# Australia's submarine solution



## Sean K (13 January 2012)

Like our car industry it seems the only good reason the government has to build our new subs (and to have built the Collins) in Adelaide is that we need to maintain a national manufacturing / engineering capability. 

Should that come at the expense of national security however?

Our Collins has been a turkey in just about every sense. A deterrent and capability on paper only. I think on average we've only had one boat fully manned and sea-worthy at any one time for a number of years. Lucky we've had the US floating by and no adversary except NZ kayakers. Obviously that will change in the coming years with the emergence of China and other minor SE Asian powers responding. Add India.

I like the idea of us building our own boats. Long range conventional things that we can build and maintain, that our Baby Boomer no-nuclear NIMBY type would sign off on. However, as with the Collins, it will without doubt be a colossal failure and waste of resources that could be pushed into Pink Batts and the like. At a time when we _really_ actually do need to be developing this capability. We _can't_ get this one wrong. 

Any thoughts from the ASF Defence mindful community, or BB NIMBYs?


----------



## Glen48 (13 January 2012)

Oz has turned out some good products like the Black box which is orange and no one wanted them now they have them in cars, hearing aid implants etc  we have the ability to be world beaters given the right Government by all parties have to check with USA first  in case we step on their toes and upset the true believers in free Enterprise.


----------



## Sean K (14 January 2012)

Glen48 said:


> Oz has turned out some good products like the Black box which is orange.



Must grab on to that orange box next time the plane heads down.


Not sure why our Navy finds it hard to keep their sailors. They get paid about twice as much as a soldier, are at sea about the same as a regular sailor, get to wear pretty cool black overalls, and double dolphins on their uniform. They are very special. I guess the extra confinement under the surface is a concern especially when you can't trust the engines on board. 

Perhaps having a world class piece of kit to descend would save some angst and provide enough confidence to take up the challenge. 

Like an LA Class Attack Boat. 

Let's rent 4 of the suckers based at Stirling, and ask the US to maintain them in Hawaii for allowing their own boats to park here occasionally as part of the new 'Marines in the NT' plan. A relatively short term quick fix to our imminent no-submarine-Navy. 

Once that has filled the gap, continue work on our own conventional machines as our indigenous capability to satisfy SA Defence industry and the tree huggers.

Ooops, can't have nuclear subs being operated by Australia. 

Must check on that nuclear medicine research also. And, are we selling uranium to India now? Whatever, that's different.


----------



## Smurf1976 (14 January 2012)

kennas said:


> Must grab on to that orange box next time the plane heads down.



The ability to retrieve information after a crash has without doubt lead to a greater understanding of the causes of actual aircraft crashes and hence the ability to avoid repeating the same mistakes in future. 

How many lives this has saved is anyone's guess, but the answer would surely be "a lot".

The reason for the orange colour of the box is to make it more visible amongst the wreckage, especially where it may be in water or scattered amongst a forest etc over a considerable distance. Orange just stands out easily amongst those surroundings, the same as those orange jackets the road works people wear to make them more visible and improve safety.


----------



## Calliope (14 January 2012)

kennas said:


> I like the idea of us building our own boats. Long range conventional things that we can build and maintain, that our Baby Boomer no-nuclear NIMBY type would sign off on. However, as with the Collins, it will without doubt be a colossal failure and waste of resources that could be pushed into Pink Batts and the like. At a time when we _really_ actually do need to be developing this capability. We _can't_ get this one wrong.




When it comes to big projects Labor governments always get it wrong. They think they can fix anything by throwing money at it.



> But, flawed as the Collins process was, even less work was done by the Rudd government on the Future Submarine program before it was announced. As with the National Broadband Network, only the most cursory costing was carried out. Little serious consideration was given to the vessel's specifications. And the decision to assemble the submarines in Adelaide, thus excluding imports of fully built vessels, was entirely political.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-to-enemy-within/story-fn7078da-1226242990568


----------



## Sean K (17 January 2012)

Great summary by Ross Babbage here and is as clear as day.

Let's hope the no nuclear option idiots wake up because we will be left in long term security wilderness otherwise. Our future depends on it. 

We'll be sunk if we don't choose the best submarine 

This is much more significant than any other Defence purchase that I can imagine in recent times.


----------



## Sean K (10 November 2012)

Australia must stop trying to build an indigenous boat costing multiple amounts of COTS options when we have the US offering up superior machines for less. It just doesn't make sense to make the same Collins mistakes again. One of the supposed reasons for our support of the US in Iraq and Afghanistan was the political collateral. It's being offered up in submarines. 

I have no doubt our pig-headed government and ignorant population who think 'nuclear' means nuclear weapons will turn this opportunity down. 

http://afr.com/f/free/blogs/christopher_joye/coalition_leaders_float_nuclear_FTYU0PR4uJLeGinF94G5kI


----------



## bellenuit (10 November 2012)

kennas said:


> Australia must stop trying to build an indigenous boat costing multiple amounts of COTS options when we have the US offering up superior machines for less. It just doesn't make sense to make the same Collins mistakes again. One of the supposed reasons for our support of the US in Iraq and Afghanistan was the political collateral. It's being offered up in submarines.
> http://afr.com/f/free/blogs/christopher_joye/coalition_leaders_float_nuclear_FTYU0PR4uJLeGinF94G5kI




+1

I read in some newspaper today where it said that China would disapprove of Australia buying US nuclear submarines.  Whichever type of submarine is likely to engender the maximum disapproval from China, should be the one we go for IMO.  Though not an enemy, China remains a potential adversary should a day come when its interests conflicts with ours. While it continues to build up its military might when there is no regional threat to it, there is nothing it would like better than the rest of the region to do the opposite. You can be sure that the only thing that would not attract Chinese disapproval is for us to acquire outdated armaments and pursue ineffectual policies.


----------



## DB008 (10 November 2012)

bellenuit said:


> I read in some newspaper today where it said that China would disapprove of Australia buying US nuclear submarines.  Whichever type of submarine is likely to engender the maximum disapproval from China, should be the one we go for IMO.  Though not an enemy, China remains a potential adversary should a day come when its interests conflicts with ours. While it continues to build up its military might when there is no regional threat to it, there is nothing it would like better than the rest of the region to do the opposite. You can be sure that the only thing that would not attract Chinese disapproval is for us to acquire outdated armaments and pursue ineffectual policies.




+1

I also mentioned earlier this year that there was a great AFR article about the costs of the submarines getting built here in Oz. Buy from USA or Spain and save yourself the money, seems logical, doesn't it?


----------



## banco (10 November 2012)

The navy has a lot to answer for with the collins submarines.  They insist on vapourware, customisng and goldplating everything to the nth degree and then we end up with these hugely expensive white elephants that have terrible reliability.


----------



## DB008 (28 December 2012)

Report out...



> *Keeping Collins afloat ludicrous: expert*
> 
> The Defence Materiel Organisation cannot be trusted to deliver accurate cost estimates or capability projections for the country's $36 billion future submarine fleet, a senior naval analyst has said.
> 
> ...




http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/keeping-collins-afloat-ludicrous-expert-20121209-2b3zb.html


----------



## burglar (28 December 2012)

Keeping Collins afloat?????

I thought it was a sub !


----------



## Sean K (29 April 2014)

How much are we spending on inferior boats to the Virginia? $40b?

http://www.defensenews.com/article/...80024/US-Navy-Orders-10-New-Subs-Record-17-6B

Are we really this stupid? 

Oh, right, can't have nuclear power that causes no emissions, etc.


----------



## sydboy007 (30 April 2014)

Calliope said:


> When it comes to big projects Labor governments always get it wrong. They think they can fix anything by throwing money at it.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...-to-enemy-within/story-fn7078da-1226242990568




Yet Howard signed up for the JSF and Abbott has pretty much doubled down on it even though the cost has been ballooning and other countries have started to pull their purchase orders.  Government waste on the defence industry has bipartisan support at the federal level.

Abbott is looking to spend $10-15B to help the inefficient local defence industry make 1000 armoured vehicles.  He's still seriously considering building the submarines when we could import them for $5-6B a piece.


----------



## SirRumpole (30 April 2014)

I can see us going the same way as Britain did in the 1950-60's. Develop a product, sort out the teething problems, get it working well, then throw all that knowledge and intellectual property out because of cost or political considerations.

A smart country learns, researches, developes, improves and produces. Dumb countries just hand over money to the smart countries.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 April 2019)

$50 billion so they can argue about when to have lunch.

WTF ?????

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04...shes-lunch-meeting-times-naval-group/11049748


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2021)

So we are going to nuclear powered subs.

Great news, more jobs, more capability (more expense).

This will give you know who something to think about and advance our capabilities.

It's about time.


----------



## Sean K (16 September 2021)

This should have been the initial plan. But, there probably wasn't enough political will to mention the word nuclear until recently and China's increasing threat and belligerence.

I'm interested in what they're going to do with the French. Maybe we build 6 x conventional and then 6 x nuclear? That's probably going to be too complicated and end up costing more. Better to ditch the froggies and go straight to a copy of the Virginia Class.

We'll have to allow the US/UK to build a maintenance facility in Australia I think. The US can then possibly base a squadron of their own boats here. 

The fluff about these being just nuclear powered, not nuclear armed or lead to nuclear energy, is a bit of a furphy I think. This will be a gateway drug for nuclear down the track.


----------



## IFocus (16 September 2021)

kennas said:


> This should have been the initial plan. But, there probably wasn't enough political will to mention the word nuclear until recently and China's increasing threat and belligerence.
> 
> I'm interested in what they're going to do with the French. Maybe we build 6 x conventional and then 6 x nuclear? That's probably going to be too complicated and end up costing more. Better to ditch the froggies and go straight to a copy of the Virginia Class.
> 
> ...




Spot on, nuclear weapon's really are our only choice against China, I am anti nuclear but a realist and also anti being forced having to speak Chinese.

If we get processing tech then nuclear power becomes more viable as perhaps a base load option still its the most expensive option.


----------



## Sean K (16 September 2021)

The Canadians are freaking out that the US, UK and AS are doing this. The Canucks are in integral part of ABCA Armies and Five Eyes and arguably an even closer ally to the US than us. A lot of people will think they've been left out. I think they may have been part of the initial discussions on this but there's no way Trudeau would have joined this gang. Unless they painted the subs in rainbow colours perhaps...


----------



## sptrawler (16 September 2021)

kennas said:


> The Canadians are freaking out that the US, UK and AS are doing this. The Canucks are in integral part of ABCA Armies and Five Eyes and arguably an even closer ally to the US than us. A lot of people will think they've been left out. I think they may have been part of the initial discussions on this but there's no way Trudeau would have joined this gang. Unless they painted the subs in rainbow colours perhaps...



I think it will give the uranium stocks another leg up.


----------



## macca (16 September 2021)

As posted on ASF Sep 1st in Scomo thread, someone must be reading here

<<I think we should lease some newish stuff from the USA or the UK, maybe a 10 year lease for their spare ships.

Much better than buying a Sub that runs on Diesel in 2050, what an idiot, probably won't even be able to buy diesel by then>>


----------



## sptrawler (16 September 2021)

I see France is upset, well let's not get too upset, they don't hold any punches when upsetting all and sundry. 🤣
Let's be honest, what has the French sub contractor done in the last 5 years?








						French submarine deal with Australia was in troubled waters before AUKUS
					

The $40 billion contract was one of the largest military export deals in 2016




					www.theweek.in
				












						Emmanuel Macron has good reason to feel angry and deceived by Australia
					

Overnight, Paris has gone from viewing Australia as a friend and ally to a nation which can’t be trusted.




					www.smh.com.au
				





*History of delay*

Despite the French protests, there had been indications of problems with the Attack submarine project for several years now. Australian media reports have indicated there were concerns in Canberra about extent of workshare given to Australian companies by Naval Group and delivery timelines and costs.

In January, media reports indicated the cost of the Attack submarine project had risen from Australian dollar 50 billion to nearly Australian dollar 89 billion (US $65 billion). While the first submarines were originally intended to enter service by the "early 2030s", in November 2018, vice admiral Michael Noonan, the chief of the Royal Australian Navy, admitted the first ship may not be operational until 2035.

The last submarine would have entered service by 2050, according to the delayed timeline. The delays had raised concern about the relevance of the new ships, particularly given the continuing growth of China's navy and also Beijing's development of unmanned underwater vessels

Ever since news of delays in the submarine project surfaced, Australian politicians and analysts had called for Canberra to junk the deal and examine buying nuclear submarines from the US.

