I publish on subs, military/naval, nuclear weapons & enrichment; political issues. Aussie sub changes are slow: talk since 2009 rather than new subs. The Collins LOTE 2028-2040 might help Australia's sub availability temporarily. UUVs help. POTUS 2031 may cancel AUKUS Virginias due to USN advice it needs all its SSNs through to the 2040s. Australian Government ignores higher priority US Columbia SSBN production is minimising Virginia production until 2043. Shawn C is an excellent author.
If Russia even hinted that it might use Poseidons against the US, the US could promise it would launch US Poseidons and other nuclear weapons against
Russia.
When the US put out tenders for the Orca very large UUV/AUV,
Boeing publicly won the competition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orca_(AUV). But significantly there was
no word or complaint I know of from the other competitor, Lockheed, about losing. So I suspect Lockheed Martin was asked to develop a "black program" US nuclear armed, nuclear propelled Poseidon for potential use against Russia, China, North Korea and anyone else.
The US quietly telling Russia
"we also have a Poseidon we could use against you"
constitutes the age-old and effective MAD strategy. Boeing may also be in the
know about this Lockheed project because could use Boeing's Orca "hull" because that hull is actually larger (up to 26m long = 16m standard + 10m payload module) than Russia's 20m Poseidon (see right sidebar).
Here and above is a 6 minute Wall Street Journal (WSJ) mini-documentary on what Russia's Poseidon is and what it may do.
Through much original scientific and engineering
research, espionage and reverse engineering China has rapidly developed electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS), aka aircraft carrier electromagnetic catapults. China probably tested its EMALS with a pilot at sea in mid 2025 on its latest aircraft carrier Fujian, of the Type 003 class commissioned November 5, 2025. Fujian's EMALS are inspired by the first pilot at sea use on the USN's latest supercarrier USS Gerald R. Ford(CVN-78) on July 28, 2017. The US is probably building 10 more Fords to replace its 10 Nimitz-class carriers on a one-for-one basis.
In building the Type 003 classChina has leaped from limited war-load ski-jump carriers of the Type 001 and 002 classes and avoided obsolete steam catapult technology altogether.
I don't know whether China will build more Type 003s or proceed straight to nuclear powered Type 004s. At the rapid rate China is advancing in carrier technology I wouldn't be surprised if China builds 7 x Type 004s. Seven Chinese nuclear carriers in the Indo-Pacific might give China something approaching parity with the USN. This is given the USN's eleven carriers must cover much more ocean - that being the Atlantic-Arctic as well.
Meanwhile the UK has taken a step back from its two full size steam CATOBARAudacious-class aircraft carriers of the 1950-70s in building two full size ski-jump carriers of the Queen Elizabeth (QE) class. The QEs are limited to F-35Bs of limited range, limited war-load with no scope for manned fixed wing anti-submarine aircraft and no E-2 Hawkeye style AEW aircraft.
India, currently having ski-jump carriers seems to have settled on a future EMALS CATOBAR carrier to be called INS Vishal. Vishal may be conventionally of nuclear powered and probably commissioned at least 15 years from now, in the 2040s.
France may retire its nuclear powered carrier Charles de Gaulle (CdG) in 2038, but probably later. France aims to replace CdG with a new nuclear carrier Porte-avions de nouvelle génération (PANG)in English"new generation aircraft carrier" after only 7 years of construction (2031-2038). But I think the timings are overly ambitious, given France has 4 x 3rd generation SSBNs (SNLE 3G) to be completed by 2050. France also needs to meet the increased Russian conventional and nuclear armed forces threat.
After Russia's experience with the troubled carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and earlier carrier-cruisers Russia should be encouraged to build several more. This may spare two or three blameless European countries from Putin's love of invasion.
Here and
above is "Deep Intel on New Chinese Carrier's First Flight Ops"
uploaded September 25, 2025 and expertly narrated by former US Navy F-14 Radar Intercept Officer Ward Carroll on his Youtube Channel. Ward provided the
description below:
"A video just released by the Chinese government
documents that the People’s Liberation Army Navy recently had a significant
operational milestone. During an at sea period off the coast of Shanghai, the
PLAN aircraft carrier Fujian, which was launched three years ago,
already completed its first successful flight operations that included using
the J-35, China's fifth generation fighter, and
the electromagnetic catapult system better known by the acronym “EMALS.”"
[Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi] "said on Nov. 6 that Japan must consider adding nuclear-powered submarines to its fleet, a sentiment spurred by U.S. President Donald Trump’s recent approval for South Korea to build its own..."
Pete Comment:
Japan expressing interest in nuclear submarines once South Korea makes nuclear submarine progress is no surprise. I have been predicting it since 2015, if not earlier, see my:
1) RoK's (I will call it SK's) KSS-II is a TKMS-HDW 214. It looks like a well balanced submarine with good range. I think it would serve Australia needs if the AIP were removed and Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) used. Australia's Navy, if buying from TKMS, almost definitely wants a larger 216.
