British nuclear submarine visits Australia

Astute size is too big, far to much internal space especially back aft, and the shape isn’t the best design for a SSK.
SSKs all have large battery compartments, often more than one, modern designs incorporate some form of AIP too, which lets the SM stay submerged for far longer then it otherwise could.
The Japanese have now moved away from AIP systems, and have gone over to Lithium batteries with all that entails, they seem to believe it’s the way ahead for SSK propulsion.

Don’t forget the spuds!!

Those were the days prior too health and safety bacon wrapped in tin foil

What the eye doesn’t see………

If you had the Middle , could always garrantee a pot mess of the stoker’s

KLONKIE OK was rather harsh , I know that being led by Ms Ardern and her dislike for Nuclear, in any form have a great idea that might go some way too non reliance on Aus Solar powered Hunter killers Subs OK just joking , if Aus supply’s the Subs NZ could supply the Surveillance over the both countries sea ways that should go someway too appeasing Ms Aredern

No probs Tommo- pretty funny!. I agree with you & I’m no friend of Tax- inda Ardern!

but well looked after and valued by the RAN.

Thanks for the reply Deep. If no more Astutes I do wonder if the any Trafalagars can have an extended life and even if the Vanguards can be repurposed for a time? Just to keep our sub numbers up.

Hi Quentin,

The problem is the hull life. Remember the Indonesian submarine that sank. When they found it it had broken into three sections. Although we may never know what caused the disaster the age of the boat was probably a factor suggesting a catastrophic hull failure.

Similar suggestions also surround the loss of the Argentine submarine a couple of years ago. Running subs past their sell by date is a danagerous business, especially when you consider that the Indonesian boat had recently been thoroughly refitted and upgraded, I think by South Korea.

If you do run a boat past it’s sell by date and you are being sensible you place a reduced dive depth limitation on it – which makes you more vulnerable to any adversary.

I’m guessing, but I recon our T-boats either have a dive limitation on them or are inspected and maintained with increasing frequency or both…

Cheers CR

Hi Quentin, in short the answer is no, it’s not a good idea to keep them past their OSD.
Apart from a safety factor, the systems are just worn out and suffer from a greater frequency of failures. This in turn becomes increasingly expensive to rectify and maintain.
Vanguard is currently undergoing a refit to keep her going past her OSD to allow for the Dreadnoughts to come on line. The refit was scheduled to last 3 1/2 years, she is now some 2 years late, such are the issues with these systems.
The cost is North of £250 mill, and climbing, impacting further on the MOD budget.
No easy or cheap answers to these questions, other then to have enough assets in the first place I’m afraid.

Thanks for your reply too. I do hope the UK gets something from this three way partnership with the US and Australia. How good was it for an actual live and operational Astute to visit Perth Naval Base at Stirling. That’s got to count for something.
I’d like to see the UK SSN sub count up to 8 just for some added undersea security to the fleet and that they can be forward deployed anywhere.

Hi Spyinthesky,

I was not aware of that report, interesting.

Thanks CR

New to this, so tried answering from my email in box. It doesn’t appear to work.
We went through Fassers once Andy but that was because we were mere colonials (an HMAS/m Oberon). I still know a few over FBW (Stirling, fleet base West). Talk is there that Astute class and/or Virginia SSN’s are shortly going to be permanently home-based at FBW. So SSN crew will have somewhere “bronzy” to go on a permanent basis. There is substantial submarine refit and dockyard capability over there to dry lift boats for maintenance and repair. Plus FBW has no public access to the island itself and really beefed-up security which SSN’S require. I wouldn’t quite be breaking out the sun block cream if I was on an Astute SSN now but I certainly would be looking at planning to buy some shortly for myself and the family.
Robbo.

Cheers for the info Robbo, that would be a cracking draft. 😃

Sorry don’t understand your comments, it’s not up to electric boat who does or does not get boats. The program literally just came together in the last few months so no one has had any time or previous inclination to plan who does or does not get boats. As you will be aware, the USN has been pushing the yards for years to get every boat they can. I can’t imagine the USN suddenly turning around and reversing that for some exports to Australia. The US ship building base is not exactly big on the idea of exports. As for 2076 being inferior do you have anything to back that up? I’m not say that it’s not but I have never seen any account anywhere that suggests it. The US is using 2087 as well which may support the idea that British sonars are very advanced and ahead of the US baring in mind the US rarely selects foreign tech without very good reason.

Got to agree with@Martin ref your comments on V Blk4 boats? Think the USN might well have something to say about them all being paid for and going to Aus!!!!
USN is in process of replacing it’s older LA class SSNs, so won’t be sending any to Aus just yet.
Not sure what your basing your comments about sensor capabilities on, as no navy will reveal how good or bad they actually are, but safe to assume they will all be somewhat capable otherwise they wouldn’t have them.

