Sub Standard

[old man emu]

As former Prime Ministers go, Malcolm Turnbull seems to be the least controversial, or at least his comments appear to be level-headed. In this video he is calling attention to the fact that we have paid the Yanks $3 billion to support their submarine construction industry based on the promise that they will supply us with a couple of subs sometime after 2030. However, in this video he tells us that the supply is contingent on the Yanks having some spare subs after they have met their requirements. However, while they need to build two subs per year to meet their requirements, they are only building one and a bit. Also the deal says that the supply is dependent on Presidential approval of supply at the time of supply, as long as the requirements of the Yanks have been met. 

 

He says that while AUKUS is Australia's Plan A, we don't have a Plan B, which means that if we decommission our Collins Class subs and the subs don't arrive from the Yanks, we will be without subs for over a decade. Also, there is no going back the the French, cap in hand, to ask them to make some for us. 

 

 

[facthunter]

Turnbull and Macron are good friends. Deals with Trump are pretty suss. He's thoroughly Unpredictable. I Reckon WE have BLOWN our dough. That's a fair chunk of OUR DEBT.  "Bottom of the Harbour" Scheme.  A bad deal from day one. Kickbacks??  Nev

Edited June 10 by facthunter

[old man emu]

Actually it is not going to be Trump who makes the decision to give us the submarines or not. It will be the person who is President at the time. A condition of the deal is that the Yanks will supply the subs if, and only if, the Yaks have met their requirements for subs. If they haven't, we miss out. At the moment they are about 20 down on numbers, and with a build rate of about one per year, and if they don't lose any, then we are not likely to be getting any for more than twenty years. 

 

Turnbull was PM when we started talking to the French, but it was Morrison who pulled the rug out from under that deal with France. In 2016, Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull signed a A$50 billion (€31 billion) deal with the majority French government-owned company Naval Group (known as DCNS until 2017) to design a new generation of submarines, known as the Attack class, under the "Future Submarine Program", scheduled to replace the Collins class. The idea was to have the same design of the boats as the nuclear powered ones, but ours would be conventionally powered. I don't know if any money changed hands before we made our $3 billion down payment to the Yanks.

[facthunter]

It Cost $$s to pull out of the NAVAL (French) deal, and the way Sco Mo did it was pretty sneaky and the French were NOT happy. ScoMo and spouse spend time at Mar A Lago with the Trumps . What amuses ME is Sharing Nuclear subs  is ONLY done WITH AUS and US troops train Here and we have Pine Gap as a prime target but we still get Tariffs against us.?? With Friends like Trump, you don't need enemies with AMERICA FIRST and UP the rest.   Nev

[old man emu]

I got angry when I found out that the US had launched bombers for raids against the Houthis from Tindal in the Northern Territory. That puts Australia into the fight with that mob.

[rgmwa]

But isn't that why the Americans want bases here?

[Jerry_Atrick]

Pulling out of the French deal cost us something like $9bn

 

Committing $380bn for options on subs is plain nuts.

 

Albo, too, could have pulled  the deal as a new government but elected not to.

 

Led by donkeys comes to mind.

 

[facthunter]

Well, THAT would put the Cat amongst the Pigeons . Give it time.  Nev

[onetrack]

And in the meantime, the U.S. is talking about building a new breed of diesel-powered submarines that are superior to the nuclear ones. Li-ion batteries are providing the impetus to better (and much cheaper) diesel-electric subs.

 

Edited June 10 by onetrack

[nomadpete]

I laughed because that is laughable. 

 

When a military decides to use critical components of its machines (the batteries), from their most likely foe (China make the best), you gotta laugh.

[facthunter]

Magnetos for rubber tyres was swapped in WW1.  Nev

[old man emu]

Now it seems that the AUKUS bizzo could come crushing down as the US takes on a “US First” attitude. Perhaps we should  remind the US about Pine Gap and Tindal. 

[facthunter]

YES, we are dealing with the US MAFIA now.    WHERETHEFUGARWE.? Nev

[nomadpete]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

US takes on a “US First” attitude.

Let me think...

 

The US has a deal whereby some insignificant country promises to give them billions of US greenbacks for subs that they don't even have to provide.

 

Good for US?

 

You bet it is.

[Marty_d]

Yeah that's what I thought. This is the perfect deal for the US.

Because it's a shit deal for Australia.

[nomadpete]

But has anyone written to their MP to complain?

 

I did.

[rgmwa]

6 hours ago, nomadpete said:

The US has a deal whereby some insignificant country promises to give them billions of US greenbacks for subs that they don't even have to provide.

America First! Trump will probably claim it was his idea to start with and that he talked his mate, Scotty, into going along with it to stop that French guy, Macron from getting all that money we were giving away.

 

 

[facthunter]

ANGUS Taylor reckons AUKUS is theirs and IS VERY IMPORTANT. They wedged Labor. The Orange U Tan will hate it because it was signed by BIDEN. I'd like OUR billions Back and not be tied to the Biggest WHACKO Leader in the World.. Nev

[onetrack]

Imagine what we could do if the $380B was kept here, and invested into Australian defence manufacturing. I reckon conventional subs will become obsolete, as tanks have become in this age of drone warfare, and remotely-controlled unmanned mini-subs such as the Huntingdon version will become the norm for underwater stealth activities. They can't get sub crews at the best of times, it's the next best thing to a kamikaze mission during wartime.

 

We have the Australian-designed Ghost Shark mini-sub under development here, the Govt need to wake up and understand that buying war equipment now, for delivery in 20 or 30 years time, is about on a par with ordering a hundred Sopwith Camels in 1919 for use in WW2. We had enough of a problem with obsolete equipment in 1939.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Shark_(submarine)

 

https://www.defensemirror.com/news/33048/Huntington_Ingalls_Unveils_Remus_620_UUV

[facthunter]

The Unpleasant FACT IS, Trump cannot be trusted by his allies and a Lot of Yanks don't care as long as they get richer in the Process. What is a DEAL worth IF it can be cancelled Unilaterally on  a whim?  NOTHING! It's just a LIABILITY and LOSS OF SOVREIGNITY.  The LAST thing we need.  Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

This deal means we pay and they don't have to deliver.. Chump will be fuming anyway as he has never had a deal that good.. seems Biden is a better deal maker for putting America first.

 

UK is still not sure what it is or what they are there for

[red750]

There was a Four Corners report on the Virginia class submarines, and the British SSN AUKUS submarine.

Here is a link to view the program on ABC iView.   https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2503H020S00

 

They say the SSN AUKUS may be too big for us, with waters around Southeast Asia being too shallow. And it is also likely to be delayed due to the same problem affecting the US sub, lack of skilled labour. This is a comparison of the two subs with the Collins Class.

 

[rgmwa]

Plus bigger subs also means more crew, and probably more training facilities. Where are they going to get the extra personnel from? That Aukus sub is a monster even compared to the Virginias.

Still, it's a pretty safe bet that we'll never see one. The Brits will never be able to get it designed, built, debugged and operational to meet the program, and it will cost three times more than expected.