According to the US Congressional Research Service report on China's naval modernisation in September, as of 2020, China had 46 diesel-electric submarines, six nuclear-attack submarines and four nuclear submarines meant to carry nuclear-armed ballistic missiles. The Royal Australian Navy currently has a fleet of six 'Collins' class submarines that were inducted in the late 1990s and are based on a Swedish design. The delays in the Attack programme had led to calls to upgrade the Collins class submarines.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 September 2021)

sptrawler said:


> I see France is upset, well let's not get too upset, they don't hold any punches when upsetting all and sundry. 🤣
> Let's be honest, what has the French sub contractor done in the last 5 years?
> 
> 
> ...



I heard on the ABC from one of the generals that they still have the plans to upgrade Collins Class. Also they are hoping to get the nuclear subs by 2035 which is as you posted when we would get our new French sub due to all the delays


----------



## moXJO (17 September 2021)

How far up US arse do we have to crawl. The US took advantage of China stopping trade with Australia. They came in and filled the void that we left. And a big part was that scomo decided to mouth off for the US, that had zero benefit for us.

Scomo is an Idiotic turd. All this does is put us in a worse position. We are the ones that will suffer the most for the US playing war games through Asia.

We lose more trade and guarantee that US fills more void.


----------



## sptrawler (17 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> How far up US arse do we have to crawl. The US took advantage of China stopping trade with Australia. They came in and filled the void that we left. And a big part was that scomo decided to mouth off for the US, that had zero benefit for us.
> 
> Scomo is an Idiotic turd. All this does is put us in a worse position. We are the ones that will suffer the most for the US playing war games through Asia.
> 
> We lose more trade and guarantee that US fills more void.



I guess being out here in the middle of nowhere, in a big country full of keenly sought raw materials, we have to be up someone's butt. 🤣
Until WW2 we were up the U.K's butt, from WW2 until the 1960's we were up the U.S and then Japan's butt, from the 1990's until present we have been up China's butt.
Now China has decided that it wants to expand its reach into the Indian and Pacific oceans, through Africa, the Philippines, Taiwan, New Guinea etc, we are looking for a butt to crawl up.
Nothing changes, just the butt, when you are the skinny kid on the block.🤣
Pretending that we are liked in the area, is just dreaming, someone once said Australia is the white trash of Asia, I think that is a commonly held belief.
Just my opinion.


----------



## Knobby22 (17 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> How far up US arse do we have to crawl. The US took advantage of China stopping trade with Australia. They came in and filled the void that we left. And a big part was that scomo decided to mouth off for the US, that had zero benefit for us.
> 
> Scomo is an Idiotic turd. All this does is put us in a worse position. We are the ones that will suffer the most for the US playing war games through Asia.
> 
> We lose more trade and guarantee that US fills more void.



Pretty much what Paul Keating said. Especially about tying us to USA closer.
I don't think China is going to be nice to us anyway after we stupidly mouthed off a while back. 
We need nuclear subs. Maybe we could have got them from France, who we have really pissed off. We pissed of Japan also but they seem to have forgiven us.  








						This pact ties Australia to any US military engagement against China
					

It amounts to dramatic loss of sovereignty, writes the former Australian prime minister.




					www.theage.com.au


----------



## SirRumpole (17 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> How far up US arse do we have to crawl. The US took advantage of China stopping trade with Australia. They came in and filled the void that we left. And a big part was that scomo decided to mouth off for the US, that had zero benefit for us.
> 
> Scomo is an Idiotic turd. All this does is put us in a worse position. We are the ones that will suffer the most for the US playing war games through Asia.
> 
> We lose more trade and guarantee that US fills more void.



Militarily speaking there is a limit to what a country of 20 million people can do against a country of 1 billion.

Waving the flag of Independance is fine except when it comes to the crunch.

 Alliances are more safety, as far as I'm concerned the Yanks can have bases in the NT and FNQ if it's going to give C**** a headache and keep them away from us.


----------



## sptrawler (17 September 2021)

Knobby22 said:


> Pretty much what Paul Keating said. Especially about tying us to USA closer.
> I don't think China is going to be nice to us anyway after we stupidly mouthed off a while back.
> We need nuclear subs. Maybe we could have got them from France, who we have really pissed off. We pissed of Japan also but they seem to have forgiven us.
> 
> ...



My guess is, if China's expansion plans could include a non military takeover of Australia, why wouldn't they? They can install the population and infrastructure to develop Australia's to its potential, all that stands between them and doing it is a small arrogant, self opinionated population. Not being nasty, but being realistic.
Going one step further, if China takes Taiwan, which looks extremely likely, why wouldn't they look South if we aren't aligned with someone and or having nothing but a vocal media to discourage them?

With regard France and upsetting them, when has France worried about anyone but themselves, just look at the crap France gave the U.K for  leaving the EU and ask Greenpeace.


----------



## Sean K (17 September 2021)

Australia is pretty much completely defensive against any middle power or greater. That's why we need a significant asymmetrical deterrence like nuclear subs - and/or/plus the ANZUS treaty. This deal doesn't tie us any more to the US or UK, we have separate defence agreements that do that. This is just about getting the hardware to have our own deterrence stick. If an adversary does X, then XYZ is sent back. 

I can not believe that they're going to take so long to get the first boats built and persisted with all built in Adelaide. It's going to take too long. A better plan may be to put an initial order in for the next 4 available Virginia Class boats (US is only building 2 per year) and in the mean time we develop our capability to build our own in SA. In the mean time we send engineering teams to Newport News for on the job training and start putting our own sub mariners on the US boats for training and experience. By the time the first boat is delivered by the US we could have an entire crew ready to go. Then, repeat.

These things are only $3-5b MOTS.









						Virginia-class submarine - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## sptrawler (17 September 2021)

kennas said:


> I can not believe that they're going to take so long to get the first boats built and persisted with all built in Adelaide.



I'd go one step further and say, I don't believe their going to take so long. 
Small bites, is the way forward IMO.


----------



## IFocus (17 September 2021)

kennas said:


> I can not believe that they're going to take so long to get the first boats built and persisted with all built in Adelaide. It's going to take too long. A better plan may be to put an initial order in for the next 4 available Virginia Class boats (US is only building 2 per year) and in the mean time we develop our capability to build our own in SA. In the mean time we send engineering teams to Newport News for on the job training and start putting our own sub mariners on the US boats for training and experience. By the time the first boat is delivered by the US we could have an entire crew ready to go. Then, repeat.
> 
> These things are only $3-5b MOTS.
> 
> ...





I wonder why this isn't the case surely its not about politics, no military aircraft are built here are they?