I have no idea what he’s basing his opinion on. As is there is a great deal of concern that the current plan of 2 Virginia’s a year will not be fast enough to replace the scheduled decommissioning of older subs. To suggest that the USN would then be ok with forgoing all the remaining blk IV Virginia’s, I just can’t see that happening.

No, neither can I. I believe that the US still needs to build another 45ish Virginia class SMs in whatever block form to compensate for the decommissioning of the LA class, even at 2 per year that will 2042ish before they are completed.
The Aussies will want something in the water long before then I would imagine!

Many are ex-submariners Sean. Electric Boat won’t get this SSN contract as the RAN had 100% of its submariners trained by the RN from the early 60’s up into the 90’s with the Scottish built Oberons. I was one of them. Some only did basic training (part 1 and 2) while others served for years on RN conventional submarines both upper and lower deck sailors as fully RN qualified submariners. The RAN will also choose a “mature” design so says the current Defence Minister Peter Dutton and not a mish-mash of SSN designs and that favours the present Astute boats or the Astute replacement SSN. This is so because the Astute class is more suited and designed as a true hunter-killer which is what Australia wants and not the multi-role Virginia’s. Lastly the Virginia’s are a much larger boat with a much larger crew requirement and more tellingly much larger dockyard lift facilities that Fleet Base West currently does not have. It can accommodate the smaller Astutes but would need a rebuild to accommodate the Virginia’s.

Henderson can be upgraded to handle the bigger sub and a Virginia Block IV is only 18m longer then the Astute and not as wide, I don’t think the 140m long Block V is in the running. One big problem with the Astute though is the RR PWR2 Reactor is no longer in production, so would need to either fit the PWR3 Reactor or the US Reactor.

All true Michael. Have you seen one of the Collins boats on the dry lift at Henderson? It’s a reasonably tight fit. I think, but it’s only opinion that the RAN will finish up co-funding the development and manufacture of the Astute class replacement and in the meantime train RAN crews in the Astute boats. The reason for that opinion is that this working arrangement will be identical to what went on when the Oberons were still in the water when all RAN submariners were trained in part or in full in the RN. That is the RAN, Australian Defence and even politicians know this arrangement worked well in the past and will again. Whereas training RAN submariners on the Virginia’s or its replacement class will be an untried process.

Obviously the Barracuda does look inferior to the Astute and Virginia classes in regards to Refuelling, but the option of using someone else’s facilities surely would make the project cheaper, I just think the Barracuda would be a quicker cheaper option,and for a country which would literally have to start from scratch to design, manufacture and support such a project id say it offers a better starting point.

Hi Pete

Can anyone confirm the following;
In June 2012, the MoD awarded Rolls-Royce a GB£600 million contract to produce reactors for the Dreadnought-class and also for the final boat of the Astute-class HMS Agincourt. The MoD also awarded Rolls-Royce GB£600 million to refurbish their Rolls-Royce Marine Power Operations reactor core manufacturing plant at Derby to manufacture the PWR3 and to extend the plant’s operational life to 2056. In January 2020, the National Audit Office reported that the construction of the plant was five years behind schedule and was now forecast to be in service in 2026.
Looks like Australia will need a few (2 or 3) lease / return Astute’s to get operational boats sooner. 
Good for Aus and Good for UK if they are returned after 10 to 15 years.

i cant see the UK leasing any Astute’s to Australia Andrew. They will be the only asset available to the RN that could sink another major warship for the next decade probably. Perhaps they might offer the Trafalgar boats…but Australia already seems committed to doing mid / late life upgrades to the Collins class to keep them going for another 20 years.

How about this idea
Oz Does a Lend Lease of several Astute Class subs as a “stop gap” and place the order shortly 

Lets say we “lend lease” 3 Astute SSN’s we would receive the boats 8,9 and 10 in 2030, 32 and 34. At that time the UK will have a developing capability gap as HMS Astute will be 30 years old. And highly likely the Astute replacement will be behind schedule. 

So by the time our “lend lease UK manufactured boats are 15 years old HMS Astute will be 45 years old. Hence as our first home manufactured boats roll off the Adelaide production line, it’s highly likely the UK will want their “lend lease” boast back to fill their capability gap.

The UK is only planning 7 Astutes..thats it. Will be lucky to have 2 on patrol at any one time as it is. Delaying availability of 3 boats would mean you might only have 1 boat available globally at any one time….and building 3 new boats would delay the 4 x Dreadnoughts the CDAS replacements. Its also unlikely Australia will have the infrastructure or capability to support / operate Nuclear boats inside of 15 years. More plausible they might lease a couple of old boats from the USA and operate them out of Hawaii utilising the US support facilities there…[possibly in exchange for more space for surface stuff in Darwin !!)

It’s not the worst place to move to! Have you been over for a visit?

Not yet but I hope to sometime mate!

What a total load of rubbish mate, you can’t operate nuclear SMs without the infrastructure not support them!!!!
Just what do you think happens to the nuclear systems when a SM returns to port after a deployment? You just switch everything off and go home I suppose!
Nuclear SMs require constant and costly maintenance, you need a nuclear authority to oversee everything and a infrastructure to support it – that doesn’t include anything to do with refits either!
Part of said infrastructure is how you deal with a leak with regard to the local population, you will be surprised at what’s required, go live in Plymouth or Faslane , see what the local authorities need to have in place for such an eventuality……

Pills for the population for a start! Off site contingencies location. NARO called in…quite a list!

Absolutly mate absolutely, and all this needs to be in place before you start operating SSNs. Refits would probably be item 135 of a list of 250 things you need in your infrastructure set up.
It will take Aus a good decade to get everything set up and the right people in place to start this project. I know both UK and US will fully support the Aussies, but it wont be quick or cheap.

The point about the complexity and timeframes for the portside infrastructure needed to safely maintain and operate SSNs is well made.

However, Australia does already have a nascent nuclear industry (albeit without experience in commercial power generation, maritime or naval nuclear operations) and a nuclear regulator ARPANSA that would oversee naval nuclear safety.

Australia has operated a nuclear reactor (primarily for research purposes and medical isotopes) at Lucas Heights in Sydney since the 1950s with the original HIFAR reactor replaced with a more modern OPAL reactor in 2006 so we have some skin in the game already and a small pool of scientists and engineers with some understanding of nuclear engineering and safety requirements.

Australian scientists have a long and storied history in nuclear research including Sir Mark Oliphant co-discoverer of nuclear fusion (and incidentally microwave application in radar) and a leading figure in the creation of the Manhattan Project to build the first atomic weapons. I think Australia may prove to be a ‘quick study’ that can build on the fundamentals already in place.

Australia is also one of the largest exporters of uranium ore, including to the UK, with huge reserves in the Northern Territory and South Australia, although Australia does not have the intention to develop the capability for refining or enrichment. Ironically some of the uranium powering the Astutes, the RN SSBNs or their warheads may have originated in Australia.

The export of uranium is subject to range of controls through a complex international regulatory framework overseen in Australia by the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office (ASNO) including ‘nuclear security’.

Australia currently has 25 bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements in force covering 43 countries.

The point being that Australia is not entirely a novice when it comes to nuclear safeguards and regulations, though with still much to learn and put in place and learn specifically re: SSNs.

Morning @OZ, many thanks for the informative posts.

I wasn’t for on minute suggesting that Australia didn’t have any knowledge in the nuclear field at all. What you already have in place will obviously stand you in good stead for this project.

One of the biggest challenges that you will face is getting enough qualified specialist workers into place to make it all work. I imagine that you will attract many from both our and the US shores over to your country to fill some positions should you wish to take that route.

I also imagine that both UK and US will be seeing lots of Aussies on placements within our setups to gain firsthand knowledge if required.

As I understand things these SSNs are going to be built in Aus with the Reactor Compartment built and fuelled elsewhere, shipped across to you and inserted into the design, itself a challenge given the distances involved.

It will be very interesting to see how this develops over the years, I suspect there will be lots of bumps along the way!

No worries.

Agree that a skilled workforce is the greatest challenge for the project as it proved to be with the Collins class, but a nuclear boat will be another order of complexity again.

Still, some of the workforce planning and recruitment and supply chain work already undertaken for the now cancelled Attack class may not be entirely wasted as is early construction work at Osborne SA.

Australia has been putting some effort into the so called continuous national shipbuilding plan to ensure continuity of a skilled workforce – Hobart DDG to Arafura OPV to Hunter FFG to SSN.

The RAN will attempt to replicate the approach of drawing on the expertise of the UK and US to ‘fast track’ standing up the nuclear capability that proved successful in developing the full operational capability of the RAN’s Amphibious Ready Group in around a decade without having to develop TTPs from scratch or bitter experience.

The number of English, Scottish, Canadian and US accents associated with the ARG in RAN uniforms holding Australian citizenship is remarkable. I guess Australia’s climate may prove a natural advantage in attracting experienced crew or engineers. No offence but I think I’d rather spend winter in Fremantle than Faslane!

No offence taken. I would rather spend my winters in Fremantle then Faslane too, but then I live on the South coast, a much better climate then the cold North. Perhaps not as agreeable as Fremantle, but not bad nevertheless!

We could do with reducing the tilt of the Earth’s axis to shorten those Winter nights for you than?

If at all possible that would be most kind!🤣

The ship transporting the reactor compartment would also need to be escorted also.

Yes, I imagine it would have to be, plenty of people about who would like to see that go wrong I think….

Deep32 thanks for correcting me.

Don’t mind me mate, sometimes I just go off in auto mode!!

It will be either or near identical design to the Astute or Virginia (Which block who knows). Government and RAN have already stated they want to limit/avoid any changes to reduce risk thus allowing for a more definitive delivery time.

There is a lot of Nuclear infrastructure in Devonport to support the SSN’S. Australia would need a similar setup.