I'm not an educated man but I like to learn about issues that effect the world in general and you have the talent to make what ever you cover understandable to me and I love that. I'm an old Viet Nam vet and that made me look at world affairs more seriously. thank you great job!
You were happy using your war warmongering usa poured petrol on woman and children Hitler r stalinnever stooped that low how many Jewish children suffering from the Holocaust none sleep well marines now can wear lipstick on the battle fields Biden fiddles while USA burns
G’day from Australia, thank you for posting such a well thought out discussion of the reasons behind Australia’s acquisition of nuclear submarines. It gave me a different perspective on why China are concerned about AUKUS. I’ll even forgive you for the upside down sub 😉
Six to eight nuclear submarines is insufficient for our needs. We need to start build another six to eight advanced Collins (or barracudas ) and get the Nukes on order built overseas.
@@carisi2k11 (American) We can do anything if we try. (Australian-you) We can't do anything, so why even try? Lets just dig stuff out of the ground and sell it to the Chinese.
Thank you sir for being one of the very few to remember the multinational submariners that served out of W.A. I used to maintain a small memorial at the swan docks slipway in Fremantle and the number of people sadly still on patrol deserve all the respect we can muster, and yeah I know they were pirates not angels, but unquestionably brave. Top episode so thanks again 😉👍🏴☠️
I agree. Our Navy has wanted to for some time. When we acquired our Collins class in the late 90s early 2000s many back then said we should have been getting nuclear submarines. We just have so much coastline to cover. Unfortunately Australia is very anti-nuclear. We also have no domestic nuclear industry that could refuel the submarines. Hence using American/British technology that doesn't require refuelling is a game-changer for Australia. My preferences for the American subs but both are great.
Japan hesitated after the atomic bombs for days to surrender to the USA. Japan ultimately surrendered because Russia renounced their neutrality in the Pacific and declared war on Japan. Russia then attacked Manchuria, and were moving to attack the Japan mainland islands in the North with the aim of dividing Japan as they did Germany. Japan surrendered to the US to avoid this. USA was the better better option to live under than Russia. This is why there are islands in dispute now.
March 2023 and we are just days away from the British and Australian Prime Minister's going to Washington for the big AUKUS announcement. This new alliance is huge and involves very large investment in manufacturing capability that will benefit all three nations. China should never have tried to push Australia around, but now they reap what they sowed.
Great video, your comparison of SSNs and SSks speed and endurance absolutely nailed the main issue. A couple of other things - the bigger SSN has more space and can carry more weapons. When you run our of weapons your patrol is practiaclly over as you're defenceless if detected. Secondly, SSNs' space allows for more powerful sonars which can help to redress the sonar advantage of an SSK. However both Virginias and ASTUTEs are very quiet.
@@Beehive101 There are several articles this week in the Washington Post and the NY TImes about China and trade - of course this is not because of the business interests of their owners Jeff Bezos and Carlos Slim, However, I don't think there is much to admire in any Communst society. Have a look at Chris Chappell's channel "China Uncensored" We operated from the Clude Submarine Base for thirty years with CND protesters camped outside - we sometimes dropped in for coffee on the way home from a run ashore! As far as I know the protesters are still there and nobody cares becasuse they're wrong.
It doesn't matter how many weapons it carries, because the moment it fires one everyone knows exactly where it is, and then because it can't run silent, it's only going to survive for hours at best. Maybe minutes. One shot and it's done.
@@gasdive I agree with you, there's also the fact that we will never see the 100 to 150 ship convoys like ww2, and detecting and hunting nuclear subs with destroyers and frigates and helicopters will be just as deadly as the nuclear subs hunting ships and other subs. so great loads of weapons is not really needed if the sub can survive once being detected.
Australia. UK and USA are all together as one. Australia has decided on investing into subs because that is what is beneficial to the greater picture for all involved. As we have done through history, we will stand together and fall together but no one will push us around or dictate to us. United we are.
Hahaha. I get it. I have served in the Royal Australian Navy. I sailed to Hawaii, in an RAN ship. I remember when we had to flip over; it was painful to flip at the equator AND the International Date Line, both going and returning. We regularly fly Air Force aircraft over the oceans, also, and they also fly upside-down when they get to Guam, Hawaii, etc. NOT!
A few points; Current RN/USN SSN plants never need to be refueled. Part of this agreement is basing agreements for RAF/USAF/RN/USN which brings refitting much closer by half finally the PRC is a hybrid economic system where investment and movement of money is much more restricted than a capitalist economy. Nice summary of IJ WW2 strategy
That is why we were converting French Nuclear subs to diesel/electric in the first place and never considered French nuclear subs that would have to be taken back to France every 10 years for refueling, but British or US models are fuel for the expected lifespan of the sub.
When the USN started using nuclear subs, the joke then was that the subs would only need to visit port when it was time for the crews to reenlist. As an Aussie with a solid awareness of history, defense matters and international events, the AUKUS subs are absolutely the right move.
UK here, with no armed forces connections - am very pleased to see the UK and US governments pitching in with Oz on this. Eight SSNs is a pretty chunky force - that's more than the RN has! Best regards from Trent Bridge Town
@@notreallydavid that should probably tell you all you need to know about how likely this plan is to actually see fruition, especially when you compare the population sizes and GDP of the UK and Aus - we could note that apparently the UK hopes to boost its subs count to 19 but your guess might be better than mine where Downing st is going to find the sailors who want to sit in them all day, or which ports they're going to park them in
@@Christmas12 Thanks C. _Nineteen_?!?!?!? All full-size and noocoolar? As you suggest, no chance. Is somebody planning to sell off St Paul's and Westminster Abbey as hotels to raise some of the loot? All best
@@Christmas12 And yes, as you point out, we aren't over endowed with berths for huge subs, and recruitment wouldn't be a walkover. On the other hand, if everyone on board were to have access to a (hushed) Xbox, maybe they'd find cylinder-life tolerable. (
As an old merchant Marine Engineer i enjoy your channel & this great video, just a couple of points. The reason china is upset with australia is simply we asked for a independent review of the background and cause of civid19 and as Australia has never allowed china to bully it which they have tried many many times this was their responce. They thought we would cave if they effected us but as noted we dont allow bullies. We now dont need their trade as 95% of the market was made up with in 6 to 9 months selling to other markets that now had the opportunity. Wine is perhaps the only looser and china still cant power its self as that cant effectivly buy the quality steaming coal they need. In respect to our defence australia is one of the closest allys to the USA and the only one who has assisted the usa in every conflict it has had since ww2. Our sub force is very effective and the only one that have sunk a USA air craft carrier and multiple support vessels during our regular war games, then on 2 other occasions we have got right into the inner circle for an effective kill even with the USA navey specifically looking for us testing new tech after the first shock sinking. I also understand unofficially one of our subs came right up to the US sub with in 50 feet and used internal music to announce their presence, bit of a shock that one. So there is a good chance we will use both kinds of subs. It also means we can defend our selves now but of course with the aggressive rise of china the expansion with the new sub is fantastic. Australias worry is the political decline of the USA over the last 3 administration (not taking sides) and the decline of its internal fabric and social adhesion, so in the long term we need to plan for the next 50 to 100 years.
Lol, what?! We don’t allow China to bully us here in Australia??? China owns Melbourne Port, Darwin Port, and possibly a plethora of other resources and assets too. Bullying is a matter of subjective opinion as far as this discussion is concerned!
@@Lakridza67 no they may have bought/leased things but not bullied us, anyway the stroke of a pen simply removes their ownership and brings critical infrastructure back in our hands if anything escalates. Its happened in the past and can easly be achieved if required
Meanwhile its been observed that Singapore is much more open when it accused the USA of political interference in the past as compared to when accusing mainland China of the same more recently e.g. when the gov't accused a professor of spying & deported him, it refused to say for whom he was spying for. When questioned about such different standards I remember 1 of the ministers said something like: "Do you want to be embargoed by mainland China like Australia?"
@@lzh4950 I dont know the situation in Singapore thus cant make a comment. But the impression China tries to portray to the world is that they have effected Australia which is mostly false and it may be your ministers impression due to China CCP billing tactics and who know his politics and CCP beliefs. It should be noted that China is still suffering (not us) from the coal bans and are paying over 3 times the market rate for our coal via third parties, just this week they have dropped the bans and tried to buy aussie coal but the miners has told them to stick it where the sun don't shine as our new clients are more important so CCP KICKS THEM SELVES AGAIN.
Morning Sal, hope you virtually attended some of the McMullen Conference. Much food for thought, I was on the Corbett 100 panel.. Anyway, about this, our strategic risks keep rising and this made the SSK insufficient to meet the threat. Simple as that, really. When we signed up for the SSK, SSN were simply not available to us. The Attack class design was, without doubt, the best SSK design in history, although it was so large that AIP could not be fitted to it. The French SSN is a good vessel, but it needs reactor refuelling and we have no domestic nuclear industry to do that. Your points on SSK vs SSN are all correct. We are under orders not to speculate so I cannot do so. Your points on comparing the Pacific War of 1937-1945 (yes, it started in China) are good ones. If Communist China (and yes, they are communists and are right now dismantling Deng Xiaopeng's 'partial-capitalist' system. Xi Jinpeng has announced a 'Second Cultural Revolution', as the last one was such fun for the CCP, as they got to kill maybe 20 million of their own people. Their economy is in desperate trouble. Our Prime Minister and Defence Minister have made it very plain in their public announcements that we are very worried about the CCP taking the PRC into a situation where they trigger a major regional war. ASEAN is also worried about this. That's why we are all rearming in this region. We all understand that the CCP has made the PRC into a hostile power (please note that this DOES NOT mean 'enemy' power) Also, please ignore that figure of "eight SSN", too, no decision has been made. I think that figure came from the MSM, it's just a guess from people who don't know what they are talking about if so. it might wind up being 8, but no decision has been made. My British friends are telling me that things may well happen very quickly in this space, so keep your eye on it. Cheers: Mark
Thanks for your post & thoughts, im an ex underwater weapons Technician who worked on aussie subs , torpedos, Periscopes & other underwater instrumentation. You absolutely hit the nail on the head with regards to time being on station against a diesel/electric. With regards to the announcement this week on AUKUS , i think we will just order the 5 Virginia subs of the bat given the new designed ( Astute Plus )will be behind time as usual . The new Astute Plus will have a 15mt -25mt Vertical Launch insert for Tomahawk missiles & Other. This AUKUS SUB will be using a US fire control hardware ,software & communication syncing. Going back to the 3 - 5 Virginia class submarines Australia are purchasing , i hope that they will be new as the current Virginia is a Block iv & the upgraded is the Block V that takes some new Tech & upgraded tomahawks & hammerhead mines ect. It's important that we get the top spec Virginia as we are paying a premium for access and having this agreement.
Let me tell you a short but very true story. 1983 at the Jungle training school in Australia. Siting around in the rain with a group of Private soldier mates. I asked a question "if you were the Minister for Defense how would you defend our country". After some discussion it was decided Facts : Australia is an Island all be it pretty big. So you have to get here. If you do get here, you continue to need getting here. Supplies etc. SO we decided defense was very simple. 1. Nuclear Subs a lot of them ( NO surface ships they are just floating paper weights). 2. Long range missile systems both Air to Air and Air to Surface. 4. Long range aircraft F111 and Fighter aircraft 3. A Small fully conventionally organized Army supplemented by 1 year national service for all men and Women. There it is simple and flexible for all contingencies. ONLY now 40 years later are the so military called experts slowly moving in this direction
[sigh] Isn't it a shame that you and I don't rule the world? I often solve problems this way. [chuckling] After Pasteur's great discovery of bacteria, French doctors in practice still couldn't be bothered to wash their hands. I read somewhere "they just had to wait for the old doctors to die off." I think that applies to a lot of situations where new thinking is required.
