Dumb and dumber: Australia's failed naval procurement and maintenance

Even a relatively slow nuclear submarine can go at its top speed all day every day for years if it wants to and only has to go back to port to collect food for the crew.   It never has to do that vulnerable recharging thing. It can also feed power-hungry modern combat systems and it has the size to accommodate larger sensor arrays than any diesel.  Increasing the size and power of flank sensor arrays gives a disproportionate increase in effectiveness.  The fat-hulled Astute Class achieve amazing flank sonar performance.

The French Barracuda solution provides low-enriched uranium reactors similar to their domestic nuclear-powered stations, which of course can be refueled endlessly every 5 years or so.  Consequently, the French have an effective nuclear regulatory system that is compliant with all relevant international regulations and they have an excellent safety record.

The UK Astute class and US Virginia class utilise high enriched uranium which lasts of the whole life of the sub - around 25-30 years.  End of life disposal of high-enriched reactors is significantly more problematic than low-enriched ones.  There are credible reports that the USN is investigating a move to low-enriched fuel for its next generation of naval reactors.

The obvious problem is that despite the Nation’s wealth that we have in the ground, more specifically, South Australia’s wealth, of uranium and thorium, and previous Prime Ministers such as Bob Hawke advocating developing nuclear technology in 1993, we have neither a nuclear electricity industry nor the associated regulatory bureaucracy. Why is it that our State and Federal leaders fail to focus on what we have, as opposed to myopic focus on what the minority hallucinate about, such as green energy and a crisis that is only in their nightmares. Despite rocketing energy prices and clear evidence of what has happened to other foolish nations that have followed Pied Pipers Greta and the UN, our leaders have achieved a new low in the word. Leadership is all about convincing people to do what they don’t want to do, and achieve a better outcome.

South Australia is finally making sensible statements about embracing the nuclear industry, and as the basket case of all State economies, so it should.

The US nuclear safety system is humungous and would probably vaporise our GDP all by itself before we even got a submarine. While the British nuclear regulatory rules are a little lighter, overcoming our national “nuclear fear” will take education and we may not be able to go from Collins to nuclear in the time available. We might need an interim type but, ultimately, Queensland needs to line up with BAE. There are almost as many attractions in this for the UK Government as for us in critical mass, continuity, strategic image, etc.

If I was the Queensland Premier I would be looking for a unique selling point to put to the PM. If she offers to do the same as ASC but cheaper. Cairncross should be the place.

I would argue the case on the basis that a diesel sub cannot remotely achieve the significant endurance and capability required, so we need to go nuclear and here’s how to do it.

The “Astute” acquisition strategy, partnering with the UK for a mixed-build and parallel exploration of a nuclear electricity industry. The challenge will be schedule. Anything that drives a life extension for Collins will play in ASC’s favour. It would make great sense to get the UK to build the stern of the vessel, including the nuclear propulsion package and Queensland builds the front at the upgraded Cairncross perhaps with UK help.

 Australia acquired an unparalleled understanding of French submarines during the Shortfin Barracuda programme. We threw millions of man-hours of hard-acquired expertise down the drain when we abandoned it. It wasn’t the fault of the French builder that the Australian Government asked them to do something spectacularly stupid.  There are good reasons no one else has ever tried to develop a diesel-powered version of a nuclear-powered sub!  Are French nuclear subs as good as US or British ones?  No one really knows, but the industry consensus seems to be “not quite but close”.  Are they better than anyone else’s, including Chinese?  Yes. If, and it is a big if, the French Government will play, then their Barracuda is smaller, cheaper, quicker to build and needs a smaller crew (the critical path for Australia) than the alternatives and will achieve 99% of the effect of its AUKUS equivalents.

The other choice is to foolishly believe that our Nation will never go to war again and let Cairncross become another habitat of the petulant cappuccino set, so that even more people can lounge around and grumble about our inept and spineless governments.