----------



## moXJO (18 September 2021)

Couple of problems with subs. First off I'm not sure we can crew that many of them. You are out to sea in a hot cramped tin can. Personally if you want protection then build nukes if you don't mind an arms race. I don't trust the US in having our interest at heart. Or even its ability or stomach to protect us if it goes wrong. 

In saying that, I doubt much of China's army would die for their government at the moment. However.... there's a reason Xi has decided to roll out a program to brainwash this generation of Chinese kids to love government and country. In the future China is definitely planning on some major expansion.

Scomo parading around like a golden buttplug is only enforcing our image as 'outsiders' in Asia.


----------



## sptrawler (18 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> Couple of problems with subs. First off I'm not sure we can crew that many of them. You are out to sea in a hot cramped tin can. Personally if you want protection then build nukes if you don't mind an arms race. I don't trust the US in having our interest at heart. Or even its ability or stomach to protect us if it goes wrong.
> 
> In saying that, I doubt much of China's army would die for their government at the moment. However.... there's a reason Xi has decided to roll out a program to brainwash this generation of Chinese kids to love government and country. In the future China is definitely planning on some major expansion.
> 
> Scomo parading around like a golden buttplug is only enforcing our image as 'outsiders' in Asia.



Yes piss drinking bogans clicking their fingers for another Bintang, is a much better image, as caring sharing neighbours.lol


----------



## Smurf1976 (18 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> You are out to sea in a hot cramped tin can.



I've never been in the military but I've had a look on a couple of subs in the past. Proper ones albeit not actually going anywhere just docked.

They're not quite as cramped as I was expecting but there sure isn't much space inside.

It would need the right sort of person (mentally) to serve on board one I think. Might be alright at first but it would get to people after a while.


----------



## moXJO (18 September 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Yes piss drinking bogans clicking their fingers for another Bintang, is a much better image, as caring sharing neighbours.lol



2 years and tourism is missing us.


----------



## Knobby22 (18 September 2021)

moXJO said:


> 2 years and tourism is missing us.



Yes, we are generally a lot nicer than some other countries tourists.


----------



## SirRumpole (18 September 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> I've never been in the military but I've had a look on a couple of subs in the past. Proper ones albeit not actually going anywhere just docked.
> 
> They're not quite as cramped as I was expecting but there sure isn't much space inside.
> 
> It would need the right sort of person (mentally) to serve on board one I think. Might be alright at first but it would get to people after a while.




I went on an Oberon class when I was a kid.

Hot, smelly and cramped. The smell of diesel oil was pervasive.

Of course you won't get that with nukes. I'm sure they do a lot to keep the environment friendly. 

The idea of spending months underwater in cramped conditions doesn't appeal to me , but the Yanks seem to be able to find crews for their subs.


----------



## IFocus (18 September 2021)

Nuclear are much bigger  and come complete with an ice cream machine in each one...true.


----------



## sptrawler (19 September 2021)

An article from 2019 on the French subs debacle.








						Are Australia’s subs duds?
					

It looked like the deal of the century. Now the $50 billion Future Submarine contract is coming under intense scrutiny as costs mount and timelines balloon.




					www.crikey.com.au


----------



## SirRumpole (19 September 2021)

IFocus said:


> Nuclear are much bigger  and come complete with an ice cream machine in each one...true.




Bomb Alaska ? 

Only in Russian subs.


----------



## macca (19 September 2021)

Dutton mentions leasing USA subs while we build our own, about time they caught up with the thinkers on here.


----------



## sptrawler (20 September 2021)

It looks as though the U.K, U.S and Australian alliance, might have been a good move, when you get those who really have never been friendly saying it was a bad move.
Maybe they were happy with us sitting here, until such times as they were ready to ask us to move on?
How they can feel threatened, when we are sitting down here on our own in the middle of nowhere is ludicrous, if anyone should feel threatened it's us and NZ IMO. 🤣








						North Korea's daunting threat to Australia: 'Dangerous act'
					

North Korea is not happy with Australia's latest move calling it 'extremely undesirable'. Read more.




					au.news.yahoo.com


----------



## sptrawler (20 September 2021)

macca said:


> Dutton mentions leasing USA subs while we build our own, about time they caught up with the thinkers on here.



As I said in post #31, I didn't think it would take long, the deployment of naval personnel and naval excercises to familiarise staff, will ramp up very quickly.
I worked for the U.S Navy for a couple of years and one thing they do, is throw all the resources required at it, whether it works out is another thing. But it wont be from lack of resources or effort. 🤣


----------



## IFocus (30 September 2021)

Keating, 

"The US submarine decision was not just about under-sea warfare, it was about donating eight submarines paid for by us to the command of the United States, as an integral part of its Pacific fleet. Try and think of another country that would do anything this submissive."










						A relic of a bygone age? I might be, but I’m not a defeatist
					

The Coalition is not only turning over control of our defence forces to the US, but shopping our foreign policy too.




					www.smh.com.au


----------



## wayneL (30 September 2021)

Smurf1976 said:


> I've never been in the military but I've had a look on a couple of subs in the past. Proper ones albeit not actually going anywhere just docked.
> 
> They're not quite as cramped as I was expecting but there sure isn't much space inside.
> 
> It would need the right sort of person (mentally) to serve on board one I think. Might be alright at first but it would get to people after a while.




I had a client whose husband was a submariner during the cold war, unfortunately now deceased.

I had many long discussions with him about his time in the subs... He was a sufferer of severe PTSD as a result of those times. A lot of the stuff he told me I'm sure it was probably classified and truly scary about what was only really a few minutes away from 
potentially happening at any time.

The scariest thing was, as the sonar dude, he served on many American subs... Apparently the sonar systems were of Australian design...  That doomsday clock as it turns out was pretty accurate.


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2021)

IFocus said:


> Keating,
> 
> "The US submarine decision was not just about under-sea warfare, it was about donating eight submarines paid for by us to the command of the United States, as an integral part of its Pacific fleet. Try and think of another country that would do anything this submissive."
> 
> ...



Interesting coming from Keating, it just shows how people's perceptions of, respect, submissiveness  and groveling can be different , he and Hawke copped the wrath of the public for wanting to fly the Governments flags at half mast when Hirohito died, guess it all boils back to personal perceptions and beliefs.









						Australians protest Hirohito flag order
					

Flags at government facilities were lowered to half staff across Australia Friday to mark the funeral of Japanese Emperor Hirohito, sparking strikes and...




					www.upi.com
				












						Government Bows To Pressure From War Veterans On Lowering Flag
					

CANBERRA, Australia (AP) _ Outraged war veterans forced the government to back down today on its decision to fly the national flag at half-staff over the Australian War Memorial during Friday's funeral in Japan for Emperor Hirohito.   	   Prime Minister Bob Hawke intervened after a wave of...




					apnews.com
				




Most Countries the size of ours, as sparsely populated as ours and as remote as ours. Would probably jump at the opportunity to obtain state of the art military equipment IMO. I can't think of many Countries that the U.S and the U.K would tie a similar alliance with, as Trump said the EU has been on the U.S apron strings since the second world war.
My guess is the silent majority will think the alliance and the subs is a positive, the Collins class subs were a joke and always ridiculed by the press and public, when the French subs were announced they copped a lot of media flack also.
I think that debacle dated back to Tony Abbotts time in the big chair and from memory he copped heaps over the Japanese diesel subs idea.
Then Turnbull threw that out and went with the French, which has been another fiasco.
The U.S/U.K subs make absolute sense, if you are going to have subs at all, at least they will be state of the art not just another underwater coffin that makes more noise than an tanker. 🤣 
Just my opinion.


----------



## rederob (1 October 2021)

sptrawler said:


> The U.S/U.K subs make absolute sense, if you are going to have subs at all, at least they will be state of the art not just another underwater coffin that makes more noise than an tanker. 🤣
> Just my opinion.



The subs make no sense, except as Keating explained.

These subs cannot be owned by Australia unless we break the Nuclear Nonproliferation Act and set a precedent for every other nation in the world to operate nuclear subs.
The deal will *not *create more jobs and we won't have the skillsets to maintain them.  That's aside from not having anyone capable of operating them unless our crews are drawn significantly from overseas submariners.
Strategically the idea is not sound, especially given that the rationale for the original decision was based on diesel subs being the best suited to serve Australia’s defence interests in Asian waters because of their ability to go quiet so quickly and remain undetected through observation of heat trails. 

We do not need long range submarines unless operating well outside our sphere of influence
Neither Indonesia nor Malaysia are pleased with AUKUS, and it's questionable why we are not instead partnering with the nations between China and Australia for defence compacts, rather than the very distant USA and UK!
We also need more nimble (non-nuclear) submarines if we intend to operate in the shallower waters around SE Asian nations

We will have a gap in submarine capacity for over 20 years, yet the oft vaunted China peril is more immediate
The few submarines we will have do not have the capability of defending our massive shoreline, so it looks like we are putting our eggs into a basket riddled with holes
Is the the rationale for our submarine purchase defence or offence?

Our submarine base in south west Australia is strategically inappropriate
Communicating with subs is very difficult, unless they are near surface, defeating their purpose.  This is important as in today's world situations change quickly and having submarine actions based on day or week old orders is not desirable.
As Hugh White explained in the linked podcast, aligning ourselves with the UK/USA has done us no favours - globally - since the Vietnam War.  He sees us as needing to develop a capability to *defend* Australia based on greater self reliance.  Moreover, we don't get much bang for our buck with nuclear subs and should spend more time on looking at smarter options.  In this latter regard drone and autonomous technologies are increasingly attractive and significantly cheaper than manned craft.  Indeed, our recent "Loyal Wingman" contract with Boeing demonstrates all these points.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2021)

As I said, "if you need subs at all", I'm definitely not a fan of subs.
But then again, I don't profess to be an expert on military strategies.
As for Keating, he as many other ex P.Ms , seem to have a much higher opinion of their council than others do. There was a reason he only served one term.


----------



## IFocus (1 October 2021)

Unfortunately Keating is not the only one raising the issues.

The handling of the French was a major blunder and as Keating points out the only western partner that has assets in our back yard to defend, the Frogs wont forget.


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2021)

IFocus said:


> Unfortunately Keating is not the only one raising the issues.
> 
> The handling of the French was a major blunder and as Keating points out the only western partner that has assets in our back yard to defend, the Frogs wont forget.



Maybe the Frogs (and I'm speaking here of the government not the ordinary folk) have already forgotten the contribution Australians have made to their nation.... With our blood, not our money.


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2021)

wayneL said:


> Maybe the Frogs (and I'm speaking here of the government not the ordinary folk) have already forgotten the contribution Australians have made to their nation.... With our blood, not our money.



Like I said earlier, the frogs never cut the UK any slack, when they wanted out of the EU.
And if the frogs owe anyone any loyalty, its the U.K.
Keating was that far up Asia butt, he needed a snorel IMO.
It was on his watch we lost our manufacturing, now all of a sudden he is going on about our manufacturing, give me a break.


----------



## IFocus (1 October 2021)

China Announces New Nuclear Submarines Won’t Be Allowed To Dock At Their Port In Darwin​
China’s port in Darwin will be off-limits to our new nuclear submarines.

The announcement was made today via state media in Beijing with the government suggesting that the ban is over environmental concerns similar to those harboured by the New Zealand Government.

The move has blindsided Acting Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, who told_ The Advocate_ today that he was very disappointed by the decision.

“Apparently, the Chinese Government tried to call us last night but nobody was at the office,” said Joyce.

“Anyway, it was bloody immature of these Chinese to just bloody spring that on us with no warning. Shithouse at diplomacy they are.”










						China Announces New Nuclear Submarines Won't Be Allowed To Dock At Their Port In Darwin
					

More to come.




					www.betootaadvocate.com


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2021)

Now that is a classic. Lol


----------



## Humid (1 October 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Like I said earlier, the frogs never cut the UK any slack, when they wanted out of the EU.
> And if the frogs owe anyone any loyalty, its the U.K.
> Keating was that far up Asia butt, he needed a snorel IMO.
> It was on his watch we lost our manufacturing, now all of a sudden he is going on about our manufacturing, give me a break.



The frogs probably have petrol.....


----------



## sptrawler (1 October 2021)

Humid said:


> The frogs probably have petrol.....



And nuclear, I think it is the French nuclear power stations, that is keeping the lights on at the moment over in Europe.


----------



## SirRumpole (9 October 2021)

First submarines, now helicopters. The French and others will be disappointed (again);









						US reveals plan to sell Australia 12 military helicopters in $1.3b deal
					

The Royal Australian Navy is set to dump its troubled fleet of European-made MRH 90 Taipan helicopters, replacing them with 12 US-made Seahawks in a deal worth around $1.3 billion.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## macca (9 October 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> First submarines, now helicopters. The French and others will be disappointed (again);
> 
> 
> 
> ...




