Can someone explain what the big fuss is about?

As far as I can tell, we dumped France because after 5 years they've produced nothing. $90 billion is a lot of money to waste for that. I can understand France getting upset because they will miss out on some dough, but not for any other reason.

A nuclear-powered submarine would seem to be a good idea as long as it stays intact. Never needs fuelling, can stay out there doing its job indefinitely. Other countries have them, and nobody said anything then. Why the sudden big stink now? And of course China stirs the pot by saying it jeopardises peace. Guess what? They've had nuclear-powered subs since 1974. What a bunch of hypocrites.

My only question is how much will it cost, and how long before we get them? Nobody has said anything yet.

Think it's all about Time and technology. it's possible that we rent the subs off the states too.
With all this trouble in the south China sea, The more likely a war of some type is very possible now so we need something that can take part that's not antiquated .

Quite so Rob.
I occasionally look at current news on the Telly (before putting the cartoons back on) and the rubbish being spouted by brain dead lip flapping "expert" idiots is amazing.
Not knowing much more than buying stuff stuff like getting a chair from Bunnings, their lack of understanding about procurement of large complex contracts and the procedures therein shows large.
I am not privy to any detail but the guts of it seem to be the Frogs kept missing critical way points in build steps.
I have been there while dealing with contracts, when a supplier starts to show an inability to achieve built in crisis points in a contract you start to worry. Sooner or later you have to step in and stop the nonsense. The Morrison government has done exactly that, used the built in "pull the pin" contractual instructions. The Gillard government should have pulled the pin on the whole thing and not listen to the green anti nuke anti vax anti everythings. The idiots that followed were too busy covering the arses to do anything at all. The danger is in the end the supplier delivers nothing of value and you spend ages fixing it.
That Macrami bloke can carry on all he likes and look tough, after all he has an election coming up, but the fact is his mob were offering nothing better than a warmed over German U-boats with diesel engines where you have to surface every other day to recharge the batteries!!! Strapping computors all over it does not fix the essential problem.
I want our subbies to be driving about in the most up to date gear with a silent sealed for life power pack and I could not care less if that was powered by moonbeams or magic.
Fred.

All submarines have their pros and cons. Conventional submarines, like our Collins-class subs are usually quieter than nuclear-powered ones because they run on a battery and electric motor when under water. A nuclear-powered sub runs on a water-cooled reactor and a steam turbine. The turbine runs all the time as it is also required to generate electricity.

Nuclear-powered submarines have an unlimited range but their endurance is usually about the same as a conventional submarine. Endurance means how long stocks of food, water and fresh air last before the submarine has to resurface to be re-provisioned.

One thing that is commonly omitted in our mostly negative media (being negative sells more papers, etc) is that the Collins-class subs can fire the same weapons as the cancelled Attack-class subs and the proposed nuclear-powered subs, they being Mk48 torpedoes, Harpoon anti-ship missiles, Tomahawk cruise missiles and Stonefish sea mines and these can all be fired whilst the submarines are dived. The media has always painted these submarines in a negative light but they are ultimately the most heavily armed and quietest conventional submarines in the world. They also score well in naval exercises. Any niggling issues they once suffered when built have well and truly been ironed out well before now.

The problem we have is that we need more than six submarines. With six subs, only two are typically war-ready because another two will be in reserve and the remainder will be undergoing maintenance or a refit. The youngest four Collins-class subs should be kept and refitted with the latest machinery and combat systems so that the RAN's covert surveillance work can continue, taking advantage of the stealth possessed by the Collins-class boats. Then, the nuclear-powered boats can be used for the RAN's main defence and attack missions.

China's belligerence cannot be overstated. There is no chance that in a full scale war, a country with 25m people can win against a country with 1.3bn people. But in an alliance with the US and UK, the number of available ships turned back in favour of the Allies, coupled with more recent battle experience. China hasn't been to war since 1979 and at that time they got their beanies handed to them.

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
A valve a day keeps the transistor away...

I would challenge Collins class a fail. They were described as being like a Symphony Orchestra, I think by NZ as their hydrophones has no issues finding them.

The one that gave USA a hard time was Russian & encased in 6 feet of rubber.

