AUKUS Treaty NEWS ONLY

www.calameo.com

AUKUS Forum News | Issue 6 | May 2024

AUKUS Issue 6 FORUM May 2024 NEWS Steering the Course of the Autonomy Revolution hear from a determined innovator in AI robotics and Aussie energy navigation technologies innovator powering a new frontier in space From Reserves to...
www.calameo.com www.calameo.com
 
Maybe this is obvious at this point but slowly starting to believe the US will never achieve a shipbuilding or defense industrial base, in general, that supports its aspirational modernization goals.

It will more closely integrate with its allies into a global industrial base and global force structure. The US won’t have 80 deployable surface combatants but the US, Japan, Australia & S. Korea will.

I know the allies already cooperate and integrate I’m talking about making up shortfalls in US force structure.
 
Looks like AUKUS has convinced the Australian government to move away from their longstanding prohibition on nuclear power, last month they announced 7 sites where coal power stations would be replaced by nuclear power stations. This is also positive environmentally as Australia like China was one of the countries resisting ending coal power.

www.theguardian.com

Peter Dutton names seven potential nuclear power station sites but avoids questions on cost

Coalition to push ahead with potential sites across Australia, but serious questions remain about viability and cost
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
WatcherZero said:
Looks like AUKUS has convinced the Australian government to move away from their longstanding prohibition on nuclear power, last month they announced 7 sites where coal power stations would be replaced by nuclear power stations. This is also positive environmentally as Australia like China was one of the countries resisting ending coal power.
Click to expand...
Switch the nuclear makes sense given that they have the largest uranium reserves in the world.
en.wikipedia.org

List of countries by uranium reserves - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
WatcherZero said:
Looks like AUKUS has convinced the Australian government to move away from their longstanding prohibition on nuclear power, last month they announced 7 sites where coal power stations would be replaced by nuclear power stations. This is also positive environmentally as Australia like China was one of the countries resisting ending coal power.

www.theguardian.com

Peter Dutton names seven potential nuclear power station sites but avoids questions on cost

Coalition to push ahead with potential sites across Australia, but serious questions remain about viability and cost
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
What a load of rubbish!

Here are some facts: Peter Dutton is not in Government. He is the leader of the Opposition and thus this is all just talk. He cannot do anything and certainly his so-called announcement of "7 sites where coal power stations would be replaced by nuclear power stations" is nothing but wishful thinking. This is just political posturing.
 
bobbymike said:
Maybe this is obvious at this point but slowly starting to believe the US will never achieve a shipbuilding or defense industrial base, in general, that supports its aspirational modernization goals.

It will more closely integrate with its allies into a global industrial base and global force structure. The US won’t have 80 deployable surface combatants but the US, Japan, Australia & S. Korea will.

I know the allies already cooperate and integrate I’m talking about making up shortfalls in US force structure.
Click to expand...
You're talking about japan and s. korea building ships for us or you mean combining with their naval ships to achieve numerical parity/superiority against china?
 
donnage99 said:
You're talking about japan and s. korea building ships for us or you mean combining with their naval ships to achieve numerical parity/superiority against china?
Click to expand...
I think it will be a way the DOD tries to politically mitigate (somewhat deceptively) and pump up ship numbers while avoiding “talk” of industrial base production shortfalls.

“Oh sure we said we need 80 deployed major surface combatants and only have 72 BUT along with our allies we have 90”

Deceptively because we’d have 98 combined if we had 80 ourselves (in the above scenario)

If that makes sense (barely I know)
 
Work continues in the UK....more good news for Forgemasters (with the SMR potential, US sub forging work, gun barrel forging, Dreadnought work etc..).

https://twitter.com/x/status/1815666330713952407
View: https://twitter.com/NavyLookout/status/1815666330713952407


Sheffield Forgemasters submits plans for new landmark Machining facility

www.sheffieldforgemasters.com www.sheffieldforgemasters.com

I particularly liked..."designed to complement the historic look of the company’s existing buildings."....which if you've ever been past Forgemasters should mean a mix between overly ornate Victorian/Edwardian brick monument to industry, corrugated iron shed or brick encrusted with soot....doesn't look like the Architects have really followed that brief....more going for Amazon depot look...

Incidentally planning permission for Forgemasters in Sheffield in that area is a mere formality...you could drop a bomb and it would be an improvement...

We often forget that there is still some serious engineering in Sheffield...all around Forgemasters you'll find some other very capable companies in forging and machining...

A street view of the road that runs through Forgemasters site...

www.google.com

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.
www.google.com www.google.com
 
Last edited:
GTX said:
breakingdefense.com

Australian admiral warns AUKUS effort may be 'at risk' if dry dock issue not solved soon - Breaking Defense

Separately Australian Defense Minister Richard Marles said, "We need that infrastructure on the west coast and so it's going to be really important to put that in place... . We have some time in order to do it, but not a lot of time."
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
All you really need for a nuclear submarine is a moderately sized floating drydock. No need for multi-billion dollar funding and a decade of planning. There are plenty of available floating drydocks with more than adequate capacity. https://horizonship.com/ship-category/barges-for-sale/floating-dry-docks-for-sale/
 
Last edited:
TinWing said:
All you really need for a nuclear submarine is a moderately sized floating drydock. No need for multi-billion dollar funding and a decade of planning. There are plenty of available floating drydocks with more than adequate capacity. https://horizonship.com/ship-category/barges-for-sale/floating-dry-docks-for-sale/
Click to expand...
real drydocks are better.

For example, the submarine base at Groton has a floating drydock (or did when I was there). But the Bangor, WA sub base has a dedicated drydock, you can see a CGI model of one on google earth. The permanent drydocks can have much higher capacity cranes working over them than a floating drydock.
 
www.abc.net.au

Weapons export rules removed for trade between Australia and AUKUS partners

The US will remove critical export and arms regulations in order to encourage trade of weapons and military technology between the three AUKUS partners.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
breakingdefense.com

US to approve streamlined ITAR for Australia, in order to speed AUKUS arms exports - Breaking Defense

This US ITAR reform would reduce by "close to, or slightly over 900 export permits required under our export controls from Australia to the US and the UK, with a value of around $5 billion AUD a year," an Australian defense official said.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom