Insane Sub 'Deal'

[Uncle Fester]

Can somebody explain why we need to spend up to 368 Billion dollars for a few second hand submarines that according to Wiki only cost US$3.4 Billion new?
And mostly why we need to reinvent a very expensive wheel, only to produce 3 more potential disasters pieces instead of continuing with the Virginia Class for the fleet of 8?

Initially it was 80 Billion for the 30 years...WTF?

And how these ATTACK submarines, very suitable to fight other people's wars, are going to defend our vast country from possibly 1000's of incoming Russian and Chinese intercontinental ballistic and other missiles !?
These subs are only drops in the water, that can take weeks to get from their base(no talk about stationing them up north) to any incoming war ships and aircraft.
$368,000,000,000 for 8 drops, is everybody OK with that?

This insane unjustifiable waste of money will prohibit the only chance we could have actually had to DEFEND our country:
A great wall of at least 10,000 long range missiles and anti-ICBMs deployed along our entire north coast.
We could have used that money to make our own missiles and still create plenty of jobs.


I will also write this to our government.

[enf]

It's the same as with Beazely's Collins Lemons. Turnbulls French Lemons. Promising jobs to shore up SA seats. Politics as usual. Promising "security" to the population with this stuff reflects on the populations lack of acumen, that's all. And the contempt our so called leaders have for us in general. And, I'm sad to say, justifiably so given our national obsession with trivialities.

I read a piece some time ago by a defence analyst (dunno who) who postulated that Australia would be the most secure nation in the world if we could defend ourselves with our defence annoucements.

What we need are some atomic weapons/delivery systems and the willingness to use them, that's all. Let the meglomaniacs posture around all they like, but leave us alone.

[enf]

Yeah yeah, I know it's a Murdoch article, but the facts are the facts. It's "jobs" not security that is the driving force of this. And anyway, given the cost it doesn't sound like that many jobs to me.

"What a gullible breed!" Agent K, Men in Black

WA eyes maintenance boom as SA wins bigger share of submarine jobs

By Paul Garvey
9:29PM March 14, 2023

Western Australia believes it will be the biggest winner from the AUKUS program despite securing only a fraction of the headline jobs South Australia will enjoy under the $368bn program.

An $8bn overhaul of the existing HMAS Stirling naval base at Garden Island, off the coast of Rockingham in WA, will create 3000 direct jobs and will become the western hub for Australia’s new nuclear submarines.

South Australia will gain more than 9500 jobs over 30 years thanks to the decision to build the submarines at a new facility at Osborne.

While the construction work will head to SA, WA’s role in the support and maintenance of the nation’s submarines will grow significantly.

HMAS Stirling has long hosted visiting submarines from other nations but the frequency of visits from US and British nuclear submarines will increase from 2027 when it becomes the home for Submarine Rotational Force-West. They will be joined by Australia’s first nuclear submarines when they are bought in the early 2030s.

WA Premier Mark McGowan said HMAS Stirling and the shipbuilding businesses based in nearby Henderson would be big beneficiaries of the program. “The ongoing maintenance is 70 per cent of the spend on the submarines; the build is around 30 per cent of the cost,” he said.

Toff Idrus, a former submarine engineer who was the lead person responsible for the development of WA’s nuclear submarine sustainment capability development road map, said construction work for SA and maintenance work for WA suited the expertise of both.

Having visiting nuclear subs in WA in the near term would allow the state to develop the extra skills needed to support those boats. “It’s pretty clear that the lion’s share of any asset with maritime capability is in the maintenance and sustainment space,” Mr Idrus said. “We’ve built that capability in WA so it makes a lot of sense to leverage that capability.”

SA Premier Peter Malinauskas lauded the subs announcement as a “game-changer” for his state, saying work would begin this year on the design of the Osborne yard, with the first Australian-built nuclear submarine to be completed by 2040.

The federal government has already set aside $2bn over the next four years to help build the Osborne construction yard, with that work to employ 4000.

“We know the numbers only scale up from there – 5500 direct jobs potentially employed in the construction of the nuclear submarines, and that’s before we talk about the indirect jobs,” Mr Malinauskas said.

What matters more than anything, he said, was the opportunity “to dramatically uplift the skills base here in South Australia”.

WA has the lowest unemployment rate in Australia, but Defence Industry Minister Paul Papalia is confident enough workers will be found for the project.

“What WA has done historically is respond to huge demand for additional trained skilled people. We’ve done that before,” he said. “Our institutions are the best at identifying demand and need and then ramping up to meet that. We did it in successive booms and we can do it again.”

[wotnot]

....and towards the end of the 2030's we'll have them....and by then I'll be pushing up the daisies =)

atomic weapons/delivery systems and the willingness to use them

If I were a truly agnostic nation, and totalitarian enough to be able to force 10s of million of ppl to be in close proximity to strategic targets, I would wonder just how much willingness there will be, when the estimated collateral damage turns out to be 10s of million of (otherwise innocent) civilian casualties. The militaria already know this....

[enf]

....and towards the end of the 2030's we'll have them....and by then I'll be pushing up the daisies =)



If I were a truly agnostic nation, and totalitarian enough to be able to force 10s of million of ppl to be in close proximity to strategic targets, I would wonder just how much willingness there will be, when the estimated collateral damage turns out to be 10s of million of (otherwise innocent) civilian casualties. The militaria already know this....

I've got no problem with these treaties and with subs in general....same with the tanks. But the idea that these will give us security is ludicrous. The ONLY way to have security is to be able to push back, and unless the nation is willing to forgo 10-15% of GDP and really try, its a fallacy. A nuclear weapon will stop an invading fleet, nothing else.

The biggest concern for an increasing number of Australians if an an invasion was imminent would be "Are facebook and tiktok still going to be running?" It's sad, but that's the way it is.

[Uncle Fester]

I've got no problem with these treaties and with subs in general....same with the tanks. But the idea that these will give us security is ludicrous. The ONLY way to have security is to be able to push back, and unless the nation is willing to forgo 10-15% of GDP and really try, its a fallacy. A nuclear weapon will stop an invading fleet, nothing else.

The biggest concern for an increasing number of Australians if an an invasion was imminent would be "Are facebook and tiktok still going to be running?" It's sad, but that's the way it is.

I do have a problem with AUKUS.
It basically writes in stone that when the USA decides to go to war with China, we are their cannon fodder, if we want or not.

Furthermore if China/Russia drops strategic or full blow nuclear weapons on Australia, what is the chance America will avenge with nuclear? ZERO!
Of course they won't risk damage to their own country.
It will be a proxy war but on now on Australian soil instead of Vietnam, Ukraine, etc.

I agree that if we actually had our OWN nuclear weapons, China/Russia might have second thoughts about using theirs on us.
This will never happen. The USA would never allow that. AKUS and other treaties we have would not allow that.

However there will be a conspiracy (the new B20 bomber) that USA 'secretly' stations nuclear weapons in their bases on our soil, which they probably will not, but it will be enough for China/Russia to believe that they do. This won't help us at all.

Wotnot, I am hearing US Virginia subs could be arriving here any time when there is a place to park them, if they even need that.
Even the ones we are supposed to buy, we will not have full access and sovereign control of, the USA will always have the last word.
I do not trust the USA. They are showing no interest in peace and stability with their anti China rhetoric and next year we are likely to have Trump back again or something similar.

They all just want our money while our politicians, held on a tight leash by the USA, brainwash us that this is all good for our security.
I TOTALLY DISAGREE.
All this AUKUS B.S. is doing is making us a target and poor. I see no protection.

[fromaron]

I do not trust the USA. They are showing no interest in peace and stability with their anti China rhetoric and next year we are likely to have Trump back again or something similar.

They all just want our money while our politicians, held on a tight leash by the USA, brainwash us that this is all good for our security.
I TOTALLY DISAGREE.
All this AUKUS B.S. is doing is making us a target and poor. I see no protection.

+1 Fester
Lets also don't forget that Trump didn't start any conflict and on opposite - achieved more peace and stability in the world than any current Democrats' leaders (DemonRats). So I would prefer Trump or somebody similar returning ASAP.

[Johnno]

+1 Fester
Lets also don't forget that Trump didn't start any conflict and on opposite - achieved more peace and stability in the world than any current Democrats' leaders (DemonRats). So I would prefer Trump or somebody similar returning ASAP.

Meanwhile, former US President Donald Trump went to social media to declare that “We will have a Great Depression far bigger and more powerful than that of 1929. As proof, the banks are already started to collapse!!!"

read into that what you will.

[Al Bundy]

I do have to wonder sometimes at the naivety of some reporters, do they really believe the crap that they are being told and then repeating?
Like “The submarines will carry conventional non-nuclear weapons”, ahem, this is 2023, you are talking about the late 2030’s that is a lot of time to pass between what is said now, and what is to come to pass in 12-15 years, what is being said now is meaningless.

Personally I just cannot see why such huge amounts of money should be spent on development of future unknown technologies like a new submarine design. Spend some of the money on what is already known, I’m talking about the Virginia Class, I also believe all the eggs are being thrown in to one basket when it comes to submarines, the Air Force needs expanding, our Northern defences are almost nothing, Uncle Fester is right, a high priority should be spent on missile batteries across the north to intercept and shoot down ICBM’s, something like the US GMD system or Israeli Arrow 3 system, with Patriot missile batteries around our major urban areas and targets of interest, all costs money I know but we have been living with our heads in the sand for too long.

[enf]

I do have to wonder sometimes at the naivety of some reporters, do they really believe the crap that they are being told and then repeating?
Like “The submarines will carry conventional non-nuclear weapons”, ahem, this is 2023, you are talking about the late 2030’s that is a lot of time to pass between what is said now, and what is to come to pass in 12-15 years, what is being said now is meaningless.

Personally I just cannot see why such huge amounts of money should be spent on development of future unknown technologies like a new submarine design. Spend some of the money on what is already known, I’m talking about the Virginia Class, I also believe all the eggs are being thrown in to one basket when it comes to submarines, the Air Force needs expanding, our Northern defences are almost nothing, Uncle Fester is right, a high priority should be spent on missile batteries across the north to intercept and shoot down ICBM’s, something like the US GMD system or Israeli Arrow 3 system, with Patriot missile batteries around our major urban areas and targets of interest, all costs money I know but we have been living with our heads in the sand for too long.

We still have our heads in the sand mate. These things in this country are about politics, nothing more. The leadership that we have voted into place (ALL OF THEM) are a reflection of our stupidity and our obsession with the trivial. Albo spent more time at the mardi gras than he did at Alice Springs, which shows the level of ANY real committment.

We currently allocate less than 2% (I think) of GDP to defence. That number would have to increase 10 fold just to begin to adequately plan. I don't believe it will happen. We'll just go with whomever proposes the easiest option to get elected. And THATS having your head in the sand.

[Reschs]

The basic cost of the subs is not the end story.
With it comes the cost of the support bases and more importantly the missiles they are going to fire.
I think you will find that a lot of other hardware comes with the deal. Things that go bang.

[enf]

The basic cost of the subs is not the end story.
With it comes the cost of the support bases and more importantly the missiles they are going to fire.
I think you will find that a lot of other hardware comes with the deal. Things that go bang.

Exactly. The Chinese have a massive fleet compared to ours (with mystical subs included), so the things that go bang have to be credible.



This doesn't include army/airforce/surface navy assets that would be overwhelming.

We need to be able to defend ourselves long enough for our allies to arrive....that's assuming they can be relied upon. Adequate reconnaissance that is long distance and long duration would be the first step. We don't even have that.

[Johnno]

I think you will find that a lot of other hardware comes with the deal. Things that go bang.

"Australia could buy as many as 220 Tomahawk missiles and supporting equipment from the US as part of the deal struck under the AUKUS pact.
The United States has approved the sale of up to $US895 million ($1.3 billion) worth of the guided weapons, which initially would be fitted to the navy's Hobart-class destroyers, and could later be installed in the Viriginia-class submarines when Australia acquires them next decade."

