As part of AUKUS, the United Kingdom and the United States are establishing a rotational presence of one UK Astute class submarine and up to four U.S. Virginia class submarines at HMAS Stirling, located near Perth in Western Australia, by 2027.
Just over a year ago, Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States announced the Optimal Pathway to deliver conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs) to Australia – the first major initiative of the new AUKUS alliance.
This undertaking, named ‘Submarine Rotational Force-West’ (SRF-West), will adhere to Australia’s longstanding policy of no foreign bases on its territory.
Additionally, this will enable the three nations to pool resources while Australia endeavours to build the necessary operational capabilities and expertise to oversee and run its fleet of nuclear-powered submarines, you can read more about that here.
This week, an update was published by the Ministry of Defence on the enabling work for this effort.
“Building on the success of earlier SSN visits to Australia since the Optimal Pathway announcement, AUKUS partners welcomed a visit by USS Annapolis to HMAS Stirling in March 2024. This latest visit is part of a trilateral commitment to more frequent SSN visits to HMAS Stirling under the Optimal Pathway. This, and future such visits from UK and U.S. SSNs, will contribute to building Australia’s capacity to support a rotational presence of UK and U.S. SSNs under Submarine Rotational Force-West (SRF-West) from as early as 2027, and Australia’s future sovereign SSN capability.
The most significant maintenance activity to be conducted on an SSN in Australia, to date, is scheduled to occur in the second half of 2024. The maintenance activity, supported by a Submarine Tender, will be critical to building Australia’s ability to safely and securely sustain U.S. SSNs in preparation for the establishment of SRF-West. In anticipation of this forthcoming activity, 37 Royal Australian Navy sailors reported to the USS Emory S. Land in Guam in late January 2024, to begin training and to gain the necessary skills and qualifications. Australian industry personnel will also be involved in supporting this activity to continue to grow the submarine sustainment workforce and supply chain. UK Royal Navy officers will observe the activity to enable integration of UK maintenance requirements for future UK SSN port visits and future UK rotational presence as part of SRF-West. This will be the first time that Australian personnel will actively participate in the maintenance of a U.S. SSN in Australia, enabled by the provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024.
Important steps have been taken towards delivering a sovereign conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine training capability for Australia. In December 2023, the United States and Australia finalised a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) case to procure submarine training devices to support the establishment of SRF-West. As part of the FMS case, the first contracts were awarded this month by the United States for submarine training simulators. These will be used to train Royal Australian Navy personnel on the Virginia class platform in advance of Australia operating its own sovereign Virginia class SSNs, and supporting visiting and rotational U.S. Virginia class SSNs through SRF-West. The FMS case will also enable the training of Australian Defence and industry personnel in the United States. In March 2024, a cohort of 20 Australian industry personnel completed a successful three-month placement at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility.”
Not entirely new
HMS Astute, a nuclear submarine then deployed with HMS Queen Elizabeth’s Carrier Strike Group, visited Perth back in 2021.
UK High Commissioner, Vicki Treadell, said at the time:
“This visit, and the warm welcome our Royal Navy has received exemplifies our commitment to the region, and the spirit of mateship that underpins the bonds between our two great nations.”
The Astute class are the largest, most advanced and most powerful attack submarines ever operated by the Royal Navy, combining world-leading sensors, design and weaponry in a versatile vessel. The class have provision for up to 38 weapons in six 21-inch torpedo tubes. The submarines can use Tomahawk Block IV land-attack missiles with a range of 1,000 miles and Spearfish heavyweight torpedoes.
With 10 fleet subs it would be reasonable for one to be in the Pacific. But with only 6 they should all be Atlantic side. Unless of course the glorious HMG are about to order more boats; which I seriously doubt.
So if we don’t deploy to the Pacific why would US or Australia bother deploying their boats to our waters if we needed help. You can see why the MAGA bunch in the US think NATOs a one sided deal.
It’s a simple numbers game. It would likely require three boats to maintain one boat deployed to the Pacific. That leave three in the Atlantic to protect our deterrent and provide the RNs anti-surface role. That just doesn’t add up in my book.
We will get a 7th Astute boat. Yes it’s not much but it’s something
How many did the Navy require, I wonder?
Paul we are just finishing the Astutes and there are 7 of them in total not 6. There can be no more ordered nor built without seriously screwing up the CASD replacement programme and then the SSN(A) project itself, it isn’t going to happen ! RR doesn’t build PWR2 reactors anymore as the Dreadnought and the SSN(A) use the New PWR3 which is too big for an Astute hull, so it’s impossible. As for deploying to the Pacific it really isn’t a huge problem, you send one out for a couple of years, then rotate it. You just make sure… Read more »
He already knows it isn’t going to happen, which is why he said he “doubted it”.
