Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 14, 2023, 8:25 am

Australia, the USA and the UK have just signed off on a 3 way deal to purchase these subs and technology from our allied partners. Its unclear at this point, Pres.Biden has said they will not be nuke armed, maybe because the greenies, snowflakes, flower people and lefties do not want nuke weapons in Oz. Strange that as the US & UK nuke subs will be visiting Oz in the future.

The time line at this stage.

2023: US Virginia Class submarines will increase visits to Australia

2026: UK boats to increase visits to Australia

2027: Up to four US and one UK submarines to rotate through HMAS Stirling near Perth

2033: Australia receives its first Virginia Class submarine from the US

2036: Second Virginia Class delivered

2039: Third Virginia Class delivered

2042: Planned completion of Australia’s first SSN-AUKUS submarine built domestically (option to purchase up to two more Virginia Class submarines if there are delays with the new design)

2045: Second SSN-AUKUS built in Australia delivered

2048: Third SSN-AUKUS delivered

2051: Fourth SSN-AUKUS delivered

2054: Fifth SSN-AUKUS delivered

2057 onwards: As Virginia Class submarines are retired, Australia will continue to have about one SSN-AUKUS submarine delivered about every three years.

Congrats to the previous Govt. for kicking this deal off, even though it was a cock-up with the Frenchies at the start and congrats to the present Govt for seeing it through. The present diesel subs Oz has will be upgraded in the interim.

Thank christ Oz does not have the mentality the Kiwis have in not allowing nuke ships without sails to enter Kiwi waters.



Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 14, 2023, 11:56 am

John Gorton , the liberal Prime Minister of Australia, made it illegal for Australia to have nuclear weapons by signing the Nuclear non prolification Treaty in 1968.

The Greens did not become a political party until 24 years later.

Doodoo
udonmap.com
Posts: 7128
Joined: October 15, 2017, 8:47 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Doodoo » March 14, 2023, 1:21 pm

Groton signed yes

But In 1968, ex-RAAF pilot Gorton became Prime Minister. The nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT) was already in the works. However, a big supporter of a homegrown nuclear deterrent, Gorton wanted to Australia to be on the “brink of manufacture” of a weapon, says Prof Reynolds.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/scie ... 17d6ef999b

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 14, 2023, 1:40 pm

Doodoo, your point?

Sport was lamenting the fact the Australia had no nuclear weapons and asserted that this was because various left wing folk were at the heart of this policy.

I pointed out it was the conservatives that signed the Nuclear Non Prolification Treaty in 1968. The fact that it was in the works before that date is 100% irrelevant as it was a conservative government before Gorton that did the lead up work. The last Labor government prior to 1968 was 19 years previous!

19 years of conservate rule. Gorton was in the cabinet for the previous 5 years and was deeply involved in defence policy setting for some time including his time as minister for the Navy.

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 14, 2023, 3:56 pm

Whistler wrote:
March 14, 2023, 11:56 am
John Gorton , the liberal Prime Minister of Australia, made it illegal for Australia to have nuclear weapons by signing the Nuclear non prolification Treaty in 1968.
OK you got me on that one, I did not know, I was only a kid in 1968, politics whats politics.

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 14, 2023, 4:39 pm

Don't blame me, I was too young to vote, got got my call up for national conscription that year. Silly buggers, I was disabled at the time.

If it is any consolation the treaty was not finally ratified in Oz, until your hero and mine, Whitlam signed into law, the libs only signed the UN document before the bill hit the Oz parliament.

User avatar
jackspratt
udonmap.com
Posts: 16191
Joined: July 2, 2006, 5:29 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by jackspratt » March 14, 2023, 7:21 pm

Whistler wrote:
March 14, 2023, 1:40 pm
Doodoo, your point?
Perhaps he was indulging himself in a bit of pedantry - if you get my point.

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 14, 2023, 7:28 pm

Whistler wrote:
March 14, 2023, 4:39 pm
Don't blame me, I was too young to vote, got got my call up for national conscription that year. Silly buggers, I was disabled at the time.

If it is any consolation the treaty was not finally ratified in Oz, until your hero and mine, Whitlam signed into law, the libs only signed the UN document before the bill hit the Oz parliament.
I was too young too vote in 68. Spent my early teens fishing, catching rabbits, shooting roos and ducks and sometimes went to school.

User avatar
FrazeeDK
udonmap.com
Posts: 4927
Joined: February 13, 2006, 2:02 am
Location: Udon Thani Thailand

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by FrazeeDK » March 14, 2023, 7:37 pm

pretty decent time line but anything that extends out 10 years before Aus gets their first nuke sub leaves a lot of wiggle room for things to change. I'd be more interested in when the Aus naval base that will "host" US and UK subs will be fully operational. You can bet UK and US will dump hundreds of millions into said base to make it able to accomodate the nuke subs... As soon as UK or US boats "visit" they should be doing joint crewing with Aus Navy submariners to have them fully trained up long before the "loaners" Virginia Class boats arrive.
Dave

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 14, 2023, 8:41 pm

FrazeeDK wrote:
March 14, 2023, 7:37 pm
pretty decent time line but anything that extends out 10 years before Aus gets their first nuke sub leaves a lot of wiggle room for things to change. I'd be more interested in when the Aus naval base that will "host" US and UK subs will be fully operational. You can bet UK and US will dump hundreds of millions into said base to make it able to accomodate the nuke subs... As soon as UK or US boats "visit" they should be doing joint crewing with Aus Navy submariners to have them fully trained up long before the "loaners" Virginia Class boats arrive.
Australia can host nuke subs at this very time. Naval base east in Sydney, navy base west in Perth, navy base north in Cairns Qld, there may be more. Also Eden port in NSW has been hosting subs since the late 70s, and now hosts the largest of cruise ships and wood chip carriers as well as a small munitions base for naval ships.

We also have deep harbours for any size ship in Oz. The battleship USS Missouri and the US aircraft carrier Constellation? had no troubles at all in Sydney. The harbours of Newcastle, Wollongong, Port Phillip Bay, Whyalla and Darwin just to name a few.

So Oz can host the nuke subs now with food, booze and women. I believe Oz submariners will be on board the overseas subs for training before we take delivery of our own.

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 14, 2023, 10:34 pm

The very large US carriers can not sail under the harbour bridge still plenty of harbour for them, but anybody who has seen how high the bridge is, can now get some idea how huge these carriers are.

I shudder to think what it would be like if there was another hot war, Sydney with its significant navel bases would be a prime target for ICBMs

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 15, 2023, 7:47 am

Whistler wrote:
March 14, 2023, 10:34 pm
The very large US carriers can not sail under the harbour bridge still plenty of harbour for them, but anybody who has seen how high the bridge is, can now get some idea how huge these carriers are.

I shudder to think what it would be like if there was another hot war, Sydney with its significant navel bases would be a prime target for ICBMs
The US and UK carriers dock in the navy yard in Sydney harbour at HMAS Kuttabul, Wolloomooloo, nowhere near the coat hanger (Sydney harbour bridge). No need for them to go under the coat hanger.

All world wide navy bases, along with military air fields are prime targets. I would imagine the US would have at the moment, ICBMs primed and ready for chinese targets.

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 15, 2023, 4:09 pm

When the Enterprise visited Sydney, it was too big for any of the Navy wharfs and anchored in the middle of the harbour
enterprise.jpg

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 15, 2023, 5:25 pm

Whistler wrote:
March 15, 2023, 4:09 pm
When the Enterprise visited Sydney, it was too big for any of the Navy wharfs and anchored in the middle of the harbour
enterprise.jpg
Maybe the tide was out whistles and Enterprise had to park in the harbour, dont know.
Enterprise was 232m long and 25m wide.
Constellation was 332m long and 86m wide.

Constellation parked at the navy wharf. On google you can see her tied up and photos of Aussie visitors going up and down the gangplanks for a closer look over her.

User avatar
Bandung_Dero
udonmap.com
Posts: 3631
Joined: July 10, 2005, 8:53 am
Location: Ban Dung or Perth W.A.

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Bandung_Dero » March 15, 2023, 5:53 pm

Enterprise was 232m long and 25m wide.

Where did you get those figures from?

