before the cultural revolution in 1939. Communist china is more of an oxymoron than anything, more billionaires being minted on a yearly basis than any other country in the world.


    Yet the funniest part of all this if anything ever happens is that in 30 to 40 yrs we will have a fleet of 2020 subs that we paid 200 bil for.

    Regards,

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Originally posted by Halcyon66 View Post
    The belief that anything military will be manned in 20 or 30 yrs is pointless, 10 yrs could even be possible. The next belief that submarines will even have a role in 15 yrs is also hard to fathom.

    The use of cruise and standoff weapons will only increase and be lower cost, SlowMo will not even make any comments on the cost of the hand me downs that will never appear anyway. 10 bil + on subs can be spent better elsewhere. He has 18 months breathing room and the chance to spend even more money that has does not have to account for. Australia has 35,000 km of shoreline, we could get invaded and no one would know for months. Thank god we are going to have a few subs that can save us.

    "Scotty from marketing" is doing exactly that, not polling well and not able to "pork barrel" his way out of it so let’s make the Chinese the enemy. Australia's growth since 2000 is off the back of one country, China, funny they are now enemy number one.

    Australia really does not produce anything anymore it is just a quarry, the national pastime now is flipping houses due to the flood of money from China in one way or another.


    America has run out of wars and the military complex has nothing to do now, let’s make Australia the new base of operations and start awarding the build contracts to all those US companies to come in a have a field day. I think the latest Darwin fuel depot contract went to a Florida company.

    Funny how no one ever talks about the fact that there is a huge naval base right in the middle of Sydney harbour, is there the possibility that we will be invaded by NZ? Seems the perceived threat is further north, that is even if there is an actual threat?

    Let’s not forget the F-35 disaster?

    America has turned into a turkey shoot and no way for anyone to bee able to outline what will happen there in the next 2 yrs let alone 30 yrs.


    Anyway this is a RC sub forum, that’s why I joined.

    Regards,
    Food for thought. Sobering evaluations. Once the Communist Chinese take Taiwan, they head South, ever more emboldened. Rotsa Ruck. I have not a clue what my government will do about it.

    David

    Leave a comment:


  • Halcyon66
    replied
    The belief that anything military will be manned in 20 or 30 yrs is pointless, 10 yrs could even be possible. The next belief that submarines will even have a role in 15 yrs is also hard to fathom.

    The use of cruise and standoff weapons will only increase and be lower cost, SlowMo will not even make any comments on the cost of the hand me downs that will never appear anyway. 10 bil + on subs can be spent better elsewhere. He has 18 months breathing room and the chance to spend even more money that has does not have to account for. Australia has 35,000 km of shoreline, we could get invaded and no one would know for months. Thank god we are going to have a few subs that can save us.

    "Scotty from marketing" is doing exactly that, not polling well and not able to "pork barrel" his way out of it so let’s make the Chinese the enemy. Australia's growth since 2000 is off the back of one country, China, funny they are now enemy number one.

    Australia really does not produce anything anymore it is just a quarry, the national pastime now is flipping houses due to the flood of money from China in one way or another.


    America has run out of wars and the military complex has nothing to do now, let’s make Australia the new base of operations and start awarding the build contracts to all those US companies to come in a have a field day. I think the latest Darwin fuel depot contract went to a Florida company.

    Funny how no one ever talks about the fact that there is a huge naval base right in the middle of Sydney harbour, is there the possibility that we will be invaded by NZ? Seems the perceived threat is further north, that is even if there is an actual threat?

    Let’s not forget the F-35 disaster?

    America has turned into a turkey shoot and no way for anyone to bee able to outline what will happen there in the next 2 yrs let alone 30 yrs.


    Anyway this is a RC sub forum, that’s why I joined.

    Regards,

    Leave a comment:


  • Slats
    replied
    For those in France who still feel this was completely unexpected - the culprit is the French govt and media, who thought this was not worthy of being taken seriously

    Media reports that France was "unaware of"

    from January 19, 2021 - (9 months prior to ripping up the contract)
    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ned-submarines
    Australia looking for alternatives
    "Prime Minister Scott Morrison is reportedly increasingly unhappy with the way the Attack class program has been run so far, with “cost blowouts and missed deadlines” leading to apparent tensions between the Australian Department of Defense and the Naval Group, according to the Australian Financial Review. The project is now valued at around $69 billion. Back in 2016, when the Naval Group was selected, the program cost was expected to be in the region of $40 billion. These concerns seem to have escalated as far as talks on the subject between Morrison and French President Emmanuel Macron. The French government holds a controlling stake in the Naval Group."

    from April 27, 2019 - (2 years and 5 months ago)
    Problems and culture clashes with DCN

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-...group/11049748

    There are many others in plain sight on the internet.

    Here is a synthesis of that information
    Australian documents showed French submarine project was at risk for years
    https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-p...rs-2021-09-21/

    Leave a comment:


  • trout
    replied
    In the U.S., we say “grow some balls”.

    Leave a comment:


  • Slats
    replied
    Originally posted by DrSchmidt View Post
    As I pointed out, it's not about being 20 month delayed. Last time I checked, the US and the UK are not meeting their original schedules when building boats on a quite regular basis. Same will happen with the Australian boats. So switching from an ongoing and delayed contract to a new one that will most def also be delayed won't speed anything up for Australia.
    The project is not 20 months delayed - Australia has been complaining about the contract openly in the press for at least 20 months with the press reporting key milestones - not to deliver subs (impossible in that time) - but to deliver reassurances and remedies to the problems. Australia has been completely open in the media and France that if we weren't satisfied we would start looking for an alternative.

    Originally posted by DrSchmidt View Post
    The critical issue here is the lack of transparency. If Australia was so unhappy, they should have stated that they will start looking for other options, or better cancel the contract and look for something new. That would have given France time to react, to step up or, to have a better position to accept being kicked out.

    What happened is that Australia started negotiating with US and UK while telling France that they stick to the contract. Only when the new agreement was reached, the news was broken to France. That's how you burn bridges.
    Again re-read the comment above - and also consider the biggest complaint Australia had with the French was lack of transparency.

    Originally posted by DrSchmidt View Post
    Consider this scenario: Your girlfriend is unhappy in your relationship and doesn't tell you. She does not end the relationship but starts to look for other options. Only when she found the new guy and is sure that it will work out, she tells you and kicks you out. What would you say: "Oh, she was unhappy, she is perfectly right to look for better options behind my back while not telling me?" I guess not. You'd feel deceived. You's say that shes not trustworthy. You would never want to talk to her again.

    That's what's happening here. Lack of transparency, feelings of betrayal.

    As I said: The US is not a trustworthy partner. The UK under Johnson are behaving like expected...

    Cheers Andreas
    Consider this - Your girlfriend is unhappy in your relationship and does tell you. You're arrogant SOB so you don't care. She does not end the relationship but starts to look for other options / perhaps safer options as you don't take her seriously. When she has the courage to move on you go to the pub and bemoan about it to your EU mates.

    Australian's aren't peons whose taxes are to be sacrificed to French workers. French hubris killed the deal.
    Time as we say here in Australia for France "to harden up".
    Last edited by Slats; 09-23-2021, 10:22 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • He Who Shall Not Be Named
    replied
    Wish I could argue with you, sir. Yes, indeed, my country is now untrustworthy. We'll even abandon our own in a God forsaken sand-box.

    TERM LIMITS. NOW!

    David

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X