Singapore and Gilmore Space Technologies
Adam Gilmour (above) CEO, Co-Founder of Gilmour Space Technologies with ERIS Block 1, Australia's dual-use capable rocket. ERIS has the classic ICBM size and shape (eg. like a Minuteman III) especially in tonnage at launch. The shape also includes ERIS not having strap-on boosters that would impede each Eris being placed in ICBM silos. (Photo Gilmour Space via Byron Bay's The Echo, March 1, 2024).
[As at 2017 - Adam Gilmour an Australian entrepreneur has chosen Singapore as his base to build his own space startup and carve out a niche of his own...[Adam Gilmour's] rocket factory was located near Changi airport in Singapore,...he [Gilmour] ran an open-plan facility buzzing with activity and packed with futuristic-looking prototypes...his engineers were busy testing a new 3-D printer, which makes rocket fuel in record time. ...“We are working on low-cost small satellite launch vehicles to take satellites with masses up to 400 kilogram to orbit. This capability is matched by few other providers in the industry and we plan to be the cheapest in the market” he explained.]
---------------------------------
Australia has since the 2000s been revisiting nuclear deterrence weapon options, including long range strike platforms. ICBMs based in central Australia could hit Beijing. The dual use Eris 1 rocket at 23m tall and total 34 tonnes mass at liftoff is more than coincidently the size of a US Minuteman III ICBM at 18.3m and total 36 tonnes.
Missile carrying nuclear powered submarines (particularly versatile Virginia Block V and VI - SSGNs) could also hit Beijing and/or Shanghai with SLBMs or SL(Hypersonic)HMs.
Australian Threat
By 2022 an Australian (Aus) bargaining threat to the US was established. Unless the US and/or UK made SSNs available to Aus, Aus could build thermonuclear warheads affixed to "Gilmour" ICBMs. China being the usual potential target.
The US (the aging Biden regime, at least) reacted with AUKUS Pillar 1. The UK (SSN owning junior partner) wanted (or was persuaded) to join this deal. This is, in part, because UK nuclear powered submarine tech and Trident II missile availability to the UK heavily relies on the US.
SILEX makes Australia HEU Capable
The primary stage for an Australian thermonuclear weapon is a fission bomb which Australia could produce using the SILEX process yielding 95% HEU. This would be the trigger for a "secondary" Deuterium–TRITIUM fusion bomb.
Deuterium is extracted by separating heavy water (D₂O) from ordinary water and then isolating the deuterium gas. This is all within Australian scientific-industrial capabilities. Deuterium–TRITIUM fusion (D-T fusion) is a type of nuclear fusion in which one deuterium (2H) nucleus (deuteron) fuses with one tritium (3H) nucleus (triton) giving one helium-4 nucleus.
As a dual-use cover Australia could build CANDU (Canadian Deuterium Uranium) reactors to generate large amounts of electricity (for Aus large cities). This is while simultaneously producing TRITIUM through neutron capture in CANDU reactor's heavy-water moderator and coolant.
A major problem is the US has called Australia's nuclear bomb blackmail bluff with promised SSNs only likely to emerge mid 2040s onwards. So the US remains Australia's extended deterrence nuclear guardian. But could the likes of a Trump, Hegseth or their America First successors ever be trusted to sacrifice San Francisco to protect Sydney from "Shanghai-Beijing's" nuclear capability?
Fortunately/Unfortunately? Australia, having spent $Billions in up front deposits to the US and UK submarine industrial bases, has lost its SSN bargaining power.
This is indicated by Australia's Defence Industry Minister, Pat Conroy's only passing threat in July 2026 where he stated the Submarine Rotational Force-West (SRF-West) rotation of US submarines through HMAS Stirling in Western Australia would conclude in 2032 unless what? Delivery of the first US SSN to the RAN in 2032 was implicit. This has led to delayed SSN transfer to Australia. This may be forcing Australia to return to nuclear weapon intentions.
While the ERIS and the Minuteman are about the same size they are quite different under the skin. The Minuteman uses 3 solid fuel stages to throw a 350kg reentry vehicle 14000km [Wikipedia], while the ERIS uses hybrid first and second stages and a LOX/kerosene third stage to put 315kg payload into LEO.
ReplyDeleteWhile solid fuel is preferred for storage and reliability the first and second stages of the ERIS combine a solid fuel and a storeable liquid oxidizer, High Test Peroxide. While HTP can be difficult to handle safely this can be done - Sweden uses it in its Torped 62 heavyweight torpedo.
The problem arises in the third stage. L9X can only be loaded just before launch, which is not ideal f9r a nuclear deterrent.
This, however, is not necessarily a show stopper. The third stage on the ERIS is needed to put the payload into orbit. Beijing is less than 8000km from the red center of Australia, and it may well be that a 2 stage ERIS derivative would be able to fulfill the mission.
Another thing to remember is that you need more than just a missile and a bomb. You need a guidance system that can hit a target, a reentry vehicle to get your payload back down to the ground, and penetration aids to get past any defenses. None of these are impossible but none of them are cheap.
Hi Bill of 8/30/2026 10:35 PM
ReplyDeleteOh thou of little thermonuclear faith.
Amazing what 2 further decades of Eris development will achieve to iron out those manifest deficiencies. Israel had years of help from France on Dimona + the Dassault-Jericho series. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho_(missile)
Would that Aussie Uranium + ISRAUKUS cash greases the palms of Bibi's little helpers.
Cheers Pete
I doubt it would take more than a couple of years to develop an Eris based ICBM once the satellite launcher variant is flying reliably. The Eris Block 1 can push something of near warhead mass all the way to orbit and an Australian ICBM would only need an 8000km range to threaten China.
ReplyDeleteWarhead, reentry, navigation and penetratration aids are the long poles in the tent.
I would note that there has been mention of a Eris Block 2 design that could put 1000kg in orbit. Having more payload to play with makes designing all the other warhead features easier.
Hi Bill at 9/01/2026 6:40 PM
ReplyDeleteThanks for the info on Eris Block 1 and 2 specs/plans.
For Australia to expend the very expensive political and economic capital to develop towards Eris Block 2(?) in a "couple of years" I think Australia would need to satisfy some conditions.
We would need to avoid great and regional power opposition:
Our job would be much easier (even possible) if one-some-or-all of the following geo-strategic changes occurred by 2029:
- China successfully invades or in other ways absorbs Taiwan
- China, like Japan in WW2, then demonstrates moves by its armed forces to further expand into other E Asian, SE Asian and Pac Island countries.
- SK and Japan start signalling nuclear weapons plans to counter China (possibly also Siberian Russia and/or NK).
- NK goes further nuclear threatening rogue to regional countries far further out than SK and Japan.
- final Aus acceptance that AUKUS will not amount to SSNs/SSGNs for Australia by 2034.
Tall orders but necessary for Aus to operate within the politically doable.
Regards Pete