Sorry to disturb your dreams but Australia now can afford just six somehow big diesel submarines. Australia may afford 4 nuclear ones. For that price Australia could have bought and built at home 40 smaller diesel submarines e.g. Type 210. For me a few submarines are quite the wrong choice.
One can also see why Australia made such a fuss about Solomon Islands signing security deals with China. With trade lines closed via Indonesia, It would only really leave the eastern route towards the USA. Although not a lot of trade flows from this route, a closure of this last choke point (as well as Chinese military presence only a stone throw from major Australia cities) would be disastrous from a national security point of view. I'm from Australia, and this is a simple and well presented video of Australian NS and the need for Subs!
It was the discovery that China was only in Solomons to help finance and host the pan pacific games after Defence minister Peter Dutton used the Anzac Day address to announce all Australians should prepare for war, That’s the main reason Scomo out Albanese inn and a complete deescalation of hostile discussions, China isn’t putting any pressure on Australia our iron ore goes to BHP in China and our Coal sanctions are over because China’s Coal demands have grown, Sanctions placed on us after believing Anthony Fauci’s Wet Market Covid origins and he has been proven to have lied to us not China then he classified a treatment as a vaccine to force global vaccine mandates and big pharma pays for the ridiculous military budget while 10million people are dead, Paul Keating is 100% correct Australia needs to distance itself from USA and focus on Asia, USA has intentionally blocked our highly successful grain farmers by subsidising unsuccessful farmers and controlling export tariffs taking 12% global trade directly of us its just a coincidence Ukraine has shitloads of grain sitting in cargo ships!🤬
There's also routes from Western Australia across the Indian Ocean, either to Suez or Cape of Good Hope. It's also the main route from Europe (NATO, France, UK) into the Indo-Pacific theatre. The route for most of China's energy imports is Gulf-Malacca Strait-China. Which is why India, Australia, UK and US are cooperating to secure the entry points to the Indian Ocean from SEA.
I'm in Perth Australia. Today it was announced that three US Nuclear Subs will be stationed here and that we are purchasing a fleet of US and UK Nuclear subs. We are also going to assemble our own in years ahead. Bear in mind that we have just one reactor here ands that is used for producing medical isotopes like Technetium 99. No nuclear power down under. Oh and we are just 25 million people, not 30 million, beyond that great video. Thank you muchly!
The Singapore air force trains just north of where I live in Perth Australia at Pearce. I think Indonesia does as well although we have our tiffs. Australia only fears our largest northern neighbour. Russia and India I'm not talking to you.
Great summary of the story, one of thinigs that became apparent recently is that the acquisition of Astute/Virginia class subs is a temporay, short term measure while a new 'AUKUS' class submarine to replace both the Astute and Virginia subs is developed. Australia will be contributing to the development and construction costs in return for up to 7 of them. Construction will be in the US, but Australia will be contributing a few billion to US shipyards.
your details are mixed up- the plan is to buy 3 second-hand Virginia class SSNs between 2030s-2040s (which are built in the US, with an option to buy 2 more but that's even less likely), while the AUKUS class will replace the UK's Astute class, and we'll build 5 of those, partly built in the UK (reactor definitely), rest of it built in South Australia - with Australia contributing 3bn AUD to the efforts in the US and UK to increase their construction capacity
I wont be here but I predict Whatever they tell you the Cost It will be Triple and even more . Too many people to grease their palms Particularly American
Australia has 26m people. It has had record trade surpluses for the entire period of the XJP blockade. It easily found customers for the exports that China boycotted. There's only so much supply. If China goes elsewhere it displaces other customers, who then come to Australia. Australia is an efficient, high quality producer and free trader, so its commodities are desirable and well priced. China has had brownouts and blackouts from the coal ban and in the end coal was the first thing XJP had to relent on. Bulk carriers full of Australian coal stood off Chinese ports for 9 months before finally discharging their cargoes.
Exactly this - when the coal was blocked, there were power outages in china... and the coal just went to other developing countries and other trade routes were established - essentially to china's competitors. As long as australia can protect it's merchant vessels and does not allow china to dominate sea lanes, china can do jack shyte about it.
As an Aussie that was an excellent and accurate presentation - there is no being equal friends with China, they expect some kind of homage or subservience from their trading partners. The one strategic issue that is missed, and you did touch on it, is China's increasingly heavy influence over the Pacific Islands, especially that block of South Pacific Islands that could form a barrier between Australia and the US. Solomons, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa - (long may the French maintain their presence in New Caledonia. They are corrupting those islands with cash like confetti. These submarines will go some way towards negating that policy but I can't imagine a time when the subtle and covert Chinese influence in this islands becomes far more overt.
Yes. In fact that whole scenario is why the US Navy started off their island hoping campaign in the southwest pacific. To protect the trade route with Australia.
Why shouldn't you expect increasing Chinese influence among Eastern Pacific Island nations- China is a 'Great power' too and has as much right as Great and old colonial powers like the US, UK, and France to reach out with offers of trade and security pacts as any of them- you should expect to see more Chinese presence because this is closer to their home, it's the US who sailed across an ocean to occupy these lands and act as standover 🙄somewhere along the way you're forgetting or ignoring the history of the US who used eastern pacific islands to test nuclear bombs and do human experimentation of their inhabitants (then left all their radioactive waste around with a heaping of concrete poured over it), waged gruesome war in Vietnam (for what?!) and chemical warfare raining rainbow chemicals all over them and our troops (my friends health problems probably stem from her father getting doused in that shit, I went to school with a Vietnamese kid whose hand was a malformed stub from that shit), the same US who occupied the Philippines with force, still occupy Okinawa, still occupy Guam and Marshall islands- and these are the good guys you think we should get in bed with here 👀nevermind China how does that reflect on us with all our other Asian neighbours. China is Solomons biggest export market and it's not even close, but we were the ones who pissed off the Solomon islands way back when with our attempts to interfere with their sovereignty that was Alexander Downer (and they never forgot it), I know the media and ScoMo didn't want to talk about that, but we have an unpleasant history of treating some of our neighbours with contempt, treating them like they owe us fealty, spying on the private lives of their leaders, even tried to steal oil and gas fields from Timor-Leste, that was Downer again! (and still trying to steal that gas). You still insult them by the way every time you refer to Chinese influence taking over a place like the Solomons you're dismissing the Solomon's sovereign ability to make those decisions for themselves and implying that if they weren't captive to conspiratorial CCP influence they would make decisions that you prefer- and that arrogance does not go unnoticed by others, and African nations have echoed similar sentiments about how they feel the Chinese approach them in business compared how the west talks down to them. All the subs in the world can't do anything for bad manners.
I’m late to the party here but I don’t think Australia will go for either an astute or Virginia class here’s why Both designs are 25+ years old the astute is coming to the end of its production run the Virginia has been modified with newer blocks for VLS which isn’t what Australia will need so it’s surplus to their doctrine What I do think we will see is the sharing of the British SSNR specs and the Australians will adapt that design to fit their needs I think we will see them adopt the Lockheed Martin fire control system with the MK48 Mod 7 torpedo and also an anti ship missile along with command and control systems from the US while retaining British sensors such as the type 2076 sonar which is superior to current fit Virginia class sensors (as proven by SubEx USS Texas v HMS Astute) This mash up will give the RAN the best of both worlds and also critically a very powerful submarine with a lot of capability As for the RAN going nuclear this is undoubtedly going to be very expensive as they don’t have a home grown nuclear industry infact they have only one test / research reactor for medical uses mainly A pure SSN is a great fit for them and the increase in capability will be phenomenal and offer them absolute regional superiority I’d also note that SSKs don’t have to fully surface to recharge they can snort (can be a horrible experience) but also now with AIP technologies these boats can offer a half way solution The nuclear option though is the best fit given transit times to operational areas and I’d point out also the current Collins class are able to remain at sea for 70 days not restored en route.
To add as well we in the defence realm consider Singapore a smart buyer of hardware and they have recently just acquired new submarines which will bolster their regional influence
As an Australian, I applaud the plan. The latest news is Australia will buy 3 Virginia class boats from the US and then build 6 or 8 AUKUS boats. These will be UK designed but with US powerplants, sensors and the US heavy torpedos. There is also planning underway to establish an east coast base so the force projection would cover all the approaches into the Pacific and South China Sea from South America. I also agree that if it did come to a shooting match, it wouldn't just be Australia and the US but every single nation that rings China, from India to Japan as they all have lots to lose if China takes over.
Aussie here. Great summary of strategic advantages of SSNs. The announcement was made this week, and Virginia-class it is for phase 1. With a combined AUKUS design and build for the long term. There's been a lot of white noise within Australia since the deal was announced. Have to be suspicious of where it's coming from. AUKUS has bipartisan support, and national security ranks highly in any political poll with voters, for all parties. Final footnote: since your video was made, China has signed a security pact with the Solomon Islands. Steps to shore up that eastern route out of any blockade scenario.
George Galloway rearranged AUKUS to USUKA - pronounced You Sucker. I urge all Australians to email their Federal MPs and let them know you don't want to be suckers in this 'deal' that is a disaster for Australia. Paul Keating is a hero.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp You are absolutely incorrect. The price tag is steep but the capability and the deterrence to other nations is worth the money. Australia is very isolated and we have an incredibly weak surface navy. There is nothing that we could do against a determined adversary on the surface of the ocean. Under the waves is a very different story. A well trained and rather small SSN fleet that is at the level of the UK or US suddenly gives Australia the ability to attrit or destroy any amphibious force that would try to land on our shores.
@@freefall0483 So whose amphibious force is going to try to land on your shores? Who is Australia's determined adversary you are paranoid about? And how does a submarine destroy a landing force? And if you sink an adversarie's naval vessel, you think that adversary is going to quit and not retaliate? Are you sure you have thought this through Daniel?
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp Given that Australia is surrounded by ocean, any adversary must make an amphibious landing. Kinda obvious. Australia's potential adversaries are primarily Indonesia and China. Both of which have the ability and the want to seize the vast resources of Australia, if they could get away with it. In modern warfare, submarines are the ultimate enemy of a large landing force. Especially nuclear submarines. They can run at high speed indefinitely which allows them to continually position themselves ahead of a landing force and attrit them all the way from their country to mine. They are incredibly difficult to detect, especially by surface vessels. As well as torpedoes, modern nuclear submarines have long range anti ship missiles. These can be launched well outside of detection range and the firing vessel can easily disengage and reposition itself without fear of detection. A single sub can lay multiple ambushes. The adversary will make a valiant attempt to destroy the offending submarine. With appropriate training, this is a very difficult task. If the enemy is successful, it is most likely that the Australian submarine will have caused incredible damage to the adversary before detection and destruction. This has been the story of submarine warfare since it's inception. A small number of effective vessels can attrit, neutralise or even destroy a much larger enemy force. Many people in many nations have put a lot of thought into the advantages of nuclear submarines. This is why any country that can afford them definitely acquires them. They are the most dangerous of all weapons. Especially vessels like the Improved Las Angeles and the Virginia class boats. The ability to carry long range land attack cruise missiles and long range anti ship missiles has given the submarine a most fearsome ability to destroy whilst remaining completely undetected. The hope of all is that a deterrent force like the nuclear submarines that Australia will acquire will never be used in anger. That is the purpose. If you maintain a position of strength always, the chance of an aggressor attacking reduces immensely. All if history shows this. Basic psychology shows this.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp in national defence planning, you hope for the best, plan for the worst. Nations can lob ballistic missiles at each other, but conquering another country is only achieved with boots on the ground. To do so against Australia would require transport and logistics via a large surface fleet. That's why our defence chiefs have invested do much in a capable submarine fleet.
Great stuff Sal! Reminds me of the hours I used to spend playing P.T.O. (Pacific Theater of Operations) by KOEI about WWII in the Pacific. Amazing stuff concerning natural resources from Davao and Bandjarmisin, etc. that were so important to control to stop the Japanese navy.
Australia absolutely needs nuclear submarines if they want to have an effective deterrent. Their subs could be anywhere at any time and the Chinese will know that.
The fact that it has been decided that the Australian navy will now be getting an American designed model is really a no brainer. The USA 🇺🇸 is much more likely than the British to be operating in areas close to Australia’s coast. Therefore having the infrastructure and spare parts available to service the American vessels here in Oz is why we will be getting the US and not British subs.
Oz and the US share an ocean. A farkin' big one, granted but you do not share one with the UK...or France for that matter. I know all the heavy lifting is at Newport News on the N.E. coast of the US but there ARE US Navy bases on the west coast. And Hawaii. And Guam. Australia is, as Great Britain was referred to in WWII, an unsinkable aircraft carrier. Australia is a monster aircraft carrier, being a continent and all.... I see the importance of Aus as a world influencer growing quickly and BIG in the not-so-far-future. China is heading towards military law for the entire country because they are up to their ball it and Xi will pull some insane stuff out of his a** to keep the CCP in control, given that he IS the CCP at this point (Mar. 2023 for you future readers) whatever he dreams up is going to be a pain in the butt to many other people aside from his own population. And that includes Russia. Going to be interesting to see where the two of them stand in ten years time assuming there's anything left of them....
That's a good point. Australia is not only a part of FPDA, but we also make smaller agreements with a lot of countries in the Asia/Pacific region. So in theory having increased capabilities not only protects trade, but it also has the potential to strengthen our influence and capabilities to aid the smaller nations around us. Since China has been attempting to expand their influence in the same area, this also acts as a safeguard for that as well. Some may still ask why not depend on UK or USA for everything. But to that my answer is that we just happen to have different kinds of relationships with our neighbours compared to them, so it really benefits us if we maintain control our self rather than hoping someone in the pentagon or wherever is going to have our best interest in mind and share our same ideals for regional stability.
Your insane, you stated that China is not a “COMMUNIST COUNTRY” !! Hey hero they are a communist country, plus you never mention about FRANCE screwing Australia over price of the diesel subs. That in the end of price increases we canceled the French subs. The sharing of knowledge is also with England too, it’s more likely we’ll get a English nuclear submarine than a American style
I think Australia should keep its conventional subs in reserve for defence in Australian waters, but still go ahead with the nuclear submarine deal in order to defend herself, her allies and her neighbours from beyond Australian waters. Sure the Collins-Class submarines may be old, but they can still be useful in the worst case scenario.
the collins could be refit/upgraded if feasible as a reserve ran squadron. using them as test platforms for new sub tech, weapons, systems could keep ssn's on station longer and when refit they would have the benefit of fully sea-tested equipment. also, reserve subs very damned handy for keeping surface fleet's asw skills sharp and training of new submariners. just thinking out loud, thanks.
Australia seriously needs to work very hard on sea denial I was of the opinion that 6 conventional 6 nuclear plus a genuine replacement for the 30 f111s say a downgraded version of the b21 raider optimised for sea denial in any case I’m sure Australia is working on it
@@DEP717 The F111 was bought as a fighter it only worked as a fighter Bomber by Chance And Australia went back on its word when the TSR2 was being built We were coerced by the US just as we are being coerced today We waited 10 years for the F111 The TSR2 would have been on our shores within 2 years
An excellent evaluation that logically silences the Naysayers who do not care or understand about Defence and Strategies. I have for many years been seriously concerned at how China has Made Australia so dependent on Made in China and it's flimsy long Supply Lines that China as a whim could close down and choke Australia. With Nuclear powered Submarines Australia will be in a position of High Respect at the Table regardless of it's large land mass related to it's population.
Nice insight. A refreshing perspective on motivations for WWII. As an Aust, I have no issue with upside-down jokes. The mirror image can also explain why we drive on the other side of the road.
15:10 There is another chinese supply route across land. Why do you think the Belt and Road Intiative involves building so much rail networks to the middle east and eastern Europe.
We will not be getting a virginia class because they require way too much crew for our small submarine force. most diesel electric subs are not actually using lithium batteries because of fire hazard issues. The collins class uses lead acid. New sodium batteries should solve this issue and give conventional subs a boost.
curious, diesel electric submarines are great for near shore defense, where it does not need to travel long distances underwater. surface ships are best for show the flag and police actions. Nuclear submarines are best to combat enemy fleet. Seems this is what Australia thinks is the long term need
Trivia: The first Australian submariners instituted the dolphin insignia for sailors who have graduated to submarines in WW1. I believe most Western navies now have them.
As an Australian, Australia would not use force as a negotiation chip like some dictatorial nations have tried in the past. Australia is happy to trade with China, and any trade disputes are handled politically not militarily. If there was an armed conflict, most likely triggered over Taiwan and involving the USA, Australia and China, submarines are important to Australia because its an island nation and any landing force would have to travel to Australia by Sea, plus as you mentioned it's useful to interdict supplies to a potential aggressor nation in the region.
Trade with China is what made this country, in the last 40 years. Let's be realistic. America had done shit for us. They got Rudd out of office, (read Julia Bishops book) they've entered us into many conflicts, and have invaded more countries in the last 100 years than China and Russia combined.
A Chinese spy cackled . In three generations china will put its name on our door anyway . Australia should stop supplying a china preparing for war with iron ore . Xi told his militarry to prepare for war . What makes china think we don't understand the statement of their leader ?
I think it is fanciful to think there is a risk of a Chinese invasion of the continent in the event of a flashpoint over Taiwan. To me the argument that Keating made the other day that these boats are designed to operate in consort with a larger American force sitting off the Chinese continental shelf and attacking Chinese submarines as they leave port is much more compelling
@@kingsley3208 Who said anything a Chinese invasion of Australia? Any nation who tries to invade Australia would be dumb as they have vulnerable supply lines as Australian "defence" spending is focused on that deterrence, including F35s/F18s to attack any attempts at creating air bridge and submarines to attack supply lines, with only a small Armoured force. Australia's conflicts over the past 100 years apart from WWI and WWII have been in support of the US & UN, but they can do it with the same forces designed for invasion deterrence.
@@kingsley3208 it is ludicrouse to think china will stop at one bite . Keating is nothing more than one of those who took away our economic defence so that the world could exploit us and exploit us it has . China warns us that there is peril in defending our allies . This clearly shows china is aware of its action and it's intent . Who are we that we would tempt China's displeasure ? A stupid nation ? We would rely on the airforce to defend our coastlines from attack $300 billion to blockade China's trade routes is about all the subs are good for . Anyone who is apt at drones such as china is can turn that $300 billion into scape in short order . The investment dose not suit Australia's needs it suits America's strategy of containment . We had $50 billion for some subs .now we are in debt $260 billion and we still don't have even a bloody bolt for the excercise as yet .
Thanks for your acknowledgment of the role of Freemantle, Western Australia, to provide U, S, submarine support during WW2. You forgot to mention the WW2 US submarine support base at Brisbane (Australia's East Coast). The U.S. naval base at Newfarm, Brisbane River should be acknowledged as a major support base for US submarines operating in the Pacific, Papua New Guinea, South East Asia, and the South China Sea.
I remember flying into Singapore in 2007 and seeing all the ships that were in and around Singapore from the air before landing. I was shocked to see the numbers of ships of Singapore. I have never seen so many ships in my life. I understand why Singapore was setup by the British because it was a major bottleneck for shipping.
Hope none of the Australian submarines surface under one of 30 new MSC MV equipped with Silverstream Technologies' air lubrication system. Should limit ships radiated noise like USN Prairie Masker system (in theory) in addition to saving on fuel.
Prairie masker simply prevents subs classification of the vessels to confuse targeting. Basically it makes everything look the same to a enemy sub reducing their chances of hitting a prime target like a carrier. Believe me you can hear the props from miles away and while I'm not familiar with the system you mentioned even a deaf sonar man wouldn't miss a commercial contact. When I was still in we could hear someone cranking winches by hand on a sailboat miles away and more.
Why all of a sudden do we need nuclear subs really we should have had them long ago , if it’s now so important to have these subs,why then cant we have nuclear power stations , to ward off our emerging energy crises
A little out of your wheelhouse but a great and informative video. I'm glad you made it. As a Canadian it is embarrassing to me That Canada will not and can not play any meaning full roll in stopping aggressive Chinese expansionism in any way. I have great respect for Canadian submariners however they have very little to work with. The situation with our socialist Prime Minister and the decline of the CF capability has seen to that. Believe it or not we even have washed up senile old tree huggers like David Suzuki petitioning the government to stop the upgrade of our old fighter jets because of their carbon footprint. Unbelievable but true. Well thanks for letting me get that off of my chest.
Small players seeking to influence shipping in SCS or other choke points have a much more effective and less costly way to implement their strategies. The lowly sea mine could stop all trade through a straight or port. China or for that matter Indonesia / Vietnam could order out its fishing fleet and have them dump sea mines. Dumb ones along with a mix of high end CAPTOR type mines would stop all commercial traffic as well as prevent multi-billion dollar submarines from getting beyond deep water.
Our navy should be able to patrol the Southern Hemisphere we are the largest western country in the south we should be able to demonstrate power across the whole Southern Hemisphere We almost were invaded in ww2 and the government already had a plan for what would happen, basically all of northern Australia would of been annexed by Japan, this can easily happen again done by another country in another world war scenario, without adequate defences !
A little background. Australia originally chose to go diesel because it was considered to be greener than nuclear, which is a no-no to the Green party and much of the Labour party. In essence climate politics trumped national security considerations. The French deal involved redesigning their current nuclear submarine design into a diesel version that would cost approximately twice as much as the current nuclear version and wouldn't be available until 2030, even though the order was placed back around 2015. Moreover, the costs have steadily escalated since the inception of the contract, which was one of the principal reasons for bailing out of the French contract and going with the Anglo-Saxons. Further comment on Chinese political/economic structure. China is not a capitalist country/economy but rather a fascist country: i.e. an authoritarian government with a large private sector that is subject to government control, direction and suppression. China has a very large state owned sector which is increasingly the favored child of the government's economic policy as demonstrated by its current allocation of credit policies. At the same time, the Chinese government has been increasing its control of the private sector, especially the high-tech and construction sectors and subordinating the private sector to government control and direction. Essentially what Hitler did with the privately-owned German industrial sector in World War II.
Your SSN/SSK comparison is a bit off. Our Collins class bubs are no slouch they have a 90 day endurance. They only need to snorkel for 2-3 mins every 24 hours to charge their batteries, so they are quite stealthy even in highly contested waters. They have a top speed in excess of 20 knots so that are fast for a conventional submarine and at patrol quiet speed (3 knots) they are quieter than the background ocean noise. The main reason they are being replaced is their age, they are becoming more prone to breakdown.
Australia was certainly shafted by Britain and the Commonwealth in WWII, but that isn’t a factor in acquiring nuclear powers subs. Submarines are very effective deterrents for the Australian continent and that’s the bottom line.
@@Lilamma- In an age where warships can circle the planet without resupplying and where missiles can reach any country in a matter of hours? Some cardboard cutouts of tanks would provide a better defense.
@@Lilamma- Distance didn't stop Japanese planes bombing Darwin and other parts of Australia. Didn't stop a Japanese submarine firing deck guns on Newcastle, Japanese Midget subs in Sydney Harbour. German warships being of Tasmania south coast, Nth coast of New Zealand and Western Australia coast.
We not only need nuclear powered submarines, we need to bring back the fleet air arm aboard nuclear powered aircraft carriers; and the personnel! P.S. The population of our upright (we are not upside down or under) country, in 2021, when this was published, was under 26 million, not the 30 million as you stated; twice. Even now, in 2023, the population is still 26.2 million.
There was an Australian movie that came out in 2010, "Tomorrow When The War Began", based on the scenario of a Chinese invasion of Australia. Having nuclear killer subs which could sink Chinese troop ships before they could land troops here, much as the British used one of their nuclear subs to sink the Argentinian ship General Belgrano with thousands of troops on board during the Falklands war, would be a great deterrent against any such invasion in the future, should things ever escalate to that level between Australia and China.
There is no threat of that kind of invasion from China - and if there was, a SSN fleet is perhaps the most expensive, least efficient and most vulnerable system for a defence of the continent strategy. There is a fantastic article in the Saturday paper from prof. Hugh white that you may find interesting.
@@kingsley3208 Most vulnerable? Surely a nuclear submarine hidden in the depths of the ocean where nobody can find it is the least vulnerable of any asset that could be used to attack a fleet of ships? Aircraft can be shot down with air defence systems if they are visible on radar. As for expense, if you have already bought your nuclear submarine, it's a sunk cost, excuse the pun, and in time of war you are not going to refrain from using it, just because it cost a lot to purchase. I'm not saying a war with China is imminent by the way, but if we follow the model of World War 2, which this video maker was exploring, the Japanese did attempt to attack mainland Australia with aircraft at one point, and it's quite likely that if there weren't American submarines based in Perth to deter them, they might have attempted a seaborne invasion. As it turned out, submarines, even the less effective diesel submarines they had back then, were a crucial element in the Pacific war against the Japanese.
@@jacktattis That's interesting to know. Were there Japanese naval assets deployed in the Darwin attack, or just the aerial bombardment which is more well known? My point was not that there were US submarines there, but that Japanese ships could potentially have been in danger if a landing was attempted, so therefore there was a deterrent effect. That's the psychological effect of submarine warfare. You never know where they are, so if you believe they could potentially be in the area, you are going to be very wary about mounting an attack. The U-boats in WW2 took a heavy toll on allied shipping in the Atlantic, and forced them to travel in convoys with destroyers to try to depth charge the subs if they found them on sonar. But the only reason I mentioned the American subs based in Perth was because they were mentioned in the video. I wasn't aware of that before.
So the Aussies asked France to make them a non-nuclear version of their nuclear submarine only to ditch them for nuclears from elsewhere. If one sees who loses and who benefits from this, one gets who was behind this change. Forgot to mention AIP tech.
More complex than this, the contract with the FRA was incredibility unfavorable to AUS and the subs were incredibility over-budget. Check out Sub Brief for the full story.
My analogy: One goes to a steakhouse and asks for vegan dishes and for them to be prepared at ones home. While they prepare them, one walks to a friend's steakhouse and eats steak, calling from there to cancel.
No australia asked for a diesel submarine, everyone else (germany and japan) submitted built from the ground DE subs (type 212 and soryu), france submitted nuclear sub converted to diesel. Due to the general requirement australia wanted DCNS/NG used the nuclear hull as base because of large displacement, the PM at the time actually admitted in his memoirs that he selected the barracuda due to the possibility of changing the contract to nuclear subs at some stage of the a contract. Also note the suffren which is the first of the new class france built took 13 year launch and still not yet commissioned
Our strategic circumstances have deteriorated very quickly since the SSK deal was signed in 2016. As the Prime Minister explained, SSK are now too little capability due to this deterioration in our strategic situation, and the submarines are literally needed now. it has nothing to do with much else, really. if the French press is saying that this is somehow about money, then they do not understand the strategic situation in Asia. Consider that this decision is popular - even five years ago there was very little support for SSN outside strategic circles. Now the decision has broad-based popular support. That is a major reversal of threat perceptions in just five years. Also consider that this announcement was 'bundled' with others such as rapid acquisition of long range strike capabilities, cyber and AI capabilities. This is a major enhancement of Australian maritime capability across the board. That alone should tell you just how worried we are about the chances of a major war in this region, and we mean something on the scale of the US segment (41-45) of the Pacific War of 1937-45.
Had to laugh when the picture of the french recalling their ambassadors came up. In Australia, the people who whinge about everything complained that we had gone back on our word with our close allies. Close allies? All they have done is let Australians die defending their country, set off nukes in the Pacific when we asked them not to and blew up a greenpeace ship. I was pissed when the new labor government paid them anything.
I tend to think the PLAN is not as scared by the USN as you think. The USN in the Pacific is composed of undernamed, broken and rusty ships that keep running into freighters or reefs. Plus the LCS, the 'find one mine ever' MCM vessel. The USN antiship missiles are short ranged, slow and not particularly numerous, unlike the PLAN's. The USN also got rid of all their long-ranged strike aircraft in favor of fighters with less than half the range. But that's OK, because the USN also got rid of all their tankers, which means to launch a strike mission a carrier needs to be deep inside the PLAN's aircraft range. The Woke Chief of Staff's plan to fix this is get rid of all the actual MCM vessels and all cruisers today to save money so they can build more ships in ten years. Probably more $8 billion giant destroyers without any ammo or volume air-search radars, billon dollar short legged popgun armed LCS (still awaiting the first working mission module 13 years after commissioning) , and $13 billion dollar aircraft carriers whose bomb elevators and catapults still don't work 5 years after it was commissioned. What could possibly go wrong?
ROFL The PLAN wouldn't know if it's arse was on fire. Between the nepotism, cronyism, outright corrupt, and political nobbling, their ships have already killed more of their own sailors and pilots than any conflict.
Just remember that the PLAN has never fought a war. Vietnam absolutely kicked their arses (dispute over fishing limits) a few years ago and don't forget that about 100 Indians put about 1000 Chinese soldiers to flight in the Himalayas (The Chinese High Commands' officail view was their soldiers spent too mcuh time palying with themselves and playing video games). I don't suppose their sailors are very different. It is also a factor that the One Child policy means that every soldier/sailor lost is the end of a family bloodline - important in CHineses culture.
This seems like an incredibly belligerent move by Australia, the US and the UK. Trade is not a one-party thing. China is trading with other nations. And threatening this trade is basically threatening these other nations too. The Aussies and their English speaking buddies may think this gives them leverage. But most of the world's population will look at this and think they are assholes. What they are doing to China is basically the same that Fascist Japan did to China. They are not the good guys in this.
Was thinking the same thing. China did nothing to deserve this treatment from Australia. Australia and the UK only started trade wars with China because the US told them to. We know why the US is out to get China and Russia and that is because these countries threaten the US's petrodollar and the US hegemony. Not only did they start an unnecessary trade war with China but they escalated a military power flex war with China and Russia. Then there is Europe which will remember this betrayal. I will not trust the US in any deal. I will in fact ask countries to pay the full price in cash in front with no refunds just in case the US tries to torpedo the deal. This has happened before. I remember when the UK favourite the South African Rooivalk attack helicopter over the US Apache. Unfortunately, South Africa was getting missiles or missile components from the US who simply said that if South Africa won the UK bid then the US would stop supplying South Africa with those missiles. Just now Norway is cancelling a 20-year deal of helicopters with Airbus due to the helicopters not performing as expected. Guess who is the new supplier? The US of course. How does it take twenty years to realise a helicopter is not performing or that there are issues? The US, UK and Australia are all making more enemies with their little games.
China is already threaten trade. Not just any Australian export going north but all trade within the East Vietnam Sea, by building forts and declaring all that waters theirs is illegal (international courts). Yet some how Australia is the bad guy for getting SSN.
Aussie here - I see this differently. Whilst the video describes ability to exert pressure that would cut off trade, that capability already exists. A simple sea mine operation at choke pointz would shut off shipping. You don't exclusively need nuclear subs to do this. But if someone else with an aggressive expansionist agenda were to unilaterally declare international waters with heavily used shipping lanes to be their private lake and enforce arbitrary shipping controls - in effect a blockade (and an act of war) - that would profoundly affect Australian trade routes and we would want the ability to prevent that. Submarines are profoundly powerful naval assets due to their stealthy nature. From an aggression perspective: Not interested in imposing our will on other countries. But I am interested in being able to make aspiring aggressors think twice before using aggression, and coercion to enslave and extort others or illegally blockade, sieze and annex their territory. And yes I'm aware of Australia's own blemished record and I still believe certain people who originated those orders need to face justice.
What are these submarines going to do? Torpedo any ship trading with China in peacetime? Take out their navy all by themselves? I don't understand this.
Really enjoyed this explanation, especially as an Australian. One point I felt uncomfortable with though, was your comment on how Australia can exert pressure on China. 30 million putting pressure on 145 billion people. The real fact is that it is only one Government arguing with another Government, not the people, so those numbers are truly irrelevant. You also mention that China is looking elsewhere for it's materials because of a fall out with Australia. This is in fact quite true, but the part that nobody mentions is eighteen months before China started to cancel trade of certain items, our so called coalition government had imposed 26 breaches of the FTA on China, that were at best doubtful, yet upheld. We had started the trade war and when retaliation was put in place, it hit hard as it was our wine industry first, then seafood followed by others later. The problem was our PM, the leader of our nation. His attitude towards these problems was not to discuss or negotiate, but bluster, abuse and lose more trade. He lied to the nation, did many callous acts of poor leadership during his term and placed the country in debt. Our current government has been mending these trade issues and with some reasonable success. The nation is divided by this submarine deal so far, first we had arrangements with the Japanese, then the French, which has cost money to break contracts with. Now we have a deal for S/h subs, that cannot keep their rubber coating on. I do refer to the Virginia class submarine and this problem is well known. I do believe it is in the realm of either a Senate inquiry or a Legal court case...endangering the lives of US Servicemen. So, is this good enough for Australia...??? You correctly mention something which I believe the will call the AUKUS sub, Astute class with Virginia class operational equipment...like mating a Great Dane and a Chihuahua. A mongrel at best! Lastly, why is there a need to have to threaten a country with control over their ability to travel sea routes...? What is the point of exerting power over another country because they do not purchase from you...? This may be the way the USA has been doing its world contribution since 1945, but where has that got it, certainly no countries except dumbass Australia want to be friends with it. Others are forced by monetary control, but that could all change very soon. Every person globally is tired of the wars or correct terms should be Invasions and Coup D'etat that are caused by the USA, but more and more countries are standing up and saying NO. Recent news reports alluded to the USA, Australia and Israel, the UK was already bought and paid for during WWII and is just a vassal state. No one else is interested in being playmates with the bully any more and as we progress into this year, our Independent Senators are busy making the Australian Government answer the people for its actions. If they get it wrong, a vote of no confidence in the government is easy to move and sub deals go bye bye. Loyalty to my country, Always.....Loyalty to governments, when they earn it..!