In the event of a difficult situation it is highly likely that our main ally will be the USA, it makes sense to be using the same equipment.


----------



## sptrawler (10 October 2021)

IFocus said:


> Unfortunately Keating is not the only one raising the issues.
> 
> The handling of the French was a major blunder and as Keating points out the only western partner that has assets in our back yard to defend, the Frogs wont forget.



The frogs seem quick to forget, how many Aussies are buried in their back yard.


----------



## moXJO (11 October 2021)

sptrawler said:


> The frogs seem quick to forget, how many Aussies are buried in their back yard.



We p1ssed them off during the whole mururoa atoll testing before. This time is kind of ironic as we go nuke


----------



## sptrawler (26 December 2021)

As we said back in September, the US subs would arrive faster than was first quoted.









						Australia to get first nuclear submarine early as China tensions rise
					

The controversial deal - which saw Australia abandon its contract with France for a  fleet of diesel submarines -  could now see the new subs coming into operation in the first half of the 2030s.



					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## rederob (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> As we said back in September, the US subs would arrive faster than was first quoted.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The USA will not be number 1 when they arrive.
And by 2050 India will put America into 3rd place:





Strategic alliances with the USA and UK make little sense when considering our place in the world in coming decades.
All we have done for the past 5 years is alienate our nearer neighbours, and a handful of subs is not going to make an iota of difference
to the emerging world order.
Keating understood where we needed to be, but the legacy of our past is cemented in conservatism, blind to geography, and wedded to fighting the invisible enemy of Communism that hides under our beds.


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

Still better than diesel subs in 2040
If Keating was in we would have Chinese subs and aircraft, which probably supports the thread I started 'why dont we sell W.A to China' Keating would have IMO.


----------



## IFocus (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Still better than diesel subs in 2040
> If Keating was in we would have Chinese subs and aircraft, which probably supports the thread I started 'why dont we sell W.A to China' Keating would have IMO.





Keating never advocated that ever in fact he told China to behave its self and compile to their faces unlike the current lot of cowards making grand statements for domestic political gain.

The Chinese sending people to the Solomon's should make all here shudder  flagging the complete failure of this Coalition Government to engage in our own back yard which Keating did advocate.


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

IFocus said:


> Keating never advocated that ever in fact he told China to behave its self and compile to their faces unlike the current lot of cowards making grand statements for domestic political gain.
> 
> The Chinese sending people to the Solomon's should make all here shudder  flagging the complete failure of this Coalition Government to engage in our own back yard which Keating did advocate.



Yes, maybe the Chinese troops that are going to the Solomons, can have a game of cricket with our troops that are already there.


			https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.abc.net.au/article/100660318&ved=2ahUKEwjK2ICLhIP1AhWtSWwGHcfjDT0QFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw1Mltxmw4nZ3uBAlBJIC7j6


----------



## rederob (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Still better than diesel subs in 2040
> If Keating was in we would have Chinese subs and aircraft, which probably supports the thread I started 'why dont we sell W.A to China' Keating would have IMO.



Why the need for any?
Subs are essentially "attack" vessels as their defensive capability is incredibly limited.  So who are we attacking?
Or why are we supporting an attack on another nation given how well we have gone since WWII?

If we are not intending to be involved in attacks then we need to concentrate on defensive measures.  In that regard the upwards of $80B we are committing to subs could instead stretch a long way towards weaponry, especially UAVs, actively involved in patrolling our borders.  In fact the future of warfare will be via robotics and AI and I am gobsmacked we are investing tens of billions in a technology which is unlikely to remain "hidden" underwater in decades to come.  Last year the French won America's "Hook 'Em" award for sub hunting, and in another decade that technology will be obsolete.


----------



## rederob (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> Yes, maybe the Chinese troops that are going to the Solomons, can have a game of cricket with our troops that are already there.



Dominoes anyone?


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

Well I certainly cant be bothered getting into a debate into the strategic importance of military infrastructure, as it isnt my area of expertise, I think we are fortunate on the forum to have people who are expert on every subject know to man. Lol


----------



## SirRumpole (27 December 2021)

rederob said:


> Subs are essentially "attack" vessels as their defensive capability is incredibly limited. So who are we attacking?




It depends on how you look at it.

If an invasion armada is heading towards us, we would defend ourselves by attacking their ships with submarine launched torpedoes or missiles.

Is that attack or defense ?


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> It depends on how you look at it.
> 
> If an invasion armada is heading towards us, we would defend ourselves by attacking their ships with submarine launched torpedoes or missiles.
> 
> Is that attack or defense ?



One could also ask, if we dont need them, why do China, India, France and the U.K need them?
The U.S and Russia, possibly a left over from the cold war.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> One could also ask, if we dont need them, why do China, India, France and the U.K need them?
> The U.S and Russia, possibly a left over from the cold war.




Secret reconnaisance of other nations shipping movements and onshore military bases, potentially laying mines, general deterrence effect.


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Secret reconnaisance of other nations shipping movements and onshore military bases, potentially laying mines, general deterrence effect.



It is illogical for us not to have an effective military force, I would have thought subs would be sensible, on the basis we are an island and any attack on us will rely on a large naval force.
To say we are antagonising countries also doesnt make sense to me, Switzerland which is usually a neutral country, has a very large armed force and conscription for 18 to 20 year old men is mandatory.
 They have also cancelled the purchase of French fighter planes, in favour of U.S ones, are they being antogonistic to their neighbours?
Too many people allowing their political bias, to influence their reasoning IMO.


----------



## SirRumpole (27 December 2021)

sptrawler said:


> It is illogical for us not to have an effective military force, I would have thought subs would be sensible, on the basis we are an island and any attack on us will rely on a large naval force.
> To say we are antagonising countries also doesnt make sense to me, Switzerland which is usually a neutral country, has a very large armed force and conscription for 18 to 20 year old men is mandatory.
> They have also cancelled the purchase of French fighter planes, in favour of U.S ones, are they being antogonistic to their neighbours?
> Too many people allowing their political bias, to influence their reasoning IMO.



Better to have arms and not need to use them, than to need them and not have them.


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

SirRumpole said:


> Better to have arms and not need to use them, than to need them and not have them.



As England found out, when Neville Chamberlain tried to appease Hitler and ignored Germanies agressive expansion through Europe.
Nothing to see there, was his call, if my memory serves me correctly.


----------



## IFocus (27 December 2021)

There is a good argument that the subs will be of no use in 40 years due to technology how about missile systems instead?


----------



## SirRumpole (27 December 2021)

IFocus said:


> There is a good argument that the subs will be of no use in 40 years due to technology how about missile systems instead?




Subs ARE missile systems that can move around while being difficult to detect.

If you put missile systems on land then satellites can detect their locations pretty easily and you have to build massive bunkers to protect them.


----------



## sptrawler (27 December 2021)

IFocus said:


> There is a good argument that the subs will be of no use in 40 years due to technology how about missile systems instead?



Isnt that what Scomo says, technology will fix it, I didnt realise you were a fan. Lol


----------



## sptrawler (6 March 2022)

We did say, that the nuclear subs will be here before 2040, my guess is new U.S subs will be having training exercises here already, in preparation for delivery. 🤣










						Peter Dutton flags Australia sending weapons to Taiwan, acquiring nuclear submarines before 2040
					

The Defence Minister says Australia may send weapons to Taiwan in response to any future Chinese military aggression, while revealing Canberra may acquire nuclear submarines earlier than 2040.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## Craton (7 April 2022)

Wondering what sorta sub will we get as apparently the top silent attack Sea Wolf is a tad pricey even for the US Navy.

Found this interesting YouTube vid, re. a stealthy Swedish diesel sub entering the "red zone" in a US Navy exercise and scoring multiple torpedo hits before disappearing undetected. 
The sub uses a modified Sterling engine designed way back in 1816!


----------



## wayneL (7 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Yes, maybe the Chinese troops that are going to the Solomons, can have a game of cricket with our troops that are already there.



Well at least we might be able to win that one. 😂


----------



## sptrawler (21 April 2022)

Sounds as though our troops have been getting drone training, who would have guessed. 🤣









						Australia confirms dozens of pilots are flying armed drone strikes from the UK
					

Australia's Department of Defence for the first time confirms the total number of RAAF pilots deployed to the United Kingdom on a secretive mission to remotely operate British armed drones over the Middle East.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## rederob (22 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Sounds as though our troops have been getting drone training, who would have guessed. 🤣
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They were going to cross-train as submariners but we didn't have the subs.
Oh dear, we don't have the drones either.
I guess that explains why they went to the UK.
After all it wasn't to learn cricket from the Poms. 

We Australians are "blessed" with the wisdom of Solomons, and will disable any opposition.  
We won't go easy ....


----------



## sptrawler (22 April 2022)

rederob said:


> They were going to cross-train as submariners but we didn't have the subs.
> Oh dear, we don't have the drones either.
> I guess that explains why they went to the UK.
> After all it wasn't to learn cricket from the Poms.
> ...



I guess we will just have to buy off the shelf, rather than re invent the wheel, you never know Bunnings might and start stocking them.
At least then we would get a no questions asked refund, if they turned out to be useless. 🤣


----------



## sptrawler (22 April 2022)

We don't have any drones? neither does the Ukraine, then as if by magic, WOW now they have drones.









						U.S. Fast-Tracked ‘Phoenix Ghost’ Drone Being Sent to Ukraine
					

The latest $800 million package of weaponry President Joe Biden is sending Ukraine includes dozens of “Phoenix Ghost” drones the Pentagon says were expedited specifically to aid the fight against Russia.




					www.bloomberg.com
				



U.S. Fast-Tracked ‘Phoenix Ghost’ Drone Being Sent to Ukraine​
Pentagon sees weapon as good fit for combat in eastern Ukraine
Drones are part of Biden’s $800 million package of weaponry
The latest $800 million package of weaponry President Joe Biden is sending Ukraine *includes dozens of “Phoenix Ghost” drones* the Pentagon says were expedited specifically to aid the fight against Russia.


----------



## sptrawler (28 April 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Subs ARE missile systems that can move around while being difficult to detect.
> 
> If you put missile systems on land then satellites can detect their locations pretty easily and you have to build massive bunkers to protect them.



Rumpy, as we thought, here is an article for anyone that thinks the U.S isn't ahead of the game and satellites are obsolete.









						‘Enormous impact’: US intelligence prevented the fall of Kyiv
					

In an unprecedented information-sharing operation, US spy agencies divulged the co-ordinates of Russian forces and aircraft to Ukrainian troops, allowing them to pre-empt attacks.




					www.smh.com.au
				




*Washington:* America helped foil Moscow’s efforts to take Kyiv and repelled its advances elsewhere by sharing such detailed intelligence that Ukraine knew exactly when and where Russian bombs would fall, it has emerged.
In an unprecedented information-sharing operation, US spy agencies divulged the co-ordinates of Russian forces and aircraft to Ukrainian troops, allowing them to pre-empt attacks.


----------



## moXJO (28 April 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Rumpy, as we thought, here is an article for anyone that thinks the U.S isn't ahead of the game and satellites are obsolete.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



US has prepared to fight Russia for decades. All their armaments are specifically made to destroy Russian equipment. 

The fact that they don't lose any US soldiers is a huge bonus. "Big War" is back it seems.


----------



## sptrawler (6 May 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Rumpy, as we thought, here is an article for anyone that thinks the U.S isn't ahead of the game and satellites are obsolete.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And China has twigged on to the game.


			Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
		


China has ordered central government agencies and state-backed corporations to replace foreign-branded personal computers with domestic alternatives within two years, marking one of Beijing’s most aggressive efforts so far to eradicate key overseas technology from within its most sensitive organs.


----------



## sptrawler (11 June 2022)

Australia to pay French company $830m for cancelling the $90billion diesel sub contract, what a bargain, Dan Andrews spent more than that cancelling the East West link road years ago.
Pay $830m now, or pay $90billion for scrap metal in 20 years time, a no brainer IMO.
It is a bit like the Government cancelling an order for a fleet of ICE vehicles to be delivered in 2040, times change, the earlier the contract is cancelled the better all round IMO.









						‘An opportunity to join together’: Albanese to meet Macron after paying $830m to cancel subs
					

Asked about renewed ties, France’s defence minister noted: “In Australia, the previous majority was not re-elected and in France, Emmanuel Macron was re-elected”.




					www.smh.com.au
				



Australia will pay French shipbuilder Naval Group an $830 million settlement after the federal government cancelled a $90-billion deal to purchase twelve French submarines.
The settlement “draws a line” under the scrapped deal, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese declared at a press conference in Sydney on Saturday morning.


