Thanks for daily maps, I found it interesting
Part of me wants them to go for a second round just when the Aussies breathe a sigh of relief and believe that the thing is over.
Look closely at the map, where does the circumnavigation tour end? Suspiciously close to the port of Darwin that was leased to China for 99 years, maybe the PLAN sailors can be welcomed for a rest or something
Would you look at that, suddenly a flurry of news about port of the Darwin now.
Australia to Hold Talks Over Future of China’s Darwin Port Lease
Landbridge Corp: We can sell it back to you for 22.1 BillionLook closely at the map, where does the circumnavigation tour end? Suspiciously close to the port of Darwin that was leased to China for 99 years, maybe the PLAN sailors can be welcomed for a rest or something
Would you look at that, suddenly a flurry of news about port of the Darwin now.
Australia to Hold Talks Over Future of China’s Darwin Port Lease
Lease it back for 22.1 Billion Profit + Interest, please....
Lethe
Captain
I think we can be reasonably confident that there is no firm determination on the part of the Coalition that Australia should go in for F-35Bs, for if there were then Peter Dutton would surely have said so, mining the symbolic value of a to naval fixed-wing aviation for political advantage: the Liberal party stands firm on the storm-swept deck of history, looking steely-eyed into the distance, while feckless Labor can't even keep an eye on Chinese ships in the Tasman Sea, etc. etc.
The Hunter-class frigates are actually going to be ~10,000 tonne ships (with 32 VLS cells...), with most of the growth over the baseline Type 26 owing to accommodations for the domestic CEAFAR2 radar, the first ship to be delivered some 14 years after the design was selected. It's a ridiculous program, really, which is why the 2023 Defence Strategic Review recommended it be cut from 9 ships to 6 whilst simultaneously discerning a new requirement for eleven Tier 2 frigates.
Of course, if Australia had built 6-8 Hobart-class AWDs instead of cutting the line off at three, and immediately followed that program up with 6-8 more modest Tier 2 frigates (e.g. Mogami, MEKO A-200, FDI), the resulting inventory would've been (a) cheaper (b) delivered in a more timely fashion that better corelates with the evolving strategic environment, whilst having (c) greater levels of domestic industry involvement and (d) better prospects in terms of sustainment and future upgrade programs. For all the rhetoric, the record these past ~15 years has been one of chronic mismanagement, with AUKUS as the spectacular capstone to that ignominious record.
I haven't encountered any numbers in the public domain, but SSN(R) has been described as an evolution of the Astute-class boats and the numbers there suggest crew complement roughly two-thirds that of a Virginia-class SSN. Submarine crewing appears to be quite variable: the Soviets leaned heavily into automation such that some of their SSNs have crew complements more in line with SSKs. There isn't much public visibility into the British submarine programs and industry, beyond the general sense that it is a rather marginal affair. If there is any area of AUKUS that a future Coalition government may seek to revisit, it is probably Labor's decision to favour a British design for that future boat.
Relatedly, the final piece of evidence as to the real nature and intent of AUKUS is former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's disclosure that one of the reasons the French design had been selected for the previous SSK project is that it was compatible with a future nuclear pathway if that were ultimately to be desired, the Shortfin Barracuda being largely an SSK-ified Suffren, and that conversations had been held with Paris, and assurances obtained, in that regard. Notably, the French Suffren SSNs operate a similar crew complement as our current Collins-class SSKs, half that of a Virginia-class submarine. So the decision under Morrison/Dutton was not so much to dump SSKs for SSNs, but Paris for Washington.
Last edited:
At ~10,000 tons in displacement, the Hunter class is practically the size of a Cold War era CG.
The CEAFAR2 can't possibly require that much room, so guessing the Hunter class is intended for extended patrols far from Australian shores, especially if it's only armed with a 32 cell VLS?
Some of the official language that the Australian authorities have used to describe the AUKUS program acknowledges that the resultant submarine will share a significant number of common systems with the Virginia class.
Per the :
Don't think anyone will know for sure without some level of insider knowledge, at least for a while, but from the verbiage, there is a possibility that the AUKUS submarine will be a "distant cousin," "Australianized version," or otherwise (arguably) a derivative of a late block of the Virginia class considering all the common systems that they will share.
antiterror13
Brigadier
Thanks for the update. Very interesting.
Wondering what happen to 054A and 903A? it seems from 13 Feb, only yellow which is only 055 ?
I wouldn't be surprised if PLAN would have friendly visit to Jakarta or Surabaya and also for re-supplying and re-fuelling, sometime next week maybe. Thats would be very awesome and a very strong message to Australia from both China and Indonesia
Yellow includes the 054A and 903A.