[Uncle Fester]

"Australia could buy as many as 220 Tomahawk missiles and supporting equipment from the US as part of the deal struck under the AUKUS pact.
The United States has approved the sale of up to $US895 million ($1.3 billion) worth of the guided weapons, which initially would be fitted to the navy's Hobart-class destroyers, and could later be installed in the Viriginia-class submarines when Australia acquires them next decade."

WHAT?? ...220 Tomahawk missiles?
That is all these Americans are allowing us to have in this AUSKUS deal?


We are spending $370 Billion on subs so we can deploy miserly 220 missiles?
This must be some kind of bad joke.


Assuming we end up with 10 subs (including all variants), that is less than 2 full deployments, each Virginia has 12 VLS tubes.
So after that, what are these 'tin cans' supposed to carry on their mission, sardines?


Instead of $1.3B for 220, how about $26B for 4400, that we can also use from land based launchers with deliveries starting right now, not when it is too late.
Then we might have a bit of security from incoming.
And we should be allowed to make them under licence here on our soil. That is the stuff this AUSKUS should be about, including creating jobs.

[freakee1]

USA is happy to go to war as long as it isn't in their own backyard. Australia definitely is large enough and vast enough to have a bit taken under duress hence Darwin always has a very large contingent of US Military personnel and equipment, ensuring they have multiple bases in the South Pacific/ South China Sea region. The whole AUKUS thing, French Sub thingy, dropping millions and millions on the South Pacific Islands trying to out bid China, inviting India to play war games with us, is our commitment to do the side hustle for USA in the forthcoming conflict which has been coming for years, if not already here.


f

[enf]

USA is happy to go to war as long as it isn't in their own backyard. Australia definitely is large enough and vast enough to have a bit taken under duress hence Darwin always has a very large contingent of US Military personnel and equipment, ensuring they have multiple bases in the South Pacific/ South China Sea region. The whole AUKUS thing, French Sub thingy, dropping millions and millions on the South Pacific Islands trying to out bid China, inviting India to play war games with us, is our commitment to do the side hustle for USA in the forthcoming conflict which has been coming for years, if not already here.


f

And your solution?

[freakee1]

And your solution?

deploy another 2.5K Marines in Darwin







f

[coalminer]

There here all ready

[Al Bundy]

Wow…
“Included in its overall project budget, Australia will spend $2 billion over the next four years upgrading the Osborne shipyards in South Australia.” ($2b for South Australia)

Meanwhile…

“Australia will also contribute $3 billion over the next four years to US and UK production lines, with the bulk of that money heading stateside.”

WTF?

[enf]

Geez, the hysteria is ramping up.

Cruise missiles. We start with 220 now...ridiculous amount really considering the Coalition forces fired 116 on the first day of the Gulf War alone. However, do we know that there aren't more down the line in this agreement? We're relying on press reports and government statements which are about as reliable as a politician making a promise on super.

They have to be built don't they? There isn't some magical surpository of 200,000 in Texas or something. It's an ongoing process of upgrading and developement and testing which we don't do. F*ck, we can't even build a car. Personally hypersonics sound better to me, but those are still largely in research. Although the Russians and Chinese have been busy on that front while we in the west concentrate on more useful pursuits like gay rights and gender diversity. Something that I'm REALLY sure the forces of oppression will respect and continue once they've taken over.

A maginot line of missiles in the North doesn't seem to me to be efficient or militarily sound either. I keep picturing Singapores heavy guns uselessly poining out to sea.

This is all catchup comedy caused by our own slack stupidity, political hypocrissy, and lack of foresight, especially on the nuclear front.

"If you want peace, be ready for war." We aren't and we won't be.

Our ONLY course of action in the foreseeable future is to be allied with others. Is AUKUS the answer? Probably not, but knowing Australia we'll still be arguing about it as the planes fly overhead. The Coalition will cry "we've got this, elect us!". The ALP will cry "We've got this, elect us!" The Greens will cry "Build more solar panels!" and the Teals, well, they'll still stand for nothing but a fat paycheck like they do now...