Well fricking said! Also, you know the Australian sub commanders of these new US subs will ultimately take their orders from Washington, thereby serving US interests over Australia's.
The dynamic of the German war was such that convoy operations were the 99% of all naval activity in the Atlantic. That dynamic was not the same in the pacific hence the large amount of submarines. With a naval war with china, it will likely be 50& convoys and 50 percent blockades.
I dont think you grasp the reality of the China -Australia "trade war". The first thing you missed was it was a one way trade war, China tried to punish Australia for demanding an investigation into the covid origins and they failed miserably. Australia's total exports during that period and the Chinese economy started to tank dues to power shortages that were a result of not having Australian coal. China's other source for coal was Indonesia who's coal is of lower quality and not suitable for China's power plants. So Indonesian companies started to just resell Australian coal to China with a 50% markup.
There's not just shipping from Fremantle/ Perth on the West Coast there's large volumes of shipping from the Pilbara region iron ore, salt, natural gas, manganese,etc.
Funny thing is, when I look around me here in Melbourne, it’s downhill all the way whichever way I look, and all the nice yanks and poms and eyeties and all are all upside down and have all their seasons arse about 🤣
I'm not an educated man but I like to learn about issues that effect the world in general and you have the talent to make what ever you cover understandable to me and I love that. I'm an old Viet Nam vet and that made me look at world affairs more seriously. thank you great job!
You were happy using your war warmongering usa poured petrol on woman and children Hitler r stalinnever stooped that low how many Jewish children suffering from the Holocaust none sleep well marines now can wear lipstick on the battle fields Biden fiddles while USA burns
G’day from Australia, thank you for posting such a well thought out discussion of the reasons behind Australia’s acquisition of nuclear submarines. It gave me a different perspective on why China are concerned about AUKUS. I’ll even forgive you for the upside down sub 😉
I agree! Hi from Victoria🇦🇺🦘
Six to eight nuclear submarines is insufficient for our needs. We need to start build another six to eight advanced Collins (or barracudas ) and get the Nukes on order built overseas.
@@YaMomsOyster Not going to happen because we can barely operate 6 collins class subs let alone nuclear subs.
@@carisi2k11 (American) We can do anything if we try.
(Australian-you) We can't do anything, so why even try? Lets just dig stuff out of the ground and sell it to the Chinese.
@@carisi2k11 Forget the Collins class, once your boats are nuclear it's a game changer.
Thank you sir for being one of the very few to remember the multinational submariners that served out of W.A. I used to maintain a small memorial at the swan docks slipway in Fremantle and the number of people sadly still on patrol deserve all the respect we can muster, and yeah I know they were pirates not angels, but unquestionably brave. Top episode so thanks again 😉👍🏴☠️
IMO the Austrailian Navy should have had nuclear subs long ago.
Agreed!
Yep, but Australia is led by sheep, and sell-out politicians.
@@Rodney-fs8kx UK already considering selling Astutes to Oz soon, so very wrong.
@@1977ajax it’s locked in now. The next gen astute. But in the mean time Australia just announced they’re getting up to 5 Virginia class subs
I agree. Our Navy has wanted to for some time. When we acquired our Collins class in the late 90s early 2000s many back then said we should have been getting nuclear submarines. We just have so much coastline to cover. Unfortunately Australia is very anti-nuclear. We also have no domestic nuclear industry that could refuel the submarines. Hence using American/British technology that doesn't require refuelling is a game-changer for Australia. My preferences for the American subs but both are great.
Japan hesitated after the atomic bombs for days to surrender to the USA. Japan ultimately surrendered because Russia renounced their neutrality in the Pacific and declared war on Japan. Russia then attacked Manchuria, and were moving to attack the Japan mainland islands in the North with the aim of dividing Japan as they did Germany. Japan surrendered to the US to avoid this. USA was the better better option to live under than Russia. This is why there are islands in dispute now.
SSN for Australia about time. They are good people, a big hearted country .. well done from U.K.
March 2023 and we are just days away from the British and Australian Prime Minister's going to Washington for the big AUKUS announcement. This new alliance is huge and involves very large investment in manufacturing capability that will benefit all three nations. China should never have tried to push Australia around, but now they reap what they sowed.
Yes. Better late than never.
Great video, your comparison of SSNs and SSks speed and endurance absolutely nailed the main issue. A couple of other things - the bigger SSN has more space and can carry more weapons. When you run our of weapons your patrol is practiaclly over as you're defenceless if detected. Secondly, SSNs' space allows for more powerful sonars which can help to redress the sonar advantage of an SSK. However both Virginias and ASTUTEs are very quiet.
@@Beehive101 There are several articles this week in the Washington Post and the NY TImes about China and trade - of course this is not because of the business interests of their owners Jeff Bezos and Carlos Slim, However, I don't think there is much to admire in any Communst society. Have a look at Chris Chappell's channel "China Uncensored"
We operated from the Clude Submarine Base for thirty years with CND protesters camped outside - we sometimes dropped in for coffee on the way home from a run ashore! As far as I know the protesters are still there and nobody cares becasuse they're wrong.
It doesn't matter how many weapons it carries, because the moment it fires one everyone knows exactly where it is, and then because it can't run silent, it's only going to survive for hours at best. Maybe minutes. One shot and it's done.
@@gasdive I agree with you, there's also the fact that we will never see the 100 to 150 ship convoys like ww2, and detecting and hunting nuclear subs with destroyers and frigates and helicopters will be just as deadly as the nuclear subs hunting ships and other subs. so great loads of weapons is not really needed if the sub can survive once being detected.
As an Aussie ... that was sick ... Especially under the current climate. Thank you.
because Morrison wanted divert attention from the other stuff that was going on. Our diesel boats were capable of protecting our northern ports.
As an Aussie I’m thankful to our British and American cousins for helping us defend ourselves
I am with you.
British abandoned Australia to the Japanese in Singapore. USA will do the same one day. Never be reliant
Australia. UK and USA are all together as one. Australia has decided on investing into subs because that is what is beneficial to the greater picture for all involved. As we have done through history, we will stand together and fall together but no one will push us around or dictate to us. United we are.
Go back to sleep Billy boy.
the question is not why Australia needs nuc subs now? the question is why didn't Australia get nuc subs years ago.
Hahaha. I get it. I have served in the Royal Australian Navy. I sailed to Hawaii, in an RAN ship. I remember when we had to flip over; it was painful to flip at the equator AND the International Date Line, both going and returning. We regularly fly Air Force aircraft over the oceans, also, and they also fly upside-down when they get to Guam, Hawaii, etc. NOT!
A few points; Current RN/USN SSN plants never need to be refueled. Part of this agreement is basing agreements for RAF/USAF/RN/USN which brings refitting much closer by half finally the PRC is a hybrid economic system where investment and movement of money is much more restricted than a capitalist economy. Nice summary of IJ WW2 strategy
Not exactly never. Just 30 years. Usually by that time, they are obsolete.
That is why we were converting French Nuclear subs to diesel/electric in the first place and never considered French nuclear subs that would have to be taken back to France every 10 years for refueling, but British or US models are fuel for the expected lifespan of the sub.
This video provides a number of puzzle pieces that I simply could not have acquired by simply following the news media.
Thankyou.
AuziAli
When the USN started using nuclear subs, the joke then was that the subs would only need to visit port when it was time for the crews to reenlist.
As an Aussie with a solid awareness of history, defense matters and international events, the AUKUS subs are absolutely the right move.
UK here, with no armed forces connections - am very pleased to see the UK and US governments pitching in with Oz on this. Eight SSNs is a pretty chunky force - that's more than the RN has!
Best regards from Trent Bridge Town
Finally! Ve hef nooklear wessels!
@@notreallydavid that should probably tell you all you need to know about how likely this plan is to actually see fruition, especially when you compare the population sizes and GDP of the UK and Aus - we could note that apparently the UK hopes to boost its subs count to 19 but your guess might be better than mine where Downing st is going to find the sailors who want to sit in them all day, or which ports they're going to park them in
@@Christmas12 Thanks C. _Nineteen_?!?!?!? All full-size and noocoolar? As you suggest, no chance. Is somebody planning to sell off St Paul's and Westminster Abbey as hotels to raise some of the loot?
All best
@@Christmas12 And yes, as you point out, we aren't over endowed with berths for huge subs, and recruitment wouldn't be a walkover. On the other hand, if everyone on board were to have access to a (hushed) Xbox, maybe they'd find cylinder-life tolerable. (
As an old merchant Marine Engineer i enjoy your channel & this great video, just a couple of points. The reason china is upset with australia is simply we asked for a independent review of the background and cause of civid19 and as Australia has never allowed china to bully it which they have tried many many times this was their responce. They thought we would cave if they effected us but as noted we dont allow bullies. We now dont need their trade as 95% of the market was made up with in 6 to 9 months selling to other markets that now had the opportunity. Wine is perhaps the only looser and china still cant power its self as that cant effectivly buy the quality steaming coal they need. In respect to our defence australia is one of the closest allys to the USA and the only one who has assisted the usa in every conflict it has had since ww2.
Our sub force is very effective and the only one that have sunk a USA air craft carrier and multiple support vessels during our regular war games, then on 2 other occasions we have got right into the inner circle for an effective kill even with the USA navey specifically looking for us testing new tech after the first shock sinking. I also understand unofficially one of our subs came right up to the US sub with in 50 feet and used internal music to announce their presence, bit of a shock that one. So there is a good chance we will use both kinds of subs. It also means we can defend our selves now but of course with the aggressive rise of china the expansion with the new sub is fantastic. Australias worry is the political decline of the USA over the last 3 administration (not taking sides) and the decline of its internal fabric and social adhesion, so in the long term we need to plan for the next 50 to 100 years.
Lol, what?! We don’t allow China to bully us here in Australia??? China owns Melbourne Port, Darwin Port, and possibly a plethora of other resources and assets too. Bullying is a matter of subjective opinion as far as this discussion is concerned!
@@Lakridza67 no they may have bought/leased things but not bullied us, anyway the stroke of a pen simply removes their ownership and brings critical infrastructure back in our hands if anything escalates. Its happened in the past and can easly be achieved if required
Aussies are very good at testing our defenses, good to have. Lets remember
China and Russia are kleptocracies.
Meanwhile its been observed that Singapore is much more open when it accused the USA of political interference in the past as compared to when accusing mainland China of the same more recently e.g. when the gov't accused a professor of spying & deported him, it refused to say for whom he was spying for. When questioned about such different standards I remember 1 of the ministers said something like: "Do you want to be embargoed by mainland China like Australia?"
@@lzh4950 I dont know the situation in Singapore thus cant make a comment.
But the impression China tries to portray to the world is that they have effected Australia which is mostly false and it may be your ministers impression due to China CCP billing tactics and who know his politics and CCP beliefs.
It should be noted that China is still suffering (not us) from the coal bans and are paying over 3 times the market rate for our coal via third parties, just this week they have dropped the bans and tried to buy aussie coal but the miners has told them to stick it where the sun don't shine as our new clients are more important so CCP KICKS THEM SELVES AGAIN.
The Astute Class Attack Submarine is superb...
Morning Sal, hope you virtually attended some of the McMullen Conference. Much food for thought, I was on the Corbett 100 panel..
Anyway, about this, our strategic risks keep rising and this made the SSK insufficient to meet the threat. Simple as that, really. When we signed up for the SSK, SSN were simply not available to us. The Attack class design was, without doubt, the best SSK design in history, although it was so large that AIP could not be fitted to it. The French SSN is a good vessel, but it needs reactor refuelling and we have no domestic nuclear industry to do that.
Your points on SSK vs SSN are all correct. We are under orders not to speculate so I cannot do so. Your points on comparing the Pacific War of 1937-1945 (yes, it started in China) are good ones. If Communist China (and yes, they are communists and are right now dismantling Deng Xiaopeng's 'partial-capitalist' system. Xi Jinpeng has announced a 'Second Cultural Revolution', as the last one was such fun for the CCP, as they got to kill maybe 20 million of their own people.
Their economy is in desperate trouble.
Our Prime Minister and Defence Minister have made it very plain in their public announcements that we are very worried about the CCP taking the PRC into a situation where they trigger a major regional war. ASEAN is also worried about this. That's why we are all rearming in this region. We all understand that the CCP has made the PRC into a hostile power (please note that this DOES NOT mean 'enemy' power)
Also, please ignore that figure of "eight SSN", too, no decision has been made. I think that figure came from the MSM, it's just a guess from people who don't know what they are talking about if so. it might wind up being 8, but no decision has been made.
My British friends are telling me that things may well happen very quickly in this space, so keep your eye on it.
Cheers: Mark
If you want to come on and talk about it let me know.
Yes please.
Thanks for your post & thoughts, im an ex underwater weapons Technician who worked on aussie subs , torpedos, Periscopes & other underwater instrumentation.
You absolutely hit the nail on the head with regards to time being on station against a diesel/electric.
With regards to the announcement this week on AUKUS , i think we will just order the 5 Virginia subs of the bat given the new designed ( Astute Plus )will be behind time as usual . The new Astute Plus will have a 15mt -25mt Vertical Launch insert for Tomahawk missiles & Other. This AUKUS SUB will be using a US fire control hardware ,software & communication syncing. Going back to the 3 - 5 Virginia class submarines Australia are purchasing , i hope that they will be new as the current Virginia is a Block iv & the upgraded is the Block V that takes some new Tech & upgraded tomahawks & hammerhead mines ect. It's important that we get the top spec Virginia as we are paying a premium for access and having this agreement.
Shame they don't go with the Sea Wolfe
Let me tell you a short but very true story. 1983 at the Jungle training school in Australia. Siting around in the rain with a group of Private soldier mates. I asked a question "if you were the Minister for Defense how would you defend our country". After some discussion it was decided Facts : Australia is an Island all be it pretty big. So you have to get here. If you do get here, you continue to need getting here. Supplies etc. SO we decided defense was very simple. 1. Nuclear Subs a lot of them ( NO surface ships they are just floating paper weights). 2. Long range missile systems both Air to Air and Air to Surface. 4. Long range aircraft F111 and Fighter aircraft 3. A Small fully conventionally organized Army supplemented by 1 year national service for all men and Women. There it is simple and flexible for all contingencies. ONLY now 40 years later are the so military called experts slowly moving in this direction
[sigh] Isn't it a shame that you and I don't rule the world? I often solve problems this way. [chuckling]
After Pasteur's great discovery of bacteria, French doctors in practice still couldn't be bothered to wash their hands. I read somewhere "they just had to wait for the old doctors to die off." I think that applies to a lot of situations where new thinking is required.
Thankyou. I've believed this for years.
Sorry to disturb your dreams but Australia now can afford just six somehow big diesel submarines. Australia may afford 4 nuclear ones. For that price Australia could have bought and built at home 40 smaller diesel submarines e.g. Type 210. For me a few submarines are quite the wrong choice.
still need both Nuke and Diesel/electric boats
One can also see why Australia made such a fuss about Solomon Islands signing security deals with China. With trade lines closed via Indonesia, It would only really leave the eastern route towards the USA.
Although not a lot of trade flows from this route, a closure of this last choke point (as well as Chinese military presence only a stone throw from major Australia cities) would be disastrous from a national security point of view.
I'm from Australia, and this is a simple and well presented video of Australian NS and the need for Subs!
It was the discovery that China was only in Solomons to help finance and host the pan pacific games after Defence minister Peter Dutton used the Anzac Day address to announce all Australians should prepare for war, That’s the main reason Scomo out Albanese inn and a complete deescalation of hostile discussions, China isn’t putting any pressure on Australia our iron ore goes to BHP in China and our Coal sanctions are over because China’s Coal demands have grown, Sanctions placed on us after believing Anthony Fauci’s Wet Market Covid origins and he has been proven to have lied to us not China then he classified a treatment as a vaccine to force global vaccine mandates and big pharma pays for the ridiculous military budget while 10million people are dead, Paul Keating is 100% correct Australia needs to distance itself from USA and focus on Asia, USA has intentionally blocked our highly successful grain farmers by subsidising unsuccessful farmers and controlling export tariffs taking 12% global trade directly of us its just a coincidence Ukraine has shitloads of grain sitting in cargo ships!🤬
There's also routes from Western Australia across the Indian Ocean, either to Suez or Cape of Good Hope. It's also the main route from Europe (NATO, France, UK) into the Indo-Pacific theatre. The route for most of China's energy imports is Gulf-Malacca Strait-China.
Which is why India, Australia, UK and US are cooperating to secure the entry points to the Indian Ocean from SEA.
Finally! Ve hef nooklear wessels!
That was the big reason for the Battle of Guadalcanal, and the whole WW2 Solomons campaign.
@@DMSProduktions - blame XJP’s massive naval build up and policy of confrontation.
I'm in Perth Australia. Today it was announced that three US Nuclear Subs will be stationed here and that we are purchasing a fleet of US and UK Nuclear subs. We are also going to assemble our own in years ahead. Bear in mind that we have just one reactor here ands that is used for producing medical isotopes like Technetium 99. No nuclear power down under. Oh and we are just 25 million people, not 30 million, beyond that great video. Thank you muchly!
Much closer to 30 million.
@@petermorse5442 Ahhhh NO. We just hit 25 million last year, champ.
I don't think we'll be assembling the nuclear reactors
Next item on the Shopping list is B21 Bombers !
@@fransdebruijn6763 No more US rubbish
The Singapore air force trains just north of where I live in Perth Australia at Pearce. I think Indonesia does as well although we have our tiffs. Australia only fears our largest northern neighbour. Russia and India I'm not talking to you.
go ozzy from United Kingdom 🇬🇧
Im surprised this hasn't happened sooner. This will dramatically impact the security of some of the worlds busiest shipping lanes.
It will have an insignificant effect.
That are shipping goods in and out china not like china could just suspended trade or anything. Or we could get 50 conventional subs for the same cost
Great summary of the story, one of thinigs that became apparent recently is that the acquisition of Astute/Virginia class subs is a temporay, short term measure while a new 'AUKUS' class submarine to replace both the Astute and Virginia subs is developed. Australia will be contributing to the development and construction costs in return for up to 7 of them. Construction will be in the US, but Australia will be contributing a few billion to US shipyards.
your details are mixed up- the plan is to buy 3 second-hand Virginia class SSNs between 2030s-2040s (which are built in the US, with an option to buy 2 more but that's even less likely), while the AUKUS class will replace the UK's Astute class, and we'll build 5 of those, partly built in the UK (reactor definitely), rest of it built in South Australia - with Australia contributing 3bn AUD to the efforts in the US and UK to increase their construction capacity
I wont be here but I predict Whatever they tell you the Cost It will be Triple and even more . Too many people to grease their palms Particularly American
@@Christmas12 Yeah need the pommy leaky reactors!
Australia has 26m people. It has had record trade surpluses for the entire period of the XJP blockade. It easily found customers for the exports that China boycotted. There's only so much supply. If China goes elsewhere it displaces other customers, who then come to Australia. Australia is an efficient, high quality producer and free trader, so its commodities are desirable and well priced.
China has had brownouts and blackouts from the coal ban and in the end coal was the first thing XJP had to relent on. Bulk carriers full of Australian coal stood off Chinese ports for 9 months before finally discharging their cargoes.
Exactly this - when the coal was blocked, there were power outages in china... and the coal just went to other developing countries and other trade routes were established - essentially to china's competitors. As long as australia can protect it's merchant vessels and does not allow china to dominate sea lanes, china can do jack shyte about it.
Love the upside down thumbnail 😂😂😂
THIS IS MY CUP OF TEA LOVE THIS GREAT JOB
I am glad you liked it. I was not sure how this one would go over.
As an Aussie that was an excellent and accurate presentation - there is no being equal friends with China, they expect some kind of homage or subservience from their trading partners. The one strategic issue that is missed, and you did touch on it, is China's increasingly heavy influence over the Pacific Islands, especially that block of South Pacific Islands that could form a barrier between Australia and the US. Solomons, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga, Samoa - (long may the French maintain their presence in New Caledonia. They are corrupting those islands with cash like confetti. These submarines will go some way towards negating that policy but I can't imagine a time when the subtle and covert Chinese influence in this islands becomes far more overt.
Yes. In fact that whole scenario is why the US Navy started off their island hoping campaign in the southwest pacific. To protect the trade route with Australia.
Why shouldn't you expect increasing Chinese influence among Eastern Pacific Island nations- China is a 'Great power' too and has as much right as Great and old colonial powers like the US, UK, and France to reach out with offers of trade and security pacts as any of them- you should expect to see more Chinese presence because this is closer to their home, it's the US who sailed across an ocean to occupy these lands and act as standover 🙄somewhere along the way you're forgetting or ignoring the history of the US who used eastern pacific islands to test nuclear bombs and do human experimentation of their inhabitants (then left all their radioactive waste around with a heaping of concrete poured over it), waged gruesome war in Vietnam (for what?!) and chemical warfare raining rainbow chemicals all over them and our troops (my friends health problems probably stem from her father getting doused in that shit, I went to school with a Vietnamese kid whose hand was a malformed stub from that shit), the same US who occupied the Philippines with force, still occupy Okinawa, still occupy Guam and Marshall islands- and these are the good guys you think we should get in bed with here 👀nevermind China how does that reflect on us with all our other Asian neighbours.
China is Solomons biggest export market and it's not even close, but we were the ones who pissed off the Solomon islands way back when with our attempts to interfere with their sovereignty that was Alexander Downer (and they never forgot it), I know the media and ScoMo didn't want to talk about that, but we have an unpleasant history of treating some of our neighbours with contempt, treating them like they owe us fealty, spying on the private lives of their leaders, even tried to steal oil and gas fields from Timor-Leste, that was Downer again! (and still trying to steal that gas).
You still insult them by the way every time you refer to Chinese influence taking over a place like the Solomons you're dismissing the Solomon's sovereign ability to make those decisions for themselves and implying that if they weren't captive to conspiratorial CCP influence they would make decisions that you prefer- and that arrogance does not go unnoticed by others, and African nations have echoed similar sentiments about how they feel the Chinese approach them in business compared how the west talks down to them.
All the subs in the world can't do anything for bad manners.
Just found your channel. Thank you for taking the time to make these videos for us.
Great video. Very clear and logical explanation.
