On January 21, 2022 Lee McCurtayne asked me:
"What is your opinion of the latest Los Angeles class submarine and in your opinion does it tick the majority of the boxes for our needs."
My response:
1. The US has expressed many times that it needs every SSN for its own Navy, hence the US is not offering any Los Angeles-class SSNs to Australia. ie. no "tick"
2. The Los Angeles-class were last built 25 years ago, in 1995-96, so there are no US shipyard facilities to build new ones. ie. no tick.
3. Instead the US focus is currently on building Virginia-class SSNs with around 40 more to be built. If Australia decided to buy US SSNs Australia's long term focus might be better placed on Virginia class SSNs or even the US' follow-on SSN(X) class.
4. Need to realise large numbers of nuclear trained Australian personnel are essential. It will take Australia 15+ years for nuclear knowledgable Australian submarine officers, senior crew, maintainers and safety regulators to be produced. By that year, from 2036, the youngest Los Angeles submarine, USS Cheyenne, will be 40 years old, but probably retired. By 2036 it will no longer be functional. ie. no "tick".
5. By the 2030s, Los Angeles SSN reactors will be too old-style and uneconomic to be refueled. Reactor life and modernity issues are crucial for SSNs. ie. no "tick".
6. Their hulls will also be near their end of life metal-fatigue dive cycles. Submarines can only dive and surface a limited number of times due to contractions and expansions of their pressure hull steel. ie. no "tick".
7. All this means that Australia is after new build, modern hull, modern reactor submarines from the US or, more likely, the UK. This needs to coincide with large numbers of nuclear trained Australian submariners, maintainers and nuclear safety regulators. They will need to be trained initially in the US and UK:
- on shore based civilian and naval nuclear training facilities
- eventually some will be seconded to US though perhaps mainly UK SSNs,
- later trained at Australian shore based nuclear facilities, and
- ultimately on Australian SSNs (partly, not completely, built in Australia).
Hi Pete,
ReplyDeleteMy take is that a Virginia class SSN is way too much for Australia because they don't have the numbers to crew even a single Virginia class SSN. They are more likely to go with Astute class SSN's because it fits Australia's crew requirements.
Hi Nicky
ReplyDeleteYes, considering Australia's fewer available submariners number of crew is an important consideration favouring:
the Astutes with 98 crew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute-class_submarine
compared to
the higher numbers on Virginias, which is 135 crew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_submarine
One other consideration (I've read about) is the Virginias having the extra crew margin for damage control (eg. fire risk) amongst other reasons. What value extra safety?
Pete