348 m long x 78 m wide and 41 m at the water line!!!
Sent from my 1977 Apple II using 2 Heinz bake bean cans and piano wire!

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 15, 2023, 6:11 pm

Sport wrote:
March 15, 2023, 5:25 pm
Whistler wrote:
March 15, 2023, 4:09 pm
When the Enterprise visited Sydney, it was too big for any of the Navy wharfs and anchored in the middle of the harbour

enterprise.jpg
Maybe the tide was out whistles and Enterprise had to park in the harbour, dont know.
Enterprise was 232m long and 25m wide.
Constellation was 332m long and 86m wide.

Constellation parked at the navy wharf. On google you can see her tied up and photos of Aussie visitors going up and down the gangplanks for a closer look over her.
I'm not quoting from history books or some Wiki, I am stating from my own observation. The naval docks at Garden Island (Wooloomooloo) underwent quite a few changes since the Enterprise visited, but I still doubt that ship could berth alongside.

When Australia's last aircraft carrier 'The Melbourne' 213M long, was in service, it did dock there but there was no room for other navel ships on the dock, the Melbourne took up the entire wharf. That was of course when it was not sinking Australian and US destroyers on the high seas.

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 15, 2023, 7:17 pm

Bandung_Dero wrote:
March 15, 2023, 5:53 pm
Enterprise was 232m long and 25m wide.
Where did you get those figures from?
348 m long x 78 m wide and 41 m at the water line!!!
Got that one mixed up, sorry about that. The original Enterprise CV-6 were those measurments 232m the newer Enterprise CVN-65 with those 348m measurments. So you are quoting from wikipedia as well, or just have to know off the top of your head.

Sport
udonmap.com
Posts: 1583
Joined: October 30, 2006, 10:13 pm
Location: LA USA
Contact:

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Sport » March 15, 2023, 7:25 pm

Whistler wrote:
March 15, 2023, 6:11 pm
I'm not quoting from history books or some Wiki, I am stating from my own observation. The naval docks at Garden Island (Wooloomooloo) underwent quite a few changes since the Enterprise visited, but I still doubt that ship could berth alongside.

When Australia's last aircraft carrier 'The Melbourne' 213M long, was in service, it did dock there but there was no room for other navel ships on the dock, the Melbourne took up the entire wharf. That was of course when it was not sinking Australian and US destroyers on the high seas.
She would have her arse sticking out in the harbour maybe by 100m or so. let them figure it out. Still the subs could park at Kuttabul or the Overseas passenger terminal, cordoned off.

User avatar
Khun Paul
udonmap.com
Posts: 7778
Joined: September 16, 2008, 3:28 pm
Location: Udon Thani

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Khun Paul » March 16, 2023, 7:10 am

So now we have an expat Scot who transitioned into a Native Australian using his eyesight to determine the Naval usage fo th docking facilities in said country.
Was not aware he had qualifications regarding the docking of Naval ships of any Nation in Australian Docks....fascinating !

Whistler
udonmap.com
Posts: 5682
Joined: June 15, 2019, 8:24 pm

Re: Nuclear subs for Australia-not nuclear armed?.

Post by Whistler » March 17, 2023, 9:34 am

What a silly small small minded person you are KP, this is just another example of your spiteful meaningless posts, to achieve what?

A couple of considerations here:

1. The Australian Navy, that morphed into the ADF, and then privatised this facility was for a long time one of my clients, Garden Island in Sydney harbour was the main maintenance base for large ships. The software they were using from my erstwhile employer was for the maintenance of their facilities. I was their Account Manager for a number of years. Well embedded into the procedures and capabilities of that site.

2. When the USS Enterprise visited Sydney, it was quite an event. You did not need 20/20 vision to see a 90,000 ton leviathan moored in the middle of the harbour, it was a bit frigging obvious.

3. My math is not too bad, but wharfing a ship the was nearly 50% larger than the biggest available wharf did not require a deep knowledge of maritime procedures. I am not a trucking expert, but I would not suggest you attempt to park a semi-trailer on level 5 of the Central Plaza car park either. Common-sense comes in handy, you should try it.

Looking forward to you displaying your ignorance on other threads as you have exhausted your neurons on this one.

Post Reply

Return to “Australia”