International Naval News & Discussion

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 25 May 2022 10:19

Aldonkar wrote:
The original cost of the Shortfin Barracuda project was about US$35B in 2016. By 2021 it had risen beyond US$90B but was being promoted as "the future of attack submarines". The fact that the Aus Navy has not operated nuclear subs does not come into it. One has to begin sometime, and they already had experience of conventional subs and infra. You are right, the Aus Gov had been sold vapourware including price rises. In five years no metal had been cut.

The Aus sub deal was a huge boondoggle from the start with questionable decisions being made by the Aussies themselves. Nuclear submarines were never on the table. They earlier wanted the Soryu-class subs, but the Japanese were reluctant. It came down to the Swedes with an evolved A26, the Germans with an enlarged Type 214 or the French, with a radical nuclear to conventional conversion of the Barracuda-class. The Germans were frontrunners given that they had built conventional subs for decades, but the Aussies inexplicably chose the most expensive French option. The Aussies havent been sold vaporware, they actively bought it

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 25 May 2022 10:30

Not satisfied with French vapourware (which I believe the French might have ultimately delivered, a few more years late, and a few more B$$ costlier) Aussies have signed up for Amreeki nebula ware with Brit droppings somewhere in it - a big good luck with that !

Indias experience with France on mil purchases hasnt been bad at all. They were especially good on Rafale deliveries, cutting back on deliveries to their own Armée de l'Air to keep promises to India, at the height go LAC standoff. I dont get why this khujli to diss them for whatever happened with Aus!

Aldonkar · Post by **Aldonkar** » 25 May 2022 17:37

Cyrano wrote:Not satisfied with French vapourware (which I believe the French might have ultimately delivered, a few more years late, and a few more B$$ costlier) Aussies have signed up for Amreeki nebula ware with Brit droppings somewhere in it - a big good luck with that !

Indias experience with France on mil purchases hasnt been bad at all. They were especially good on Rafale deliveries, cutting back on deliveries to their own Armée de l'Air to keep promises to India, at the height go LAC standoff. I dont get why this khujli to diss them for whatever happened with Aus!

Yes the Aussie government are partly to blame for their selection of supplier and allowing costs to drift. With regard to the Rafale project, while the aircraft is fine, the costs escalated at an alarming rate. This "cut back deliveries to the French Air Force" stuff is because France had sufficient already and could rely on NATO backup. Dassault have only one production line and, being a commercial organisation, are reluctant to open another without the firm orders (reminds on of the HAL/Tejas situation). They have won more orders recently (UAE and possibly Indonesia) and may now do this.

My last on this topic, is that India should learn that it should build its own MIC and not rely on other nations such as Russia, France or whoever to be their supplier. Note that Russia is becoming increasingly beholden to China due to the Ukraine situation.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 25 May 2022 18:35

I think one under appreciated factor in Australia's cancellation is the much faster than anticipated increase in the Chinese threat level. In the 5 years since 2016 when the Australia-France contract was signed China's naval projection and build out of it's naval fleet has been staggering, it has the largest number of major surface combat vessels now, greater than the USN in fact. (How capable they are is unknown but one cannot assume that they are incompetent). Clearly, Australia needed a more potent naval attack capability of it's own. It did not help that French project cost had doubled or more to A$90 B by the time AUKUS was unveiled. If US nuclear submarines had been on offer to Australia in 2016 I am sure that the Aussies would have jumped at that opportunity. But in 2016 the US was not willing to part with that technology to Australia. Yet again it was the faster than anticipated increase in PLAN capability that prompted the US by 2021 to change it's position and realize that arming Australia with nuclear subs would enable better containment of the PLAN. I guess there was no easy way for Australia to break the bad news to France. The French can be excitable at the best of times and true to form they blew a gasket when they got to know of AUKUS. The rest as they say is history.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 25 May 2022 19:01

Aldonkar wrote:My last on this topic, is that India should learn that it should build its own MIC and not rely on other nations such as Russia, France or whoever to be their supplier. Note that Russia is becoming increasingly beholden to China due to the Ukraine situation.

That will take time, but the investments that required to see that MIC become a reality is not being done. We are still in import mode.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 13 Jun 2022 08:49

So 555 million Euros has cut the gordian knot!! France is mollified and Australia has got the French albatross of it's back. Naval Group has accepted the compensation.

