I just discovered something I didn’t really notice before, on The Australian Nuclear Powered Submarine Taskforce website. That is not a bad Youtube video, which I also found at https://youtu.be/1Ww5kCgkLZY .
It includes shots of Astutes, Virginias and a Los Angeles – all after 50 seconds. There appears to be equivalent airtime for Astutes (presumably implying the SSN(R)) and Virginias – leaving me none the wiser on what the Taskforce/Aus DoD may prefer.
Although elsewhere I’m predicting UK SSN(R) hull and reactor = 60% chance and late model Virginia/SSN(X) = 30% chance.
Either way both hull choices will include the Combat System basis the US shares with the Collins SSK – though a much more capable Combat System version harnessing the massive electrical power from an SSN’s reactor (versus the Collins’ comparatively miniscule diesel-electric power).
All might be revealed in the late 2040s when an Aus SSN, might, just might, be commissioned…which I might see, if I get to 90.
2 comments:
There still seems to be ongoing support for a potential UK design but US reactor situation. Astute cannot take the PWR3 reactor as its too wide & doesn't physically fit. The US SG9 reactor will physically fit but is longer than the PWR2 reactor & require some redesign of the sub layout. In SSN(R), either SG9 or PWR3 are an option. The main reasons I can see for looking at that is that-
1/ Australia could get moving faster (Astute jigs available & building an existing built design)
2/ Australia could still shift to SSN(R) as a batch 2 (once it is actually designed & built)
3/ US can build reactors faster (as SG9 is already in full production).
4/ Reactor support from the US is closer & they have an up & running decommissioning plan.
Hi Anonymous @Feb 27, 2023, 3:43:00 PM
I've written an article in reply to your comments.
See "Aus Choosing UK Likely: But Within SSN(R) Constraints" of Feb 27, 2023 at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/02/aus-choosing-uk-likely-but-within-ssnr.html
Regards Pete
Post a Comment