Back in 1994, maybe. There is little left of the original submarines and the only major original equipment is the engines and the big electric motor that drives the propellor. That is about to change though, as the next major refit (and perhaps the last) will usher in new engines and a new motor, amongst other major upgrades.

When a naval asset from any country hits the water, there are issues to sort through, especially with the first-of-class. The USS Gerald R Ford has been sailing for 3 or 4 years now and is still yet to pass its final acceptance tests. The more complex things become, the longer this task will take.

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
A valve a day keeps the transistor away...

The apparent reason for the sub cancellation was the change in the situation with regards to China, meaning we want our subs as soon as possible, and nuclear. The French build nuclear attack subs, but they could not supply soon enough for Australia. If we asked to lease a couple of their eight attack subs they would say no because they need them for the same changed situation - they have New Caledonia to defend.

On the other hand the US has twenty odd nuclear attack subs in mothballs. No problem for them to lease Australia a couple while the new ones get built. Just like we got F4 Phantoms while the F111s got built. (A lot of political crap was spoken about the F111, but there is still nothing available equivalent to them.)

It maybe that Australia being part of the five eyes intelligence set-up, we have intelligence on Chinese actions and intentions that the French don't know about and can't be told about. As part of their increase in pressure on Australia it is likely that Chinese subs are sniffing around more than usual.

On naval matters, was coming back from Tasmania on the Spirit of Tasmania about twenty years ago. Off Sydney the ship was intercepted by HMAS Newcastle which pounded down one side then turned across the stern and came up the other side, then repeated the exercise. Quite something to see these navy ships turn at speed.

First photo is the Australian flag with the New South Wales flag on the Sydney harbour bridge, taken when the Spirit of Tasmania entered the harbour, and not long after the HMAS Newcastle photos were taken. Looks pretty good in a stiff southerly breeze.
Newcastle is carrying the white ensign on the mast. More visible is the red kangaroo which was first seen on HMAS Anzac serving off Korea, to distinguish it from ships of other countries. Now seen on all Australian warships, and in my humble opinion should be the only symbol on the Australian flag. However the present flag sure looks good and having been fought under for a long time is likely to stay the Australian flag. What we do with the cross of St Andrew (the diagonal white cross of the Union flag) if Scotland leaves the United Kingdom might force a change. Being of Scots heritage, losing the Cross of St Andrew off our flag would be unfortunate.

'---if Australia wants nuclear submarines why didn't they ask us---we know how to build nuclear submarines-----'
Recent statement from French diplomat to the media by a pissed off French politician.

Meanwhile France is enjoying excellent trade relations with China while the latter punish our producers.

No thanks France, sell your subs to China (if and when you get off your ar*se and finally build them)

It is ironic that China is in trouble with coal the price of it has gone through the roof & we have the best of it. Covid has caused many truck drivers to refuse to go get it nearby for fear of Covid. About a quarter or so of the steel is now recycle & that's using a lot of coal.

As for building things here I have hands on with employment & kids coming out of schools, more and more woke and from even 40years ago, illiterate and with no skills useable in life; Plus a large mass who think the world owes them a living & could not work in an "Iron Lung".

Two words, Pine gap (⊙＿⊙')
In all seriousness maybe the U.S. wanting to protect its assets might have something to do with it.

as regards to Marc, I'm worried about my generation.

-Lance

US is probably planning to get out of Asia and one way to do that would be to sell arms and weapons to counties in the Asia area so they can do the job the US once did.
Lots of sales taking place in Asia

Well if they plan to do something like that Pete, let's hope it doesn't turn out like Afghanistan.
Not that I can lay much judgement on the subject as international policies isn't my forte.

A lot of political crap was spoken about the F111, but there is still nothing available equivalent to them.

Agreed. The F-111 was the best allround warplane ever built. It had early issues like the current F-35 but it ended up hauling arse and carrying a whole arsenal in its belly. The media picked the F-111 apart the same way they did with the Collins-class subs.

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾
A valve a day keeps the transistor away...

Word from my oldest friend whom is ex Navy. The French deal was crap and should never have been agreed to , The latest deal is a far better option. Hopefully they're delivered very soon.

I just emailed a pdf from my ex navy friend itemising the issues with the French subs. A good read it is.

More on the subs deal fiasco