Australia announces compensation deal with France for scrapped submarine contract

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the French firm had agreed to a "fair and an equitable settlement" of 555 million euros (US$584 million) for Australia, ending a decade-old multi-billion-dollar submarine contract.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 29 Jun 2022 07:11

AUKUS nuclear submarine plan to be revealed by March 2023
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-06-29/ ... /101190876
29 June 2022

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 02 Jul 2022 03:40

Oops! Navy helo ‘rigging failure’ sends five missiles into the Pacific
https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-nav ... e-pacific/
30 June 2022

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 18 Jul 2022 16:21

Chinmay · Post by **Chinmay** » 30 Jul 2022 14:22

Aussies competing with India in having a worse submarine procurement program

Defence is facing a capability gap as the existing Collins-class fleet retires and hopes fade of getting a new submarine under the Aukus deal before 2040.

Under the Aukus deal, Australia will buy at least eight submarines from either the US or the United Kingdom.

Former defence minister Peter Dutton suggested the US might give Australia a couple of its boats, a suggestion that was largely dismissed.

.......

Shadow defence spokesperson Andrew Hastie, while in London, has challenged the UK to compete against the US to supply the first two submarines by 2030 by boosting its building capacity, but experts have also dismissed that idea

So the Aussies pay half a billion to the French for cancelling the contract, go to US and UK and yet wont get a new sub till 2040 *slow claps*

kit · Post by **kit** » 30 Jul 2022 14:59

Chinmay wrote:Aussies competing with India in having a worse submarine procurement program

Defence is facing a capability gap as the existing Collins-class fleet retires and hopes fade of getting a new submarine under the Aukus deal before 2040.

Under the Aukus deal, Australia will buy at least eight submarines from either the US or the United Kingdom.

Former defence minister Peter Dutton suggested the US might give Australia a couple of its boats, a suggestion that was largely dismissed.

.......

Shadow defence spokesperson Andrew Hastie, while in London, has challenged the UK to compete against the US to supply the first two submarines by 2030 by boosting its building capacity, but experts have also dismissed that idea
So the Aussies pay half a billion to the French for cancelling the contract, go to US and UK and yet wont get a new sub till 2040 *slow claps*

Basically it comes down to NOT HAVING A DOMESTIC SUBMARINE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 07 Aug 2022 06:58

South Koreans offer Aussies new subs in 7 years to close Collins gap
https://breakingdefense.com/2022/07/sou ... llins-gap/
25 July 2022

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 29 Aug 2022 19:50

The £3bn Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales has broken down just one day after departing from Portsmouth to begin a four-month deployment to the US.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/202 ... portsmouth

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 07 Sep 2022 16:52

https://news.usni.org/2022/09/06/japan- ... ommissions

Japan to Build Two 20,000-ton Missile Defense Warships, Indian Carrier Commissions

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 17 Sep 2022 07:09

https://twitter.com/TheLegateIN/status/ ... kyhwv55Y1w ---> Thailand: Many senior officers of Thai Navy are opposed to the use of Chinese CHD 620 engine onboard Thailand's submarines on order from China, due to reliability issues; arguing that it has never been used even in Chinese submarines.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 19 Oct 2022 05:15

If wars were won on just looks, France would dominate the world!

Naval Group just released some artwork of PA-NG (Porte-avions de nouvelle génération), which is French for new generation aircraft carrier. Naval FCAS, Rafale Ms + E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes. Drag & drop each image into a new window for full size.

VIDEO: https://twitter.com/navalgroup/status/1 ... 3oVccDw6Xw ---> Keep calm and PA-Ng on

https://twitter.com/navalgroup/status/1 ... 3oVccDw6Xw --->

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 20 Oct 2022 01:38

Rakesh wrote:If wars were won on just looks, France would dominate the world!

Dassault owns Catia

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 01 Nov 2022 04:48

France’s Choice for Naval Nuclear Propulsion: Why Low-Enriched Uranium Was Chosen
https://fas.org/pub-reports/frances-cho ... as-chosen/
05 Dec 2016

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 16 Nov 2022 06:35

A great twitter thread from a French perspective. Click on the link below.

https://twitter.com/xaviervav/status/15 ... dUPXjl4phQ ---> My embark experience aboard @Warship_78 via COD. I had the rare chance to spend a few hours (which felt like a few minutes!) aboard USS Gerald R. Ford yesterday. The "newest and most advanced US Navy carrier" as I was told repeatedly. Here is how it went & what I saw...

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 23 Nov 2022 20:37

Navy P-8 Poseidon Can Now Drop Winged Torpedoes In Combat
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/n ... -in-combat
22 Nov 2022

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 29 Nov 2022 21:02

NATO Strike Groups demonstrate multicarrier operations
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... perations/
24 Nov 2022

Three NATO Carrier Strike Groups (CSG) demonstrated their commitment to the security and stability of the Euro-Atlantic Area during multicarrier operations while sailing in the Ionian Sea, Nov. 23, 2022.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 04 Dec 2022 02:34

£15.4 million contract for first cutting-edge Navy crewless submarine

A £15.4 million contract for a cutting-edge crewless submarine has been awarded to Plymouth firm MSubs by the Royal Navy. The vessel will be delivered to the Navy in two years’ time and will further advance the UK’s ability to protect our critical national infrastructure and monitor sub-sea activity.

Project Cetus – named after a mythological sea monster – enhances the Royal Navy’s experimentation with autonomous underwater systems. It is the first step in developing an operational autonomous submarine that will work side-by-side with crewed submarines – including the Astute-class hunter-killers and their successors – or independently.

Its maximum operational depth will exceed that of the current submarine fleet, meaning Cetus will equip the Royal Navy with even greater reach into the oceans in support of UK defence. It will be able to cover up to 1,000 miles in a single mission.

Cetus will be 12 metres long – the length of a double decker bus – 2.2 metres in diameter and weigh 17 tonnes. It will be the largest and most complex crewless submersible operated by a European navy. The bespoke vessel is being designed and built for the Royal Navy by Plymouth-based tech firm MSubs. This contract will create 10 and support 70 specialist jobs in the city.

.........................

VinodTK · Post by **VinodTK** » 04 Dec 2022 03:01

US largest military base in Asia; If this is retaken by US it will pose lot of problems PLAN because of the location of the port; close to China, Japan, and Taiwan

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 10 Dec 2022 22:46

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 06 Jan 2023 10:07

http://www.hisutton.com/Iran-IRGC-Drone ... pdate.html

Iran's First Carrier Expected To Be Launched In 2023

Work is progressing on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' first aircraft carrier. The 240 meter long drone carrier is based on a large merchant ship hull

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 09 Jan 2023 00:25

Armies. A successful first for the nuclear submarine Suffren, built in Cherbourg
Built in Cherbourg (Manche), the nuclear attack submarine Suffren successfully completed, on January 4, 2023, its first operational deployment within the carrier battle group.

The nuclear attack submarine Suffren was deployed within the French carrier battle group, led by the aircraft carrier Charles-de-Gaulle.

By Editorial staff La Presse de la Manche
Published on7 Jan 23 at 19:05
The Channel Press

First of series of the Barracuda program, the Suffren is obviously scrutinized since the cutting of its first sheet. Even more since his admission to active service on June 1 , 2022 .

With its successors, it is indeed required to replace the Rubis class nuclear attack submarines within the French Navy . In this sense, his last mission was a full-scale test .

A force articulated around the aircraft carrier Charles-de-Gaulle. With the blue crew on board, the Suffren completed this Wednesday, January 4, 2023 its first operational deployment within the carrier battle group (naval combat group articulated around an aircraft carrier). Deployed in the Mediterranean Sea , the SNA took part in the Antarès mission "for the defense of French and European interests ".

During this deployment, he contributed "to the knowledge and anticipation of crises in areas of strategic interest, thus contributing to France 's autonomous decision-making capacity ".

6 submarines
As part of the Barracuda program, six 99-meter nuclear attack submarines will be built at the Naval Group shipyard in Cherbourg: the Suffren, the Duguay-Trouin, the Tourville, the De Grasse, the Rubis and the Casabianca.

Read also

Armies. Naval Group Cherbourg will participate in the construction of the future French aircraft carrier
Annual maintenance

According to the French Navy, "through these missions and its contribution with the other deployed units, the Suffren participated in the preparation of future operations in the region".

Under the authority of the Task Force 473 staff, the SNA Suffren also validated its ability to conduct a strike against land with a naval cruise missile (MdCN), coordinated with the other units of the group, particularly the frigates multi-mission and Rafale Marine.

What are the missions of the Suffren?
Suffren-type SNAs carry out the same missions as Rubis-type SNAs (protection of valuable units, knowledge and anticipation, intervention) with superior differentiating capabilities (speed, endurance, implementation of special forces, strike capability against land at the MdCN).

See everything
This operational deployment punctuates three cycles carried out by the two crews of the building since it left the basin (for maintenance) in April 2022.

Since then, the submarine has been available for nearly 240 days, including 190 days sailed. During this time, he completed the validation of his operational capabilities, before being admitted to active service. The building will now begin its annual maintenance period in Toulon , its home port

https://actu.fr/normandie/cherbourg-en- ... 35344.html

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 20 Jan 2023 20:15

https://twitter.com/CovertShores/status ... XPh8Q9Wwug ----> ***BREAKING***

Royal Navy's new attack submarine, SSNR, will (highly likely) have a VLS. This is a major break from the Astute class but makes a lot of sense strategically. Could we see US supplied hypersonic missiles aboard RN submarines in the future?