Btw that's probably the best explanation of Japan's WW2 strategy I've ever heard.
Thank you so much!
I’m late to the party here but I don’t think Australia will go for either an astute or Virginia class here’s why
Both designs are 25+ years old the astute is coming to the end of its production run the Virginia has been modified with newer blocks for VLS which isn’t what Australia will need so it’s surplus to their doctrine
What I do think we will see is the sharing of the British SSNR specs and the Australians will adapt that design to fit their needs
I think we will see them adopt the Lockheed Martin fire control system with the MK48 Mod 7 torpedo and also an anti ship missile along with command and control systems from the US while retaining British sensors such as the type 2076 sonar which is superior to current fit Virginia class sensors (as proven by SubEx USS Texas v HMS Astute)
This mash up will give the RAN the best of both worlds and also critically a very powerful submarine with a lot of capability
As for the RAN going nuclear this is undoubtedly going to be very expensive as they don’t have a home grown nuclear industry infact they have only one test / research reactor for medical uses mainly
A pure SSN is a great fit for them and the increase in capability will be phenomenal and offer them absolute regional superiority
I’d also note that SSKs don’t have to fully surface to recharge they can snort (can be a horrible experience) but also now with AIP technologies these boats can offer a half way solution
The nuclear option though is the best fit given transit times to operational areas and I’d point out also the current Collins class are able to remain at sea for 70 days not restored en route.
To add as well we in the defence realm consider Singapore a smart buyer of hardware and they have recently just acquired new submarines which will bolster their regional influence
As an Australian, I applaud the plan. The latest news is Australia will buy 3 Virginia class boats from the US and then build 6 or 8 AUKUS boats. These will be UK designed but with US powerplants, sensors and the US heavy torpedos. There is also planning underway to establish an east coast base so the force projection would cover all the approaches into the Pacific and South China Sea from South America.
I also agree that if it did come to a shooting match, it wouldn't just be Australia and the US but every single nation that rings China, from India to Japan as they all have lots to lose if China takes over.
I found your channel a few months ago and was HOOKED right away.
I WANT this content!!
I learned a lot!
Enthralled 👍🏻
This guy is insane, he stated that China is not a “COMMUNIST COUNTRY” !!
Never forget that Australia is one of the very few places where Uranium is found and mined. (Australia, Canada, Mid Africa, Eastern Europe)
The USA another source, many NDNs died early mining it, mainly Navajo.
China doesn’t have uranium?
We have uranium here. There's a mine only 51 miles from where I live. There's also one by Thermopolis Wyoming.
We will buy reactor grade uranium from someone else
Australia has 40%of all the world's uranium deposits.
Aussie here. Great summary of strategic advantages of SSNs. The announcement was made this week, and Virginia-class it is for phase 1. With a combined AUKUS design and build for the long term. There's been a lot of white noise within Australia since the deal was announced. Have to be suspicious of where it's coming from. AUKUS has bipartisan support, and national security ranks highly in any political poll with voters, for all parties. Final footnote: since your video was made, China has signed a security pact with the Solomon Islands. Steps to shore up that eastern route out of any blockade scenario.
George Galloway rearranged AUKUS to USUKA - pronounced You Sucker.
I urge all Australians to email their Federal MPs and let them know you don't want to be suckers in this 'deal' that is a disaster for Australia.
Paul Keating is a hero.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp You are absolutely incorrect. The price tag is steep but the capability and the deterrence to other nations is worth the money.
Australia is very isolated and we have an incredibly weak surface navy. There is nothing that we could do against a determined adversary on the surface of the ocean. Under the waves is a very different story. A well trained and rather small SSN fleet that is at the level of the UK or US suddenly gives Australia the ability to attrit or destroy any amphibious force that would try to land on our shores.
@@freefall0483 So whose amphibious force is going to try to land on your shores?
Who is Australia's determined adversary you are paranoid about?
And how does a submarine destroy a landing force?
And if you sink an adversarie's naval vessel, you think that adversary is going to quit and not retaliate?
Are you sure you have thought this through Daniel?
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp Given that Australia is surrounded by ocean, any adversary must make an amphibious landing. Kinda obvious.
Australia's potential adversaries are primarily Indonesia and China. Both of which have the ability and the want to seize the vast resources of Australia, if they could get away with it.
In modern warfare, submarines are the ultimate enemy of a large landing force. Especially nuclear submarines. They can run at high speed indefinitely which allows them to continually position themselves ahead of a landing force and attrit them all the way from their country to mine. They are incredibly difficult to detect, especially by surface vessels. As well as torpedoes, modern nuclear submarines have long range anti ship missiles. These can be launched well outside of detection range and the firing vessel can easily disengage and reposition itself without fear of detection. A single sub can lay multiple ambushes.
The adversary will make a valiant attempt to destroy the offending submarine. With appropriate training, this is a very difficult task. If the enemy is successful, it is most likely that the Australian submarine will have caused incredible damage to the adversary before detection and destruction. This has been the story of submarine warfare since it's inception. A small number of effective vessels can attrit, neutralise or even destroy a much larger enemy force.
Many people in many nations have put a lot of thought into the advantages of nuclear submarines. This is why any country that can afford them definitely acquires them. They are the most dangerous of all weapons. Especially vessels like the Improved Las Angeles and the Virginia class boats. The ability to carry long range land attack cruise missiles and long range anti ship missiles has given the submarine a most fearsome ability to destroy whilst remaining completely undetected.
The hope of all is that a deterrent force like the nuclear submarines that Australia will acquire will never be used in anger. That is the purpose. If you maintain a position of strength always, the chance of an aggressor attacking reduces immensely. All if history shows this. Basic psychology shows this.
@@DennisMerwood-xk8wp in national defence planning, you hope for the best, plan for the worst. Nations can lob ballistic missiles at each other, but conquering another country is only achieved with boots on the ground. To do so against Australia would require transport and logistics via a large surface fleet. That's why our defence chiefs have invested do much in a capable submarine fleet.
Nuclear powered, not armed, because we have a lot of ocean. Should have done it 20 years ago.
Great stuff Sal! Reminds me of the hours I used to spend playing P.T.O. (Pacific Theater of Operations) by KOEI about WWII in the Pacific. Amazing stuff concerning natural resources from Davao and Bandjarmisin, etc. that were so important to control to stop the Japanese navy.
Australia absolutely needs nuclear submarines if they want to have an effective deterrent. Their subs could be anywhere at any time and the Chinese will know that.
Diesel-Electric submarines can run their diesels while submerged using a snorkel. However it slows down the submarine and makes them vulnerable.
Sal, small point, but most diesel electric subs don't use lithium ion batteries. I think only the Japanese so far.
The fact that it has been decided that the Australian navy will now be getting an American designed model is really a no brainer. The USA 🇺🇸 is much more likely than the British to be operating in areas close to Australia’s coast. Therefore having the infrastructure and spare parts available to service the American vessels here in Oz is why we will be getting the US and not British subs.
Oz and the US share an ocean. A farkin' big one, granted but you do not share one with the UK...or France for that matter. I know all the heavy lifting is at Newport News on the N.E. coast of the US but there ARE US Navy bases on the west coast. And Hawaii. And Guam.
Australia is, as Great Britain was referred to in WWII, an unsinkable aircraft carrier. Australia is a monster aircraft carrier, being a continent and all.... I see the importance of Aus as a world influencer growing quickly and BIG in the not-so-far-future. China is heading towards military law for the entire country because they are up to their ball it and Xi will pull some insane stuff out of his a** to keep the CCP in control, given that he IS the CCP at this point (Mar. 2023 for you future readers) whatever he dreams up is going to be a pain in the butt to many other people aside from his own population. And that includes Russia. Going to be interesting to see where the two of them stand in ten years time assuming there's anything left of them....
Former Australian PM Paul Keating was highly critical of the AUKUS deal.
Our future prosperity lies in the region, not being the lapdog of the US.
Worth noting Singapore, Malaysia, UK, Australia and NZ are formal defensive allies under the Five Powers Defence Arrangements (FPDA).
That's a good point. Australia is not only a part of FPDA, but we also make smaller agreements with a lot of countries in the Asia/Pacific region. So in theory having increased capabilities not only protects trade, but it also has the potential to strengthen our influence and capabilities to aid the smaller nations around us. Since China has been attempting to expand their influence in the same area, this also acts as a safeguard for that as well.
Some may still ask why not depend on UK or USA for everything. But to that my answer is that we just happen to have different kinds of relationships with our neighbours compared to them, so it really benefits us if we maintain control our self rather than hoping someone in the pentagon or wherever is going to have our best interest in mind and share our same ideals for regional stability.
G7 v G 20 Australia and newzealnd USA and zionists Brain dead puppets like zelensky fled vietnam Afghanistan
Thank you!
I am French citizen living in the UK and the mainstream media gives slanted coverage of this heated topic.
Your insane, you stated that China is not a “COMMUNIST COUNTRY” !! Hey hero they are a communist country, plus you never mention about FRANCE screwing Australia over price of the diesel subs. That in the end of price increases we canceled the French subs.
The sharing of knowledge is also with England too, it’s more likely we’ll get a English nuclear submarine than a American style
I think Australia should keep its conventional subs in reserve for defence in Australian waters, but still go ahead with the nuclear submarine deal in order to defend herself, her allies and her neighbours from beyond Australian waters.
Sure the Collins-Class submarines may be old, but they can still be useful in the worst case scenario.
the collins could be refit/upgraded if feasible as a reserve ran squadron. using them as test platforms for new sub tech, weapons, systems could keep ssn's on station longer and when refit they would have the benefit of fully sea-tested equipment. also, reserve subs very damned handy for keeping surface fleet's asw skills sharp and training of new submariners. just thinking out loud, thanks.
@@Scriptorsilentum True that.
Australia seriously needs to work very hard on sea denial I was of the opinion that 6 conventional 6 nuclear plus a genuine replacement for the 30 f111s say a downgraded version of the b21 raider optimised for sea denial in any case I’m sure Australia is working on it
I wonder if Australia would be interested in picking up some used B-1s? The F-111 was a unique capability for the Aussies for sure.
@@DEP717 The F111 was bought as a fighter it only worked as a fighter Bomber by Chance And Australia went back on its word when the TSR2 was being built We were coerced by the US just as we are being coerced today We waited 10 years for the F111 The TSR2 would have been on our shores within 2 years
australia need a long-range cruise missile and a militarized 777 not a b 21
An excellent evaluation that logically silences the Naysayers who do not care or understand about Defence and Strategies.
I have for many years been seriously concerned at how China has Made Australia so dependent on Made in China and it's flimsy long Supply Lines that China as a whim could close down and choke Australia. With Nuclear powered Submarines Australia will be in a position of High Respect at the Table regardless of it's large land mass related to it's population.
This is what we should have had years ago
Nice insight. A refreshing perspective on motivations for WWII. As an Aust, I have no issue with upside-down jokes. The mirror image can also explain why we drive on the other side of the road.
15:10 There is another chinese supply route across land. Why do you think the Belt and Road Intiative involves building so much rail networks to the middle east and eastern Europe.
We will not be getting a virginia class because they require way too much crew for our small submarine force. most diesel electric subs are not actually using lithium batteries because of fire hazard issues. The collins class uses lead acid. New sodium batteries should solve this issue and give conventional subs a boost.