It beyond numbers military alliance provides deterance if China knows it potentially could have to face off against more than just the US its far less likely to act. Same goes for Russia, that’s beauty of having an alliance’s but the moment nations reign in their participation the weaker the partnership is and therefore the deterance. We are on the way to needing more boats because our allies aren’t going to come running to our rescue.
I was told on this site some time ago that our CASD bomber is not protected by a SSN (which was a surprise to me).
Look at a globe.
Yep I see the artic which is impassable most of the year to surface ships which leaves shipping lanes from east to west through Pacific and Indian Ocean. I see our biggest ally has island in the middle of the pacific and bases there too. I see Australia a like minded liberal democaracy that needs the pacific to free for navigation. Oh wait I need to put my blinkers on…. thats better now I see just Europe and UK at the centre of the world 🙂
What does NATO stand for?
So lets not deploy to the med then… if its just the north atlantic we’ll just ignore the other sea and oceans of all NATO members shall we? What a ridiculous comment.
Well first NATO is not about the physical North Atlantic, but rather the defence of the Northern Hemisphere so the med is very much within its remit, 2nd NATO has very much avoided involvement in the Southern Hemisphere since its inception. So much so that no Southern Countries I.e. Australia can be in NATO, and article 5 is only valid in the Northern hemisphere. Hence why America didn’t join in during the Falkland’s war. As such to say European unwillingness to get involved in a conflict in the Southern Hemisphere is somehow a poor reflection on NATO is ludicrous. What’s… Read more »
I agree NATO has a massive Pacific coast shared by Canada and US. Should the Panama canal be closed the only way around for surface ships is the south Atlantic and South Pacific whether we.like it or not if the US is attacked in the Pacific all of NATO needs to be able to fight in the Pacific . We wrongly assume that if China kicks off Russia would also attack Europe, which means European forces would be tied up. If that doesn’t happen what are we going to do? Just say to the US. Just get on with it… Read more »
Not enough crew. Recruitment has been outsourced and the focus is on 20 second videos of F-35s with trending music.
This Heart of Oak…
10 ‘fleet subs’ in the RN? 4 of the RN’s submarines are SSBNs not SSNs.
My comment was about ‘if’ RN had 10 SSNs it would be reasonable to have one in the Pacific. However there are only 6. Thanks.
By the time this comes about, there should be 7. BTW, the base is in the Indian, not the Pacific. I have seen nothing so far that indicates where these subs will be operating.
Why constrain our SSNs to just the Atlantic? If the most significant naval threats to ‘western’ nations (I include Japan, Aus and NZ in that term) are in the SCS, Southern Ocean or Pacific, then we should periodically send patrols there.
The bit about no foreign bases is an interesting concept, but quite how it will work out in reality is going to be a Challenging exercise in Artistic Licence. A 22K ton US Submarine Depot ship, on shore support facilities, accommodation blocks, weapons handling and storage facilities all supporting a flotilla of 5 combat ready US & UK SSNs. It’s like the scene from “The Life of Brian” nope there are no women here and no that isn’t a Foreign Submarine Base ! Then again this is nothing new, as there are no Foreign Bases already in Australia. There isn’t… Read more »
Had previously asked a question re this general topic and received a response from (perhaps) Oscar Zulu. Evidently there was a substantial American presence in Australia during WWII and sufficient friction developed to precipitate riots w/ multiple casualties. As a consequence, Australia evidently adopted a ‘no foreign bases’ permitted policy until current day. Obviously, the Aussies have had to perform significant linguistic and policy contortions to accommodate current reality. Not certain which US service branch was responsible for initial incident. Our rep as the ‘Ugly Americans’ when abroad may well have elements of historical truth. 🤔🙄
Don’t take it personally, they also seem to have forgotten that Sydney was the primary Naval base for the entire British Pacific Fleet. Plus all the necessary support and FAA bases dotted around the country. Being American you probably know all about the USN in the Pacific in WW2, but in 1945 the British assembled the largest RN Fleet that ever existed and ran it from Trincomalee and Sydney. You lot had Ice Cream Machines but we had a floating Brewery ! To be fair the “No foreign bases” bit is probably aimed at us in the U.K. We did… Read more »
Did not realize British nuclear testing program was at least partially based w/in Australia. That type of program tends to annoy, nay, piss off the natives. Pleased to realize that we have company in the attitudes of others.
BTW, a floating brewery?!? Jolly good show! 🤔😋🍻😁
HMS Menestheus an Amenities Ship. A converted liner with a cinema, library and a Brewery. When the war finished and the BPF were being sent home Halsey is rumoured to have tried to keep her.
Never worked out why US insist on Dry ships, doesn’t seem to interfere with other countries (except maybe Russian).
“we had a floating Brewery” hhhm -I feel an ice cold VB coming on!