Britain’s New Attack Submarine To Be First With VLS
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ch-system/
19 Jan 2023

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 08 Mar 2023 20:23

The poor Aussies

After the Scorpene leak episode, the only thing that comes to mind is ---> Karma!

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 90784?s=20 ---> The Australian government has hired a dozen of retired officers and former civilian leaders from the U.S. Navy as high-dollar consultants while it negotiates a nuclear sub deal with Washington.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 60320?s=20 ---> One retired U.S. admiral charges $4,000/day

to consult for the Australian government while simultaneously advising other foreign clients and collecting a U.S. military pension, according to records obtained by The Post under the Freedom of Information Act.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 97472?s=20 ---> The overlapping arrangements cast doubt on whether the U.S. consultants can provide impartial advice and raise questions about whose interests they are representing, said Jordon Steele-John, a member of the Australian Senate.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 81761?s=20 ---> Under federal law, retired U.S. military personnel must obtain approval from the Pentagon and the State Department before they can accept money or jobs from foreign powers that could compromise their sworn allegiance to the United States.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 54244?s=20 ---> For years, the armed forces and the State Department kept virtually all information about the practice a secret, including which countries employ the most retired U.S. service members and how much money is at stake.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/stat ... 40804?s=20 ---> The Post had to file two FOIA lawsuits to compel the federal government to release details about individual cases. Since then, members of Congress have pressed the government to improve transparency and oversight for veterans who work for foreign powers.

Avid · Post by **Avid** » 08 Mar 2023 20:40

Rakesh wrote:The poor Aussies After the Scorpene leak episode, the only thing that comes to mind is ---> Karma!

From the WaPo article referenced:
The U.S., British and Australian governments are expected to unveil further details this month, including what kind of subs would be built and where. Because of backlogs in U.S. and British shipyards, analysts have predicted the subs might not become operational until 2040

JTull · Post by **JTull** » 09 Mar 2023 00:17

Avid wrote:
From the WaPo article referenced:
The U.S., British and Australian governments are expected to unveil further details this month, including what kind of subs would be built and where. Because of backlogs in U.S. and British shipyards, analysts have predicted the subs might not become operational until 2040

Cyrano · Post by **Cyrano** » 09 Mar 2023 01:26

There were news snippets in the past couple of weeks that said Aus is pissed with UK and wants a direct contract with US for these subs... Or something like that.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2023 02:40

Their least expensive and quickest bet is to have US Navy boats (and possibly even RN boats) stationed permanently in Australia. And put out a new global tender for an ocean-capable SSK. Their best bet is going to be the Japanese, for a Taigei Class type boat. The Japanese are building them quite rapidly. Operating a SSN fleet is not cheap and the question to ask is can Australia really afford the investment?

Avid · Post by **Avid** » 09 Mar 2023 06:33

Australia to Buy U.S. Nuclear-Powered Submarines
https://www.wsj.com/articles/australia- ... n-1bd94418

The plan to sell up to five U.S. Virginia-class submarines to Australia is intended as a stopgap to provide the country with nuclear-powered subs by the mid-2030s.
Submarine production would later shift to Britain and Australia, which would produce a sub with a new design that would incorporate American technology, the people said.
Other facets of the plan call for the U.S. to step up its port visits to Australia in coming years and to establish the capability to rotate American attack subs through Perth by 2027.
All three countries would invest heavily in upgrading the defense industrial base, and Australia might even make a contribution to expanding U.S. capacity to construct submarines.

Avid · Post by **Avid** » 09 Mar 2023 06:35

Rakesh wrote:Their least expensive and quickest bet is to have US Navy boats (and possibly even RN boats) stationed permanently in Australia. And put out a new global tender for an ocean-capable SSK. Their best bet is going to be the Japanese, for a Taigei Class type boat. The Japanese are building them quite rapidly. Operating a SSN fleet is not cheap and the question to ask is can Australia really afford the investment?

They took your advice.

See the outlines of the plan above.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 09 Mar 2023 07:07

Thanks for that news item Avid.

Operating USN boats from bases in Australia is the best thing for all parties involved. Since they are already a poodle, they might as well go all in. Selling Virginia Class boats directly to the RAN is also a welcome step. The Brits are looking to recover the costs from the Astute Class program and their upcoming SSN(R) program and will charge an arm & a leg to the RAN to co-manufacture SSNs for them. For Australia, operating SSNs is like setting up an entire industry and ecosystem from scratch. Way better to lean largely on the Americans for this, than rely largely on the Brits.

Military planning for the PLAN just got seriously complicated. The Virginia Class is the world's best multi-mission submarine out there. PLAN Admirals will be having sleepless nights now. A submarine wall operating 24x7, in and around the eastern and western coasts of Australia, severely choking PLAN CBGs entering the Indian Ocean Region.

The Malacca Straits is already choked for the PLAN. Now the Java Sea, the Banda Sea, the Timor Sea, the Arafura Sea, the Solomon Sea, the Coral Sea and the Tasman Sea will now be patrolled. Checkmate PLAN

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 09 Mar 2023 15:59

Rakesh wrote:...Checkmate PLAN

Not exactly checkmate yet, Admiral sir. The game is very much on. These are a series of checks and counter-checks.

It's when the manufacturing economy of either one starts slowing down and shrinking irreversibly that the end-game will begin.

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 10 Mar 2023 20:24

The PLAN have a long way to go, before they counter the technological wizardry that the Virginia Class is. The US has been investing in nuclear powered submarines since the early 50s. After 7+ decades and a number of nuclear powered classes of boats, they are the leader in the field. The Chinese will certainly bring in counter checks, but they will not prevail in a conflict. The next generation of nuclear powered boats [ SSN(X) ] is already being designed to succeed the Virginia Class.

Albanese defends nuclear subs plan after Beijing accuses AUKUS of stirring up an arms race
https://www.news.com.au/technology/inno ... c2d59574e5
10 March 2023

pravula · Post by **pravula** » 12 Mar 2023 09:59

Is SOSUS clone an option? Is it within China's tech capability?

Rakesh · Post by **Rakesh** » 13 Mar 2023 18:18

Second hand, cheaper Virginia subs headed to Australia
https://www.afr.com/world/north-america ... 310-p5cqxl
10 March 2023

https://twitter.com/ashleytownshend/sta ... 87616?s=20 ---> Based on scoops, AUKUS looks like:
1) UK/Australian designed AUKUS sub from late 2030s
2) Co-crewed US Virginias for Australia as stopgap in early 2030s under some kind of "lease now buy later" deal
3) Australian $ to boost capacity of US/Australian shipyards
4) Fwd-deployed US Virginias from late 2020s

https://twitter.com/ashleytownshend/sta ... 28995?s=20 ---> Four big alliance questions:
1) Who commands of stopgap Virginias?
2) Will Australian-US do combined HQ/military planning for melded crews?
3) Will total # of US/Australian subs in Pacific grow?
4) Will they have federated roles/missions, i.e. hunting SSBNs?
5) How do we manage escalation risk?

Manish_P · Post by **Manish_P** » 13 Mar 2023 19:36

Rakesh wrote:The PLAN have a long way to go, before they counter the technological wizardry that the Virginia Class is. The US has been investing in nuclear powered submarines since the early 50s. After 7+ decades and a number of nuclear powered classes of boats, they are the leader in the field. The Chinese will certainly bring in counter checks, but they will not prevail in a conflict....

They might be happy with a stalemate, under the nuclear overhang...

Incidentally from the Chinese armed forces thread.. a recent post had this nugget.

The US Navy Secretary Carlos Del Toro told reporters in Washington last month that US naval shipyards cannot match the output of Chinese ones. “They have 13 shipyards. In some cases, their shipyard has more capacity – one shipyard has more capacity than all of our shipyards combined. That presents a real threat,” Del Toro said.

China intends to build a fleet of more than 400 warships by 2025. The US naval fleet is currently under 300 ships, and the Pentagon aims to have 350 manned vessels by 2045, according to the US Navy’s Navigation Plan 2022 released last summer, which is still way behind China.

In January, a senior American naval expert, Sam Tangredi, a former US Navy captain and the Leidos Chair of Future Warfare Studies at the US Naval War College, warned that the US Navy might lose to China’s PLA Navy, which enjoys a substantial numerical advantage over the US, saying, “the side with the most ships almost always wins.”

In a January issue of the US Naval Institute’s (USNI’s) Proceedings magazine, Tangredi looked at 28 naval wars in history, going back to the Greco-Persian Wars of 500 BC, and found that superior technology defeated more significant numbers in only three instances. “Using technological advantage as an indicator of quality, historical research on 28 naval wars (or wars with significant and protracted naval combat) indicates that the side won 25 with the larger fleet,” wrote Tangredi, while noting that in cases where fleet size was roughly equal, superior strategy and substantially better trained and motivated crews carried the day. “Only three could be said to have been won by a smaller fleet with superior technology,” according to Tangredi’s findings.