Lethe
Captain
According to ASPI, Australia should get 18 SSNs because it needs to be able to deploy 2 subs in 2 oceans simultaneously. Also, British SSN readiness problems are caused by the UK having too few SSNs rather than recruitment and maintenance problems. The writer is a retired submarine specialist (whatever that is).
The readiness and particularly industrial arguments for having more than eight submarines is sound enough; it is the cost implications of building and crewing more than eight nuclear submarines that are terrifying. This is one of the many reasons why we should not be embarking upon this foolish nuclear endeavour in the first place. Rather, we should build at least 12 large SSKs to be delivered at a consistent drumbeat that allows us to maintain production indefinitely with a persistent supply chain and work force.
Ironically, avoiding intervals of starvation that cripple both supply chains and the accrued knowledge of a skilled workforce and hence make ramp-up costs and schedules for the next program stratospherically high was one of the very sensible suggestions to emerge from Australia's naval shipbuilding review a few years back. Clearly that has all now been thrown in the bin with the Morrison/Albanese government's "all the way with USA"-inspired nuclear fervour.
Last edited: