Australia almost no chance to buy any submarine from current US building program, experts say
Latest report to US Congress reveals the superpower will struggle to meet its own submarine-building targets for decades
The US navy’s Virginia-class attack submarine Hyman G Rickover before launch in 2021. Experts say Australia has almost no chance of buying a US nuclear-powered submarine from the current building program. Photograph: Sean D Elliot/AP
Australia has close to zero chance of getting a submarine from the United States’ current program, experts say, as yet another report shows the US is struggling to meet its own needs.
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.
The latest report to Congress on the progress of the US’s shipbuilding efforts show the submarines “experienced cost growth” in the early part of the program, and now there’s a shortage of spare parts, maintenance delays for existing boats, and concerns about the shipyards’ capacity.
Australia has close to zero chance of getting a submarine from the United States’ current program, experts say, as yet another report shows the US is struggling to meet its own needs.
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.
The latest report to Congress on the progress of the US’s shipbuilding efforts show the submarines “experienced cost growth” in the early part of the program, and now there’s a shortage of spare parts, maintenance delays for existing boats, and concerns about the shipyards’ capacity.
Australian-built conventional submarines vital to fill looming capability gap, says defence thinktank
Complications including, but not limited to, the pandemic have seen delays in production of the US navy’s Virginia-class submarines.
“Some observers have expressed concern about the industrial base’s capacity for executing such a workload without encountering bottlenecks or other production problems in one or both of these programs,” the report said.
The US is aiming to build its own fleet of at least 60 nuclear-powered boats, but the report released this week shows it will reach a minimum of 46 boats in 2028, 50 by 3032 and between 60 and 69 by 2052. It is trying to increase capacity, but will still struggle to meet its own targets for decades.
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.
Marcus Hellyer, a senior analyst at Australian Strategic Policy Institute said the “only way” Australia would get a nuclear-powered submarine by 2030 would be if the US gave us “one of their own boats”. “But their numbers are declining when they want an increase,” he said.
Complications including, but not limited to, the pandemic have seen delays in production of the US navy’s Virginia-class submarines.
“Some observers have expressed concern about the industrial base’s capacity for executing such a workload without encountering bottlenecks or other production problems in one or both of these programs,” the report said.
The US is aiming to build its own fleet of at least 60 nuclear-powered boats, but the report released this week shows it will reach a minimum of 46 boats in 2028, 50 by 3032 and between 60 and 69 by 2052. It is trying to increase capacity, but will still struggle to meet its own targets for decades.
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.
Marcus Hellyer, a senior analyst at Australian Strategic Policy Institute said the “only way” Australia would get a nuclear-powered submarine by 2030 would be if the US gave us “one of their own boats”. “But their numbers are declining when they want an increase,” he said.
Aukus pact: Australia pays $830m penalty for ditching non-nuclear French submarines
“The submarine taskforce [which will report in March next year] needs to look at all options, but at some point you have to draw a line and say this is just a distraction.”
Hellyer said that meant any submarine Australia would buy was likely to be from the next generation of US submarines, which will start being bought in the mid 2030s and are set to be vastly more expensive.
He has estimated, based on the current model, the entire program to build eight submarines will cost $171bn in the end, including inflation.
Research presented to US Congress suggests the next model would cost at least AUD$3bn more (each) than the current model, pushing the price even higher.
Hellyer said that looking at the cost increase if Australia gets the newer boat was a way to illustrate the problem of planning to buy submarines from another country that was continually upgrading and evolving its own fleet.
“What’s our philosophy here? Do we keep building one boat while the US moves on, and we’re left with this orphan … or do we move in lockstep with the US?,” he said.
“That would mean our little fleet of eight boats could be different [models].”
Rex Patrick, former South Australian senator and submariner, said Australia “will not get submarines off the US line”. “The US engage in operations all around the world and they’re important operations and the US Navy is not going to cede a capability so that Australia can get submarines [so they can] dip their toe in the water,” he said.
“All the publicly available material points to the US not providing us with a submarine.”