2) Australia considers SK an ally - this is mainly in the US regulated alliance structure. All 3 countries see China and Russia as potential strategic opponents.
3) If SK built a KSS-N then Japan would almost definitely respond by building a nuclear propelled "Soryu". (Japan and SK are not enemies but they are not friends either.) Australia would probably respond by asking the US to sell (about 6) Virginia SSNs/SSGNs to Australia.
4) Australia's current strategy is to support the US in order to persuade the US to keep on defending Australia against nuclear powers. This is called extended nuclear deterrence.
If the US didn't help or wouldn't at least sell us SSNs/SSGNs then Australia might need to develop its own nuclear weapons for "armed neutrality".
Mead’s exit may coincide
with Australia’s AUKUS submarine plan now being in disarray because the
US has offered South Korea competing access to limited US nuclear submarine
technology, production and probably training resources.
In what may be a major ASA failure it appears Australia only became aware of the US-South Korea Nuclear Submarine deal when it was announced by Trump on Truth Social on October 30, 2025.
This lack of notice or advice to Australia represents yet another example of Trumpist bad faith towards the US allies.
If true (corroborating intelligence is required) Trump's surprise approval (see Article below) for South Korea (SK) to build nuclear submarines has many implications, including:
- Trump (to maximise US profits) might want Australia and SK to embark on abidding war to secure scarce US nuclear submarine resources. This includes whole subs, US submarine reactor technology and the very highly enriched (95% U235) weapons' grade uranium that goes into the US reactors. As bidders Australia and SK are very close in Nominal GDP (see Table) hence similar in bidding capability.
- The already high risk AUKUS Pillar 1 agreement for Virginia submarines is more uncertain than up to mid October 2025, when AUKUS Pillar 1 US good faith was taken for granted by the Australian Government. Risks include huge costs, lengthy timelines and inability of the US to build Virginias quickly enough to keep its end of the Virginia sales "by 2032" bargain. In a nutshell the entry of SK's needs and expectations adds uncertainty.
REVISIONS and Additions REDDED
- What does SK say it wants and what does it really want? It seems SK, will pay the multi-$Billion nuclear sub entry fee to the US via construction of a prototype "K-SSN" SK and the US build at Hanwha Ocean's "Philly" [Philadelphia] USA shipyard. So in the medium term (10 years) SK will develop its submarine reactor integration knowledge and experience.
- The K-SSN prototype can be seen as akin the UK's original Dreadnought SSN prototype completed in 1962. SSBN's also rely on SSNs when leaving and entering base. K-SSN could also be useful against any SSBN North Korea (NK) develops and with an outside chance Russia may sell used Delta-class SSBNs to NK.
- What I think SK really wants, in the medium-long term (10-20 years), is to build nuclear ballistic missile armed SSBNs in SK for its first and second strike capability against North Korea. Such a development may be more possible once SK, like Australia, proves itself a source of funding for the US's nuclear sub supply chain. Also SK is greater value than Australia to the US because SK's highly efficient submarine building skills can increase the productivity of the US's slow build submarine industry.
- SK already has ballistic missile submarines in the shape of its KSS-III Batch 1s and 2s. All other ballistic missile subs in the world are nuclear powered because a reactor allows them to stay safely fully submerged and travel at 18 knots for 3 months rather than 3 weeks at 4 knots for SK's current conventional/AIP KSS-IIIs - with predictable needs to run very noisy diesels. So a "K-SSBN" is far less vulnerable than SK's current SSBs. Hence SK logically is also seeking nuclear power/reactors.
The Hyunmoo-4.4 SLBMs, probably on the KSS-llls, may have 500km range limitations. But I note SK is developing a much longer range 3,000 kmsHyunmoo-5land based ballistic missile (IRBM). In land based form it is too heavy and tall, as it must boost a large 8 tonne conventional warhead. But for only a one tonne nuclear warhead a 10m tall Hyunmoo-5 at 1.6m diameter would be a well miniaturized SLBM with perhaps a range of 5,500km. That may be ideal for a KSS-lll SSBs or K-SSBNs to have much safe sea-space to hit NK from afar. Such a missile would be slightly larger than the 1964 Polaris A-3.
Since 2015 I have speculated SK's KSS-III Batch 3 (then called KSSN or KSS-N) subs would be nuclear powered.
Also see my:
2020 article (on SK's request for enriched uranium for submarine reactors from the first Trump administration)
September 2025 article (where I also discuss SK strategic tensions with Japan which might cause Japan to develop a nuclear sub reactor).