Lol yes I was thinking of Pine Gap. There are I think AUS personnel there but it is as Australian as Menwith Hill is “RAF”
We have no Foreign Bases in the UK. Its RAF Lakenheath not USAF Lakenheath, the Americans that live and work in the base are just guests. Very, very long term guests.
Mmm The reality is somewhat different ! Guests don’t get to kill 19 year old Motorcyclists and pretty well get away with it. Anne Sacoolas.
She fled the country and was found guilty.
we really need two subs, one against four seems a bit embarrassing.
as if we are just a side line, I think two should be stationed there. just my opinion..
Ideally yes but we only have 7 subs so 2 in the Pacific, 1 supporting CASD out of faslane , 1 in the Atlantic, 1 supporting a carrier and 2 in maintenance seems to absolutely max out the fleet and is not sustainable. Plus they’ll wear out rather quickly on that deployment beat
I agree with you, perhaps we need more subs, but with the present government not such luck .lol
It is nothing to do with the present Government (only thing that we can’t blame them for) the reasons we have so few boats is down to the decisions taken 2 decades ago. Thank you Mr’s Major and Blair It takes about a decade to design, order the lead items, start the initial builds and then start the Assembly of a new class, so about 15 years from start to 1st Boat in service. But if you take a Peace dividend and just don’t order any subs for 7 years after the Vanguards you allow the industry to be nearly… Read more »
There only needs to be one UK SSN based out in AUS (we can’t afford to send 2), as it will rotate on patrols with the US SSNs in a 5 boat fleet. By 2026 we will have all 7 Astutes in service, which is much needed, as there is far more tasking that the SMs receive then you have mentioned. Exercises, Trials, Perisher and OOA deployments to name a few. With one in Aus, the remaining 6 will be pushed fairly hard, as realistically we will only ever have a max of 4 available (2 will always be in… Read more »
Isn’t there still one remaining T boat in RN service? If so and pending it’s condition, I wouldn’t get rid of that one in a hurry.
Hi @Q, yes there is fella, HMS Triumph, unfortunately she is rather elderly to say the least. Not sure how long she will soldier on for, but, both Trenchant and Talent only lasted about 18-24 months after their last refits.
Strongly suspect that she will be lucky to last much beyond mid 2025, depending on her remaining core life.
Great plan, fully support it, however our numbers for Astutes don’t add up! If we put a boat down under for a rotation we probably have 2 to deploy in and around the UK/NATO/Middle East commitments. Yet again our neglect of depth bites us in the paper thin arse!
Unfortunately they are what they are and there is nothing that we can do about the in service numbers for at least the next 8/10 years. Nearly 30 years of incompetence can’t just be magicked away. But we are in NATO France has 6 SSN, Italy will have 8 modern SSK, Spain 4, Netherlands 4, Germany 6/8, Norway 4/6, Sweden 5/6 plus’s we in NATO outnumber Russia’s usable surface fleet about 10:1 so no need to be suicidal yet. And that is without the US (which may be just as well). And we also need to remember that although Russia… Read more »
Something rotten xxxxxxxxc Sorry but it would seem that China’s expansion of the South China Sea is starting too upset SE Asian countries and Australia they are our Convict cousins and as they have no nuke boats then we should step in with the yanks they’ve been there for us and America and show China
No way can we deploy en masse to the Pacific, the logistics would be awful. And more importantly we cannot forget that the No1 Task of the RN is the provision and protection of our CASD SSBN and that needs the SSNs in the North Atlantic and Artic.
1 boat with rotationsl crew that’s all I was thinking of
That’s what will probably happen, makes the best sense.
👍
Clearly not published by our MoD.
Authorized in a fiscal year? UKDJ looking like the PoW scoop was the zenith.
Better hurry up, they might be needed in the WPS and SCS if things flare up with China, Taiwan, Philippines, Japan and others in the region.
I was wondering if the RAN can operate its Collins subs out of Darwin, Townsville or Brisbane as options to be a little bit closer to wherever they’re needed?
I have seen that question several times before. As I understand the answers, there are various problems, including being in potential range of attack, tides, tropical storms & distance to deep water. As I understand it, a submarine leaving fleet base west quickly enters deep water & from there could be going anywhere. A submarine leaving Darwin has a long shallow water transit & would almost always be heading north. There is also the question of where they would operate in wartime. If the intention is to close the SE Asian choke points, anything from the Australian east coast is… Read more »
Is this an April fool? We have 7 RN SSNs. Which means we don’t have 7 available. To maintain 1 submarine in Australia means sidelining, at the very least, 2 SSNs. (This is without submarines damaging themselves surfacing under merchant ships).
We’d be lucky to have 4 operational SSNs at any one time.
Pure, delusional, rule britannia, folly.
No this is as far as I can to be like the Frigate in the Red Sea in that a single one is deployed and rotated separately from the rest. In this case it would rotate with the American subs in the area instead of being replaced with another RN sub at the end of patrols