Hellyer said there was also “no way” the UK could spare a submarine as it is only building seven of the Astute class (which is one of the options being considered for Australia) before it moves to a new model. “The UK is currently wrapping up its Astute program,” he said. “They need to wrap that up to transfer the resources to the Dreadnaught program.
“They have no capacity to build us submarines.”
There have been suggestions Australia could pay for the US or the UK to expand their production capacity.
“The submarine taskforce [which will report in March next year] needs to look at all options, but at some point you have to draw a line and say this is just a distraction.”
Hellyer said that meant any submarine Australia would buy was likely to be from the next generation of US submarines, which will start being bought in the mid 2030s and are set to be vastly more expensive.
He has estimated, based on the current model, the entire program to build eight submarines will cost $171bn in the end, including inflation.
Research presented to US Congress suggests the next model would cost at least AUD$3bn more (each) than the current model, pushing the price even higher.
Hellyer said that looking at the cost increase if Australia gets the newer boat was a way to illustrate the problem of planning to buy submarines from another country that was continually upgrading and evolving its own fleet.
“What’s our philosophy here? Do we keep building one boat while the US moves on, and we’re left with this orphan … or do we move in lockstep with the US?,” he said.
“That would mean our little fleet of eight boats could be different [models].”
Rex Patrick, former South Australian senator and submariner, said Australia “will not get submarines off the US line”. “The US engage in operations all around the world and they’re important operations and the US Navy is not going to cede a capability so that Australia can get submarines [so they can] dip their toe in the water,” he said.
“All the publicly available material points to the US not providing us with a submarine.”
Hellyer said there was also “no way” the UK could spare a submarine as it is only building seven of the Astute class (which is one of the options being considered for Australia) before it moves to a new model. “The UK is currently wrapping up its Astute program,” he said. “They need to wrap that up to transfer the resources to the Dreadnaught program.
“They have no capacity to build us submarines.”
There have been suggestions Australia could pay for the US or the UK to expand their production capacity.
Peter Dutton’s claim he planned to buy US nuclear subs is ‘political point-scoring’, defence experts say
“You can achieve anything with money,” Patrick said. “But this is taxpayers’ money.”
Both Patrick and Hellyer said buying a conventional (non-nuclear powered) submarine from another country “off the shelf” would be another way to fill the capability gap.
Defence minister, Richard Marles, has consistently said he is keeping an open mind on the solution to the capability gap.
“As we go through the process now of looking at which solution we pursue, we also want not only to determine that solution but to work out is there any way in which that can be brought online much sooner than the 2040s and to the extent any capability gap is there, what are the means by which we can close it?” he said earlier this month.
“None of those questions have obvious answers. It’s part of the work we’re doing right now. But as we announce in the early part of next year as to what capability – or what submarine – we will be pursuing, we really want to have answers to all of those at that point in time.”
Guardian Australia has contacted Marles’s office for further comment.
“You can achieve anything with money,” Patrick said. “But this is taxpayers’ money.”
Both Patrick and Hellyer said buying a conventional (non-nuclear powered) submarine from another country “off the shelf” would be another way to fill the capability gap.
Defence minister, Richard Marles, has consistently said he is keeping an open mind on the solution to the capability gap.
“As we go through the process now of looking at which solution we pursue, we also want not only to determine that solution but to work out is there any way in which that can be brought online much sooner than the 2040s and to the extent any capability gap is there, what are the means by which we can close it?” he said earlier this month.
“None of those questions have obvious answers. It’s part of the work we’re doing right now. But as we announce in the early part of next year as to what capability – or what submarine – we will be pursuing, we really want to have answers to all of those at that point in time.”
Guardian Australia has contacted Marles’s office for further comment.
Wakakakaka…
ReplyDeleteThe kangaroo would most likely getting it's 1st nuclear sub under the Aukus program by 2100!
But all those thick-headed dingos would have all gone/retired. Leaving a humongous bill for the Ozzies to bear for the next 3 generations.