Trump's SK surprise also has implications for Canada which has suffered US opposition to Canada purchasing UK or French nuclear submarines for decades. Canada wants superior under ice performance in its future class of subs. Nuclear subs would be ideal. So Canada will be arguing "if it is OK for Australia and SK to have nuclear subs why not us (Canada) as well?" SK could build SSNs for Canada.
"South Korea requests US approval for acquiring
nuclear-powered submarines"
"South Korean
President Lee Jae-myung has asked US President Donald Trump
for approval to acquire nuclear-powered submarines at a summit meeting on
Wednesday.
Trump wrote on [Truth
Social at https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/115459650821125830, on October 30, 2025], "Our Military Alliance is stronger
than ever before and, based on that, I have given them [South Korea]
approval to build a Nuclear Powered Submarine."
The two leaders met in the South Korean city of Gyeongju to discuss tariffs and
North Korea, among other things.
Lee told Trump he hopes the US president will decide
to allow South Korea to acquire fuel supplies for nuclear-powered submarines so
that it can build several such vessels using its own technology.
Lee added that South Korea using nuclear-powered
submarines to defend the waters around the Korean Peninsula would ultimately
reduce the burden on US forces.
South Korea's Yonhap News Agency reported that it is the first time the South Korean
government has made public its intention to acquire nuclear-powered submarines.
The media outlet carried an analysis presuming that
the South Korean request comes as Seoul feels the need to promptly put
nuclear-powered submarines into operational deployment to deal with threats
from Pyongyang [North Korea]."
Mouse plague in Australia 4 years ago, here and above. It may happen again in 2025-26. ---
1.There could be a mouse
plague in southeastern Australia over the next 6 months due to higher rainfall this year is some parts. The plague starts in grain growing areas and then
spreads to coastal areas in high green and brown grass. Then mice move to food
sources inside houses and supermarkets, etc. As well as crop damage mice eat electrical wiring of fridges, cars and tractors is destructive.
2.The AUKUS deal is not guaranteed despite Mr
Trump's vague endorsement. The first Virginia nuclear sub may arrive here in
2043 not the originally envisaged 2032. The only 2 US submarine factories must
complete the higher priority Columbia-class nuclear missile subs first – due to
happen by 2042 or later. Only then can they speed up production of the
Virginias to 4 a year – sufficient to export Virginias to Australia. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-10-22/concern-remain-over-aukus-following-trump-talk/105918678
3.In 2006 Australia signed a dealto export vast amounts of Uranium (U) to China. This may not have meant Aussie U going into Chinese nuclear weapons. But it freed up China's own U mines to concentrate their production for Chinese nuclear weapons, All this means Australia is party to an indirect bilateral supply chain for Chinese nuclear weapons.
4. More recently 2Chinese companies are the largest
shareholders in 2 Australian mines producing minerals vital for China’s
hypersonic missiles and nuclear programs. The Australian government even gave
one of the Chinese companies a $160 million soft loan to help it into production. China
depends on imports for its supply of critical mineral Zirconium.
Australia is the world's largest Zirconium producer and supplies China with 41% of its Zirconium
supplies. Australian Zirconium eventually finds its way to Chinese
and Russian weapons –see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-03/china-critical-mineral-nuclear-program-australia-supplying/105951072
6. Because hybrid and electric
vehicles are very silent when backing up, travelling a few 100 meters forward
or a whole trip new government regulations will require an Acoustic Vehicle
Alerting System (AVAS). Drivers of EVs are able to choose the sound
effect - from ghost moaning, ice cream van jingles, to Teslas farting. Listen
to this https://youtu.be/seEVSFq3FmE?si=NaDr0uSmTd8lZ9Ia
7. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor is moving into another
mansion, early next year. This time on the royal5 mansion and one palace size Sandringham estate. At least 2 layers of security cover the perimeter of the entire 20,000 acre Sandringham Estate. Andrew will not need to contribute to those layers of security. So this means Andrew is hardly the paying private citizen many British public and many Parliamentarians demanded.
8. Cute Animal Corner:
People on a whale watching tour off the California coast were lucky
enough to spot a gray whale giving birth. After seeing a pool of blood, the
tourists feared the whale had encountered a predator. But they soon saw a
smaller fluke, or tail, poke out from under the water. The newborn calf nuzzled
as the mom held it up because newborn whales cannot swim well for 24 hours
until their tails become rigid.
9. Large software upgrades often cause grief as Australian telecommunication carriers and large banks are increasingly experiencing. This is the old Bureau of
Meteorology (BOM) all-Australia-rain-weather-radar MAP the BOM
deleted 2 weeks ago - that the BOM was forced by huge political pressure to reinstate: https://reg.bom.gov.au/products/national_radar_sat.loop.shtml .
.jpg/1920px-CNO_Adm._Lisa_Franchetti_speaks_in_front_of_Boeing%E2%80%99s_Orca_Extra_Large_Unmanned_Undersea_Vehicle_(cropped).jpg)
