International Australia Could Push To Acquire Retired US Navy Los Angeles Class Nuclear Submarines

[GhostZ06]

The recently signed Australia–United Kingdom–United States defense agreement, or AUKUS, calls for the United States and Britain to share nuclear-submarine technology with Australia. Although the agreement was light on details of what, when, and how, plans apparently are for Australia to eventually build at least eight nuclear-powered attack submarines. In the interim, former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott is now advocating for Australia to obtain used nuclear submarines to get the sharing started so as to spin up the Royal Australian Navy’s submarine capabilities and nuclear know-how. Australia has never had a nuclear power plant of any kind.

Speaking last Friday at a Wilson Center event in Washington, D.C., Abbott suggested that, in the short term, Australia should consider leasing or purchasing one or more existing U.S. submarines to develop Australia’s capability to operate nuclear-powered submarines.

Abbott has posed the question, “Might it be possible for Australia to acquire a retiring [Los Angeles] class boat or two and to put it under an Australian flag and to run it, if you like, as an operational training boat?” Abbott added that he’d make a similar proposal for British nuclear-powered submarines “were I in London.”


“It would, in that capacity, be — if you like — an addition to the order of battle in the western Pacific, should that be necessary,” he added.

The U.S. Navy has experience turning Los Angeles-class submarines into floating schoolhouses. This past summer, the ex-USS San Francisco completed its conversion from a nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) to a moored training ship, MTS-711, now operating in Charleston, South Carolina. There it joined the converted former USS La Jolla, which began its new life in this training role last year. And while Abbott clearly is calling for a deployable vessel, not an MTS, if two subs were obtained, a moored training ship might be a valuable teaching tool to add.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...-us-navy-los-angeles-class-nuclear-submarines

Since recent event's and Royal Australian Navy choosing to drop the French boats for UK/US nuclear powered subs. I'm curious on who is providing the Reactor's for theyre future submarine program.

 

[flashNsmash]

i don't see any of those boats as having a useful remaining service life at sea, they could be used pierside for training but the reactors are usually at end-of-life anyways

i also think they should train on brit boats as there is no capacity in the US to build aussie boats anytime in the next decade

 

[GhostZ06]

i don't see any of those boats as having a useful remaining service life at sea, they could be used pierside for training but the reactors are usually at end-of-life anyways

i also think they should train on brit boats as there is no capacity in the US to build aussie boats anytime in the next decade

unless theyre planning on paying for it or in the AUKUS deal we set up new shipyards for them

 

[Amerikuracana]

Dear lord let a wise man get in power and sanction those psychopaths. Don’t sell them anything.

 

[DespicablePeep]

Seeing how Aussies are Covid cucks they should just bend over for the Chinese, they have no balls to enter a war.

 

[Ruprecht]

unless theyre planning on paying for it or in the AUKUS deal we set up new shipyards for them

The shipyard is already built. We're using the Osborne shipyard.

 

[flashNsmash]

unless theyre planning on paying for it or in the AUKUS deal we set up new shipyards for them

yup adding yard capacity is the only other option

 

[flashNsmash]

The shipyard is already built. We're using the Osborne shipyard.

that yard is building the type 26 frigates and will be for quite some time

also you need nuclear infrastructure to build & fuel nuclear vessels

 

[Ruprecht]

that yard is building the type 26 frigates and will be for quite some time

also you need nuclear infrastructure to build & fuel nuclear vessels

No, that was the deal and why we weren't getting nuclear subs from France. We aren't building nuclear infrastructure. The powerplants will be provided as sealed units by either the US or UK.
Supposedly they don't need refueling for the life of the vessel, or at least that's the sales spiel.
They won't be cutting steel for the subs for at least a decade anyway.

 

[flashNsmash]

No, that was the deal and why we weren't getting nuclear subs from France. We aren't building nuclear infrastructure. The powerplants will be provided as sealed units by either the US or UK.
Supposedly they don't need refueling for the life of the vessel, or at least that's the sales spiel.

self-contained reactors would solve a lot of that. only issue is the impact to sovereignty by being dependent on a foreign allied power, similar to how the brits' trident missiles have to be serviced in georgia

 

[Ruprecht]

self-contained reactors would solve a lot of that. only issue is the impact to sovereignty by being dependent on a foreign allied power, similar to how the brits' trident missiles have to be serviced in georgia

We'd have to send them back for decommissioning, but that's less of an issue than having to send them to France or the UK for refueling in 7-10 years.

 

[flashNsmash]

We'd have to send them back for decommissioning, but that's less of an issue than having to send them to France or the UK for refueling in 7-10 years.

yeah and depending on the political climate they might end up getting refueled and refitted at that notional decommissioning point. the hulls are generally pretty rugged, despite the recent news:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/metallur...falsifying-steel-test-results-navy-submarines

 

[Ichibanner]

They are going to use it to sneak up on and attack boaters who are breaking COVID lockdown.

 

[Ruprecht]

yeah and depending on the political climate they might end up getting refueled and refitted at that notional decommissioning point. the hulls are generally pretty rugged, despite the recent news:

https://www.foxnews.com/us/metallur...falsifying-steel-test-results-navy-submarines

The flight III Los Angeles subs also use the same powerplant which isn't designed to be refueled, so it's not unthinkable that we'd get one as a training vessel in the interim.
Although due to the size and crew requirements, supposedly the industry bet is that we'll be using the Astute class rather than the Virginia class.

 

[flashNsmash]

astutes would be a shame as the block V virginia is the current queen of the seas, up to 3x the weapons capacity. but yeah it's probably 80/20 in favour of the astutes

 

[Arkain2K]

There's a huge gap between when the current Aussie conventional subs are scheduled to be retired and when their Nuclear replacements would be ready, so it's not a bad idea to start training on these previously-loved Los Angeles class now.

When the Nuclear replacement arrives years from now, the Royal Australian Navy crews wouldn't have to learn from scratch on how modern nuclear subs works.

 

[GhostZ06]

The shipyard is already built. We're using the Osborne shipyard.

Can't be that complete, i imagine some large docks and new equipment is going to be put in

 

[GhostZ06]

astutes would be a shame as the block V virginia is the current queen of the seas, up to 3x the weapons capacity. but yeah it's probably 80/20 in favour of the astutes

i imagine being close with the old empire has something to do with that. But it makes me wonder, who is providing the Reactors to the aussies? We gave one to the british, so would we be doing the same with the aussies?


Also, seeing how they dont have a nuclear infrastructure would we be helping them out with that as well? i could see a nuclear infrastructure kinda helping them out outside of military use. Espically how the smr nuclear reactors are becoming a thing.

 

[Anewt]

Seeing how Aussies are Covid cucks they should just bend over for the Chinese, they have no balls to enter a war.

Lol if Australia is cucks what the hell are you guys?

We've been involved in countless trade war / sanctions with China because we dared to suggest a independent study into the origins of covid.. " crickets " from all you brave countries.......

Actually you guys upped selling to them to cover the difference lol

Also.. for 20000th thousand time... been locked down one weekend... no mask mandates here.. Sydney and Melbourne are not " Australia ". They are " Australian "

Although we're about to get punished with covid with these passports to spread covid.. and it'll be the fault of the unclean like me in the media lol.

 

[Ruprecht]

Can't be that complete, i imagine some large docks and new equipment is going to be put in

No doubt they'll change the production line between now and when they first cut steel for these subs in about a decade, but they'll be installing American systems in the Collins class subs in the meantime, so that stage is already set to go.

i imagine being close with the old empire has something to do with that. But it makes me wonder, who is providing the Reactors to the aussies? We gave one to the british, so would we be doing the same with the aussies?


Also, seeing how they dont have a nuclear infrastructure would we be helping them out with that as well? i could see a nuclear infrastructure kinda helping them out outside of military use. Espically how the smr nuclear reactors are becoming a thing.

The military has been quite firmly saying that it's not an Anglo alliance. So obviously it's an anglo alliance. Doing the anglosphere thing isn't going to help our regional relationships either.
Federal Government has stated repeatedly we aren't going to have nuclear infrastructure though (even if it took a while before they clarified exactly what was happening after the botched announcement). No constructing/fueling/decommissioning reactors here. Not that you can necessarily believe them of course, but there's otherwise no indication of moves to change existing nuclear policy. Chances are we'll get PWR3 units from Rolls Royce.
Although they haven't ruled out going the Virginia/S9G route.