July 20, 2023

US Republican Analyst: Not Enough Virginias for AUKUS

John Noonan is an American republican national security commentator and analyst. He is a former policy advisor to Republican politicians and a former USAF ICBM launch officer.

In the following excerpt from his National Review article Biden’s Vaunted Submarine Deal Needs Meat on Its Bonesof July 19, 2023, Noonan strongly doubts the US will have enough Virginias available for Australia. Noonan also takes it as given Australia will be drawn into any war against China. 

It is also implicit from the article that the multi-billion dollars in Australian taxpayers' money that the Albanese Government is donating to the US submarine industrial base, is wasted.

The except is:

“…every silver lining has a cloud. And that is the sad state of American shipbuilding. The Navy says we need 66 attack submarines. We have 49, a number will soon drop to 46. Worse, while the Navy claims 66 total hulls is the target, reality dictates that this is a floor not a ceiling. When I worked these issues in the Senate, I always found it odd that the goal of 66 attacks subs stayed static as the number of Chinese battle-force ships rose and rose and rose. The real number is no doubt closer to 80-85 hulls with room for growth. In 1989, we had 97 boats with 19 under construction, in maintenance, or being reactivated. So we’re low. Far too low. Australia is a good ally that can act as America’s right arm in a war with Beijing. But it is a valid question if now is the time for America to be shedding even more submarine hulls.

This hard-nosed reality was made clear by Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the head Republican on the powerful Senate Armed Services Committee, in the WSJ: 

Nearly 40% of U.S. attack submarines cannot be deployed because of maintenance delays. For example, the USS Connecticut had an accident in the South China Sea in 2021 and likely won’t be operational until 2026.

The U.S. submarine industrial base is producing an average of 1.2 Virginia-class attack submarines a year, short of the two our Navy needs. There are many reasons for this underperformance. For years, the U.S. government purchased only one submarine annually—hardly enough to maintain a strong industrial base.

By comparison, during the 1980s we bought four times as many. The effort to ramp up production to a rate of two attack submarines a year has been plagued with workforce and supply-chain challenges.

To keep the commitment made under Aukus, and not reduce our own fleet, the U.S. would have to produce between 2.3 and 2.5 attack submarines a year.

The Navy has suggested that we could fill the long-term gap by shifting skilled workers on the Columbia submarine program to the Virginia or SSN(X) attack subs when it wraps in 2045. But that is not a solution. We will need more than twelve Columbias, those are the fat-hulled subs pregnant with nuclear ballistic missiles, as China expands its nuclear forces. You cannot grow a master shipbuilder with a one-off dump of supplemental funds into a presidential budget request, as some have suggested. Nor can you order a yard to do 30 percent more things on existing or inflation-adjusted budgets and expect new subs to pop out like a rabbit from a magician’s hat. 

The threat from China’s fleet is serious, so we want the Royal Australian Navy armed to the gills. They are so integrated with us they may as well be part of the U.S. Navy. But this is a problem too common with the Biden administration. A good idea made worse by rosy estimates and suspect planning. The next presidential budget dump in late winter [February 2024] will signal to Australia and Britain if they are serious or not. If the White House asks Congress for real money, with a real multi-year intent behind a real effort to unscrew our production and maintenance woes, they might just make their one foreign-policy victory a reality.”

July 18, 2023

Nuclear Waste Dumps on AUKUS Nuclear Sub Program

Pete Comment

Australian governments have searched for a suitable permanent Low to Intermediate level nuclear waste dump site for 43 years (since 1980) if not longer. The many false starts with lack of success over thos 43 years is a definite measure of the unpopularity of most nuclear ideas in Australia. This includes the continued rejection by Australians of nuclear power/electricity reactors. Australia has only operated small nuclear medicine/experimental reactors and/or other small nuclear equipment since the 1950s.  

In a blow to the Australian Government's current hope to establish a future Low to Intermediate level nuclear waste dump near Kimba, South Australia, a court decision (see Article below) quashed it today.

It is quite likely the Australian Government intended to upgrade "Kimba" waste dump by the 2050s to take High Level nuclear waste from Australia's future decommissioned AUKUS  nuclear submarines. 

Australia's Spent Nuclear Fuel/Nuclear Waste Obligations

Australia is Party to the UN Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management (“The Convention”). 

The Convention applies to many things, including spent fuel resulting from the operation of civilian and military (including submarine) nuclear reactors and to radioactive waste resulting from civilian and defence programs.

Australia’s obligations as a Party to The Convention are many, including “appropriate siting, design and construction of waste storage and disposal facilities”.

In the international nuclear industry the onus of storing spent nuclear fuel/nuclear waste falls to countries originating the fuel/waste. This becomes complex if the US or UK provides the AUKUS HEU placed in a UK or US built AUKUS nuclear submarine reactor that is then sold second hand or new to Australia. Who, then, is responsible?

Lack of Public Consultation For The Albanese Government's Nuclear Program 

The Australian public have never been permitted to vote for the Morrison Coalition or Albanese Labor Governments' AUKUS nuclear submarine program. No referendum on that. Is it therefore possible that, after Albanese has spent many $Billions of Australian taxpayers' money on these submarines, Australians will prevail upon a future Australian Government to cancel this submarine program! 

Australia is just a small-medium "power". Nuclear attack submarines (SSNs), that Albanese has signed us up to buy, are extremely expensive weapons that only Great Powers have been able to afford and justify. SSNs, to date, have been restricted to nuclear weapon powers. This is due to SSNs' main high-level warfare functions being to protect friendly nuclear armed SSBNs, while tracking and perhaps destroying enemy SSBNs. 

Put simply the highest goal of Australia's future SSNs would be to protect US and UK SSBNs while also tracking and perhaps destroying Chinese and perhaps Russian SSBNs. This would directly involve Australia fighting nuclear armed China and perhaps Russia, potentially with Australia as a combatant in a nuclear war.

Given this, Australian govenrments need to consult we the public on what we are signing up to in buying nuclear submarines for hundreds of billions of dollars.

ARTICLE

Australia's government owned ABC News reports July 18, 2023:

"Traditional owners win legal challenge to stop nuclear waste facility in Kimba"

Traditional owners on South Australia's Eyre Peninsula have won a legal challenge to stop the federal government building a nuclear waste facility near Kimba.

The federal government had planned to store low and intermediate level radioactive waste at the proposed facility.

Barngarla traditional owners applied for a judicial review in the Federal Court, arguing the facility would interfere with a sacred site.

They also said they were not properly consulted about the plan before it was approved in 2021.

The court this morning ruled in favour of the native title group, setting aside a federal government declaration made in 2021, and leaving the future of the project in severe doubt.

Justice Natalie Charlesworth made the decision in favour of the Barngarla people on the grounds there was apprehended bias in the decision-making process in selecting the site due to "pre-judgement"


"An artist's impression of the proposed nuclear waste storage facility near Kimba." (Supplied via ABC)
---

...MUCH MORE IN THE ABC ARTICLE.

Orcas/Killer Whales Damaging Yatchs

Submarine Matters now extends to submersible animals, eg. Orcas/Killer Whales.

Why have Orcas recently been attacking yatchs?

A short video is here and below.



Longer explanations come from Popular Mechanics here dated June 30, 2023.

July 13, 2023

AUKUS Subs Main Role Related to Nuclear War

Marine Engineer, Professor Jonathan Gates authoritative 188 page UK publication: 

Astute Class Nuclear Submarine: 2010 to date (Haynes Owners' Workshop Manual, 2018).

On page 159 Gates indicates the most important missions of Astute submarines (and by extension SSNs generally):

"Astute class submarines have a major role in ensuring that SSBNs are not followed in peacetime and are protected in wartime. 

They are also responsible for tracking enemy SSBNs and neutralising them in times of war."

All navies that have SSNs see their SSNs' major role as protecting their own nuclear missile armed SSBNs while being prepared to destroy enemy SSBNs. 

Following Australia's policy of Collins SSK interoperability with US SSNs escalating in the 2030s to Australian SSNs becoming "interchangeable" with US SSNs:

1.  Where does this leave Australia? Australia's intention is to acquire a large fleet of 8 SSNs for a "small-medium" power, while having no public plans to acquire SSBNs.

Or will Australia become an ally in nuclear war fighting...

2.  Might the Australian Government's insistence that "Australia's AUKUS SSNs will be conventionally armed" disguise roles of protecting US SSBNs in wartime while destroying Chinese SSBNs in wartime? 

3.  Will future non-nuclear Tomahawk cruise missiles for Australian SSNs be gradually replaced by a new class of weapon. That is by US developed nuclear armed hypersonic missiles for Australian SSNs in the 2040s?

July 11, 2023

India May Build 3 More Kalvari-Scorpene Subs

In a report of July 10, 2023 from India's The Print, India might be buying several French designed weapon types. This might include 3 additional Kalvari-class Scorpenes, without AIP, to be assembled at Mumbai's Mazagon dockyard.

The Print report is by SNEHESH ALEX PHILIP and edited by Tony Rai. The report states in part:

"New Delhi: India and France are set to ink key agreements that would pave the way for new fighters and submarines for the Indian Navy during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s upcoming visit to the country for the Bastille Day [July 14, 2023] parade this week, ThePrint has learnt.

On the agenda are a deal to procure 26 naval version of the Rafale fighter jets [and] three additional Scorpene submarine[s]..."

...Another key important project is the Project 75 [Kalvari-class] under which six Scorpene class submarines have been built in India with partnership with state-un Mazagon Dock Limited (MDL).

The Indian Navy is [separately pursuing Project 75I ("I" for India) for 6 SSKs with already proven, operational, AIP].

The French are out of the race for [Project 75I] because they don’t meet key tender requirements of the Indian Navy.

Sources said that the French through their India partner MDL have proposed to the government to build three more [Kalvari-class] Scorpene  submarines [at MDL's existing Kalvari assembly line] with the Indian shipyard making a case for expertise gained while ensuring the vessels do not go waste.

It is understood that the Indian Navy feels that three more Scorpene class submarines can be built since the P75I programme is delayed and could take time for it to see the light of the day.

The Indian Navy is facing a submarine crisis and has fallen back on its 30 year plan which ends in 2030.

Under the ambitious 30-year plan that ends in 2030, India was to build 24 submarines — 18 conventional submarines and six nuclear-powered submarines (SSNs) — as an effective deterrent against China and Pakistan.

Of the 18 conventional submarines, Indian Navy has managed only 6 so far.

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh [chaired] a crucial meeting of the Defence Acquisition Council [DAC] [mentioned below].
---------------------------------

Subsequently, on July 13, 2023, the DAC granted the Acceptance of Necessity (AoN) for procurement of the three additional Scorpenes to be assembled by MDL.

July 8, 2023

3 RAN Officers Graduate US Nuke Sub School

Australia's government owned ABC News, July 8, 2023 reports:

"Inside 'nuke school', the elite US training ground preparing Australian submariners for an AUKUS future"

In America's deep south, a group of students has just completed one of the most rigorous academic programs in the US military.

And for the first time, there were Australians among them.

Three members of the Royal Australian Navy have graduated from the Nuclear Power School in South Carolina, more commonly known as 'nuke school'.

The training pipeline was established with the US as part of the AUKUS agreement, under which Australia will obtain its own nuclear-powered submarines.

"It's a historic event for our Navy, an historic event for our submarine force and I think it's an historic event for our nation," said Australia's Chief of Navy, Vice Admiral Mark Hammond.

"Two years ago, this wasn't on the radar.

"And we've come a long way in such a short period of time but there's a lot more work to do."

Years out from Australia's acquisition of nuclear-powered subs, the graduation is an early step towards making AUKUS a reality.

But there are still major hurdles ahead when it comes to the broader workforce challenges presented by the plan.

Inside 'nuke school'

The three Australians — Lieutenant Commander James Heydon, Lieutenant Commander Adam Klyne, and Lieutenant William Hall – started at the Nuclear Power School in November with the aim of eventually qualifying to operate the reactors onboard nuclear-powered submarines.

Lieutenant Commander Heydon described the course he's just graduated from as a "four-year engineering degree crammed into six months".

"Maths, physics, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, radiological controls, to how do we safely steward and manage the nuclear plant and the nuclear by-products, are I guess aspects of what we've been learning here," he said.

"My experience [in the Australian Navy] was ship design and ship construction.

"While they were aspects here, it was very foreign. So it was … a crash course into the deep end, sink or swim, and we all swam."

The Australians will now have to complete another set of practical learning, which will include spending time on retired nuclear-powered subs known as moored training ships.

After that, they'll receive further training in Connecticut before being assigned to a Virginia-class sub.

"The plan at this stage is to join submarines based in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and they'll complete their training at sea," Vice Admiral Hammond said.

"Ultimately, we need them to pay their skills forward.

"So once they're qualified, sufficiently experienced, then we'll get them back into the ecosystem in a different role."

AUKUS presents major workforce challenges for Australia

The AUKUS plan, announced in San Diego earlier this year, will see Australia acquire a total of eight nuclear-powered submarines at a cost of up to $368 billion. 

US submarines are increasing their visits to Australian ports from this year, and from 2027 HMAS Stirling naval base in Western Australia will host rotations of American and British subs under what's known as 'Submarine Rotational Force-West'.

Australia is expected to buy at least three Virginia-class submarines from the US from the early 2030s, before building its own nuclear-powered boats in Adelaide to be known as SSN-AUKUS.

They will be based on a British design using US technology, with the first scheduled to be delivered in the early 2040s.

Retired submariner and senior fellow at Washington-based think tank the Hudson Institute, Bryan Clark, described it as a "crawl, walk, run" approach.

"The biggest challenge is going to be transitioning from having some Australian-owned, US-built submarines … to having an Australian-built or at least a purpose-built Australian nuclear submarine," he said.

"It's going to require a massive amount of infrastructure, incredible workforce demand, both in terms of technical skills and numbers.

"It just seems like that's going to be a pretty heavy lift on the part of Australia to do nuclear ship construction."


The federal government says AUKUS will create 20,000 jobs over 30 years across the Australian Defence Force, the public service and industry, including roles such as tradespeople, engineers and project managers.

The number of Australian submariners will also need to be increased, with nuclear-powered submarines carrying larger crews and requiring personnel trained to operate the reactor onboard.

"The submariners that come out of Australia are very smart, very capable, fully able to take on that challenge of becoming nuclear plant operators," said Mr Clark, who is also a former executive officer of one of the moored training ships in Charleston.

"The difficulty might be in getting the numbers that you need to be able to man a nuclear submarine."

Virginia-class submarines carry around 132 people, nearly three times the size of the crew onboard the Collins-class boats Australia has now.

And unlike the Collins, nuclear-powered subs do not need to surface regularly to recharge, meaning they can stay submerged for months at a time.

AusAustralia will continue to operate its Collins-class submarines for the orefforseeable future.

Vice Admiral Hammond acknowledged the scale of the task confronting the Navy.

"We were already focused on recruiting, increasing the size of the submarine force and then initially bleeding across in smaller numbers into the nuclear power program and then scaling up as we go," he said.

"So it's a complex challenge, especially given the workforce environment back in Australia.

"Every company, every organisation wants talent. So we'll be focused very, very clearly on recruiting and retaining."

Could Australia set up its own nuke school?

More Australians are expected to follow in the footsteps of the first three graduates in Charleston, while Navy personnel are also training in the UK.

But Vice Admiral Hammond said Australia could eventually host its own training program.

"I think if we're serious about developing a sovereign nuclear submarine capability, then in time, definitely, all parts of the ecosystem built and operated by Australians in Australia, that should be the aim point," he said.

"But we don't need it all at once."

Asked where it could be located, he said the "sensible approach" would be either Adelaide or Perth.

The new subs will be built in South Australia, while Western Australia's HMAS Stirling is undergoing an $8 billion expansion.


[Fleet Base West, just south of Perth, known as] HMAS Stirling is Australia's largest naval base. ()

"They will be the two centres of excellence, if you like, for naval nuclear propulsion in Australia," Vice Admiral Hammond said.

"If you cast our minds forward, probably another 10, 15, 20 years, then the majority of the nuclear-trained submariners will be in the home port of the submarine force.

"There'll be a large number in Adelaide, but most of the boats won't be in Adelaide. So through that lens, probably WA.

"But that's a decision for governments and probably a decision for next decade, I'd imagine."

Challenges lie ahead to bring AUKUS to fruition

Aside from skills and workforce issues, there are other major challenges that still need to be overcome to bring AUKUS to fruition.

The sale of Virginia-class submarines to Australia requires the approval of the US Congress, and significant changes are needed to a complex set of export controls restricting how sensitive technology is transferred.

Questions also remain over how the US will deliver the promised Virginia-class submarines, given the pressure its own shipyards are under to meet local demand.

The US Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday, last month said it was "too early" to provide an answer on exactly where the subs would come from.

"I wouldn't expect them to start identifying submarines by name or by hull number just yet; we've got time to work through that," Vice Admiral Hammond said.

"But at the moment, there is a deep tripartite commitment to doing this."


Lieutenant Commander Heydon, Lieutenant Commander Klyne and Lieutenant Hall will now move onto practical training.(Courtesy FARRAH TOMAZIN via Sydney Morning Herald)
Related Stories