----------



## sptrawler (5 August 2022)

Interesting that China claims Australia should not be allowed to have nuclear powered subs, as it is an act of aggression, yet they can fire missiles across another country while flicking the bird at everyone.
Obviously only the major powers have the right to throw their weight around, while smaller countries just have to hope they aren't the target.









						Japan tells China to stop its military drills around Taiwan
					

China’s Foreign Ministry says it is halting cooperation with the US in eight areas after announcing sanctions on US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her family in retaliation for her visit.




					www.theage.com.au
				



*Singapore: *Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida has asked China to immediately stop its military exercises around Taiwan after five missiles flew over the island and landed in the ocean in Japan’s economic zone.
Japan’s entry into the dispute threatens to deepen an already volatile situation and escalate regional military competition in the South China Sea where China has other overlapping territorial claims.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 August 2022)

sptrawler said:


> Interesting that China claims Australia should not be allowed to have nuclear powered subs, as it is an act of aggression, yet they can fire missiles across another country while flicking the bird at everyone.
> Obviously only the major powers have the right to throw their weight around, while smaller countries just have to hope they aren't the target.
> 
> 
> ...




Every time China does this sort of thing they reinforce their reputation as an arrogant bully , and other nations will band together to counter them.

If we (the West) had any guts, we would stop buying their cheap junk and not give them the money to buy more weapons.


----------



## sptrawler (5 August 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Every time China does this sort of thing they reinforce their reputation as an arrogant bully , and other nations will band together to counter them.
> 
> If we (the West) had any guts, we would stop buying their cheap junk and not give them the money to buy more weapons.



That would be nice, except it wont happen remember sidchrome? When Bunnings etc started bringing in cheap Chinese tools the writing was on the wall, same with Holden, Ford, when Aussies could get a cheaper car from O/S the death knell was tolled.


----------



## SirRumpole (5 August 2022)

sptrawler said:


> That would be nice, except it wont happen remember sidchrome? When Bunnings etc started bringing in cheap Chinese tools the writing was on the wall, same with Holden, Ford, when Aussies could get a cheaper car from O/S the death knell was tolled.




Yes, we have no guts as I said. 

Sidchrome still seems to be in business.









						Autotech Tools – Sidchrome 382 Piece Widebody Metric & AF Tool Set - SCMT10166
					

**Get in contact with us to purchase this item***  1/4” Drive Sockets & Accessories 3/8” Drive Sockets & Accessories 1/2” Drive Sockets & Accessories 1/2” Drive In-Hex Sockets Open Ended Spanners Ring Spanners 440 Pro Series Ring & Open End Spanners Flare Nut Spanners 467 Pro Series Geared...




					www.autotechtools.com.au


----------



## sptrawler (5 August 2022)

SirRumpole said:


> Yes, we have no guts as I said.
> 
> Sidchrome still seems to be in business.
> 
> ...



Bought out by the Americans, now made in Taiwan, but they were struggling in a Chinese dominated sector as usual when tarrifs were reduced.









						Sidchrome 70 Years
					

"The brand emerged when Royston Siddons' Siddons Drop Forgings Pty Ltd turned to tool making to fill post-war shortages after World War II. Original production of Sidchrome tools in Australia was in the Brunswick area in the city of Melbourne, Victoria. The Sidchrome brand built its reputation...



					books.google.com.au
				




"The brand emerged when Royston Siddons' Siddons Drop Forgings Pty Ltd turned to tool making to fill post-war shortages after World War II. Original production of Sidchrome tools in Australia was in the Brunswick area in the city of Melbourne, Victoria.

The Sidchrome brand built its reputation with high quality products. Sidchrome until 1996 were manufactured in Australia, but since being acquired by The Stanley Works (named Stanley Black & Decker since 2010) production is now undertaken in Taiwan."--Wikipedia - viewed 7 February 2016.

*This from the Australian Financial Review - December 1991.*




__





						MORE LIKELY TO FOLLOW SIDCHROME
					

Sidchrome Tools, one of Australia's leading manufacturing brand names, has been sold to the US manufacturing giant Stanley Tools in a $30 million deal.




					www.afr.com
				




Sidchrome Tools, one of Australia's leading manufacturing brand names, has been sold to the US manufacturing giant Stanley Tools in a $30 million deal.

The transfer from Australian ownership of a leading manufacturing company is another indicator of the tough times the sector is enduring. Last week a survey by the NSW Chamber of Manufactures/State Bank NSW showed that about 28,000 Australian manufacturing jobs had been moved offshore in the past 12 months as companies moved production facilities, with the trend likely to continue.


We are starting to drift off thread and into waters that people don't like to remember, or have conveniently forgotten.


----------



## sptrawler (16 August 2022)

Sounds as though Labor aren't changing direction regarding the nuclear subs.



			https://www.heraldsun.com.au/subscribe/news/1/?sourceCode=HSWEB_WRE170_a&dest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.com.au%2Fnews%2Fnational%2Flabor-back-option-to-create-new-military-base-on-east-coast%2Fnews-story%2F89ae7d573a280e47dd09dcb8dc96c464&memtype=anonymous&mode=premium&v21=dynamic-high-control-score&V21spcbehaviour=append
		

$10 billion nuke sub base set for Aussie east coast​Labor is backing a new military base for nuclear powered submarines on Australia’s east coast. Here’s where it could be built.


----------



## sptrawler (29 August 2022)

An article on the importance of submarines in todays warfare.









						For all China's muscle-flexing and the US's rhetoric, there's another fierce battle occurring completely out of sight
					

For all the muscle-flexing by China and escalating rhetoric by the United States, there's another fierce defence contest occurring completely out of sight — the battle deep within the oceans, writes John Lyons.




					www.abc.net.au


----------



## sptrawler (30 September 2022)

sptrawler said:


> We did say, that the nuclear subs will be here before 2040, my guess is new U.S subs will be having training exercises here already, in preparation for delivery. 🤣
> 
> 
> 
> ...




WOW who would have guessed?  🤣









						Australia considering buying first few nuclear submarines from the US instead of building them onshore
					

There has been growing concern that Australia will not be able to build nuclear-powered submarines until the 2040s, opening up a major capability gap.




					www.smh.com.au
				



Australia would buy nuclear submarines from the United States by the middle of the next decade to give it more time to be able to build the boats onshore under a plan being considered by the Albanese government.
There has been growing concern that Australia will not be able to build nuclear-powered submarines until the 2040s, despite the previous government insisting it could do it by 2036 under the AUKUS defence pact with the US and Britain.


----------