3:30 Australia needs a nuclear submarine to protect global trade ???
curious, diesel electric submarines are great for near shore defense, where it does not need to travel long distances underwater. surface ships are best for show the flag and police actions. Nuclear submarines are best to combat enemy fleet. Seems this is what Australia thinks is the long term need
Trivia: The first Australian submariners instituted the dolphin insignia for sailors who have graduated to submarines in WW1. I believe most Western navies now have them.
Sal, Thanks for the history lesson on WWII. I go to bed tonight knowing more than I did this morning.
If anyone doubts China's militaristic plans for the Pacific, read about the deal China just signed with the Solomon Islands.
Can you give us a link? Please.
Excellent thank you: Joe from Sydney (and I love my all American two door Jeep Wrangler)
Glad you liked it!
not lithium batteries for Australian subs, they use lead base
No electric. They are garbage.
We're not buying subs, we're buying in. A closed, secure, capability focused club.
As an Australian, Australia would not use force as a negotiation chip like some dictatorial nations have tried in the past. Australia is happy to trade with China, and any trade disputes are handled politically not militarily. If there was an armed conflict, most likely triggered over Taiwan and involving the USA, Australia and China, submarines are important to Australia because its an island nation and any landing force would have to travel to Australia by Sea, plus as you mentioned it's useful to interdict supplies to a potential aggressor nation in the region.
Trade with China is what made this country, in the last 40 years. Let's be realistic. America had done shit for us. They got Rudd out of office, (read Julia Bishops book) they've entered us into many conflicts, and have invaded more countries in the last 100 years than China and Russia combined.
A Chinese spy cackled . In three generations china will put its name on our door anyway . Australia should stop supplying a china preparing for war with iron ore . Xi told his militarry to prepare for war . What makes china think we don't understand the statement of their leader ?
I think it is fanciful to think there is a risk of a Chinese invasion of the continent in the event of a flashpoint over Taiwan. To me the argument that Keating made the other day that these boats are designed to operate in consort with a larger American force sitting off the Chinese continental shelf and attacking Chinese submarines as they leave port is much more compelling
@@kingsley3208 Who said anything a Chinese invasion of Australia? Any nation who tries to invade Australia would be dumb as they have vulnerable supply lines as Australian "defence" spending is focused on that deterrence, including F35s/F18s to attack any attempts at creating air bridge and submarines to attack supply lines, with only a small Armoured force. Australia's conflicts over the past 100 years apart from WWI and WWII have been in support of the US & UN, but they can do it with the same forces designed for invasion deterrence.
@@kingsley3208 it is ludicrouse to think china will stop at one bite . Keating is nothing more than one of those who took away our economic defence so that the world could exploit us and exploit us it has . China warns us that there is peril in defending our allies . This clearly shows china is aware of its action and it's intent . Who are we that we would tempt China's displeasure ? A stupid nation ? We would rely on the airforce to defend our coastlines from attack $300 billion to blockade China's trade routes is about all the subs are good for . Anyone who is apt at drones such as china is can turn that $300 billion into scape in short order . The investment dose not suit Australia's needs it suits America's strategy of containment . We had $50 billion for some subs .now we are in debt $260 billion and we still don't have even a bloody bolt for the excercise as yet .
Thanks for your acknowledgment of the role of Freemantle, Western Australia, to provide U, S, submarine support during WW2. You forgot to mention the WW2 US submarine support base at Brisbane (Australia's East Coast). The U.S. naval base at Newfarm, Brisbane River should be acknowledged as a major support base for US submarines operating in the Pacific, Papua New Guinea, South East Asia, and the South China Sea.
Lots of Australians really love American's opinions on Australia not sullied by any real knowledge of Australian history or current affairs.
The US also gave nuclear power plants to Iran, India and Pakistan. Now two of the three have nuclear bombs.
I remember flying into Singapore in 2007 and seeing all the ships that were in and around Singapore from the air before landing. I was shocked to see the numbers of ships of Singapore. I have never seen so many ships in my life. I understand why Singapore was setup by the British because it was a major bottleneck for shipping.
Terror, Shock, Horror! Thailand's KRA Canal!
Yay for you, Sal ! This class of yours is growing! Congrats!
Hope none of the Australian submarines surface under one of 30 new MSC MV equipped with Silverstream Technologies' air lubrication system. Should limit ships radiated noise like USN Prairie Masker system (in theory) in addition to saving on fuel.
Prairie masker simply prevents subs classification of the vessels to confuse targeting. Basically it makes everything look the same to a enemy sub reducing their chances of hitting a prime target like a carrier. Believe me you can hear the props from miles away and while I'm not familiar with the system you mentioned even a deaf sonar man wouldn't miss a commercial contact. When I was still in we could hear someone cranking winches by hand on a sailboat miles away and more.
Why all of a sudden do we need nuclear subs really we should have had them long ago , if it’s now so important to have these subs,why then cant we have nuclear power stations , to ward off our emerging energy crises
A little out of your wheelhouse but a great and informative video. I'm glad you made it. As a Canadian it is embarrassing to me That Canada will not and can not play any meaning full roll in stopping aggressive Chinese expansionism in any way. I have great respect for Canadian submariners however they have very little to work with. The situation with our socialist Prime Minister and the decline of the CF capability has seen to that. Believe it or not we even have washed up senile old tree huggers like David Suzuki petitioning the government to stop the upgrade of our old fighter jets because of their carbon footprint. Unbelievable but true. Well thanks for letting me get that off of my chest.
Canada is a nascent world power ..Once you get rid of that Idiot currently destroying your country.
Agree! Canada needs to step it up or countries like Russia and China will walk all over Canada!
"agressive Chinese expansionism" such as what?
@@rob99brown How about threatening freedom of navigation in the south china sea? Build islands in the ocean and then threaten ships from passing.
@@lessharratt8719 The south what sea?
Small players seeking to influence shipping in SCS or other choke points have a much more effective and less costly way to implement their strategies. The lowly sea mine could stop all trade through a straight or port. China or for that matter Indonesia / Vietnam could order out its fishing fleet and have them dump sea mines. Dumb ones along with a mix of high end CAPTOR type mines would stop all commercial traffic as well as prevent multi-billion dollar submarines from getting beyond deep water.
Our navy should be able to patrol the Southern Hemisphere we are the largest western country in the south we should be able to demonstrate power across the whole Southern Hemisphere
We almost were invaded in ww2 and the government already had a plan for what would happen, basically all of northern Australia would of been annexed by Japan, this can easily happen again done by another country in another world war scenario, without adequate defences !
A little background. Australia originally chose to go diesel because it was considered to be greener than nuclear, which is a no-no to the Green party and much of the Labour party. In essence climate politics trumped national security considerations. The French deal involved redesigning their current nuclear submarine design into a diesel version that would cost approximately twice as much as the current nuclear version and wouldn't be available until 2030, even though the order was placed back around 2015. Moreover, the costs have steadily escalated since the inception of the contract, which was one of the principal reasons for bailing out of the French contract and going with the Anglo-Saxons.
Further comment on Chinese political/economic structure. China is not a capitalist country/economy but rather a fascist country: i.e. an authoritarian government with a large private sector that is subject to government control, direction and suppression. China has a very large state owned sector which is increasingly the favored child of the government's economic policy as demonstrated by its current allocation of credit policies. At the same time, the Chinese government has been increasing its control of the private sector, especially the high-tech and construction sectors and subordinating the private sector to government control and direction. Essentially what Hitler did with the privately-owned German industrial sector in World War II.
Your SSN/SSK comparison is a bit off. Our Collins class bubs are no slouch they have a 90 day endurance. They only need to snorkel for 2-3 mins every 24 hours to charge their batteries, so they are quite stealthy even in highly contested waters. They have a top speed in excess of 20 knots so that are fast for a conventional submarine and at patrol quiet speed (3 knots) they are quieter than the background ocean noise. The main reason they are being replaced is their age, they are becoming more prone to breakdown.
Australia was certainly shafted by Britain and the Commonwealth in WWII, but that isn’t a factor in acquiring nuclear powers subs. Submarines are very effective deterrents for the Australian continent and that’s the bottom line.
Yes, we're not proud of that, but we had a few poblems of our own at the time. Sorry, we'll try to do better next time!
You can easily keep diesel boats on station. The advantage of Nucboats is power and easier interceptions.
So few Australian commentators understand the importance of having your own strong military when getting respect on the world stage
Yeah. A large military, and a bunch of nuclear weapons is what you need for your country to be respected today.
@@killman369547 as an aussie i dont want nukes here... and i dont think we need em.. distance is our best defence...
@@Lilamma- In an age where warships can circle the planet without resupplying and where missiles can reach any country in a matter of hours? Some cardboard cutouts of tanks would provide a better defense.
Wrong. In many ways. Aukus is a scam.
@@Lilamma- Distance didn't stop Japanese planes bombing Darwin and other parts of Australia.
Didn't stop a Japanese submarine firing deck guns on Newcastle, Japanese Midget subs in Sydney Harbour.
German warships being of Tasmania south coast, Nth coast of New Zealand and Western Australia coast.
We not only need nuclear powered submarines, we need to bring back the fleet air arm aboard nuclear powered aircraft carriers; and the personnel!
P.S. The population of our upright (we are not upside down or under) country, in 2021, when this was published, was under 26 million, not the 30 million as you stated; twice. Even now, in 2023, the population is still 26.2 million.
There was an Australian movie that came out in 2010, "Tomorrow When The War Began", based on the scenario of a Chinese invasion of Australia. Having nuclear killer subs which could sink Chinese troop ships before they could land troops here, much as the British used one of their nuclear subs to sink the Argentinian ship General Belgrano with thousands of troops on board during the Falklands war, would be a great deterrent against any such invasion in the future, should things ever escalate to that level between Australia and China.
There is no threat of that kind of invasion from China - and if there was, a SSN fleet is perhaps the most expensive, least efficient and most vulnerable system for a defence of the continent strategy. There is a fantastic article in the Saturday paper from prof. Hugh white that you may find interesting.
@@kingsley3208 Most vulnerable? Surely a nuclear submarine hidden in the depths of the ocean where nobody can find it is the least vulnerable of any asset that could be used to attack a fleet of ships? Aircraft can be shot down with air defence systems if they are visible on radar. As for expense, if you have already bought your nuclear submarine, it's a sunk cost, excuse the pun, and in time of war you are not going to refrain from using it, just because it cost a lot to purchase. I'm not saying a war with China is imminent by the way, but if we follow the model of World War 2, which this video maker was exploring, the Japanese did attempt to attack mainland Australia with aircraft at one point, and it's quite likely that if there weren't American submarines based in Perth to deter them, they might have attempted a seaborne invasion. As it turned out, submarines, even the less effective diesel submarines they had back then, were a crucial element in the Pacific war against the Japanese.
@@apterachallenge No US submarine in ww2 was at the defence of Darwin All Australian forces
@@jacktattis That's interesting to know. Were there Japanese naval assets deployed in the Darwin attack, or just the aerial bombardment which is more well known? My point was not that there were US submarines there, but that Japanese ships could potentially have been in danger if a landing was attempted, so therefore there was a deterrent effect. That's the psychological effect of submarine warfare. You never know where they are, so if you believe they could potentially be in the area, you are going to be very wary about mounting an attack. The U-boats in WW2 took a heavy toll on allied shipping in the Atlantic, and forced them to travel in convoys with destroyers to try to depth charge the subs if they found them on sonar. But the only reason I mentioned the American subs based in Perth was because they were mentioned in the video. I wasn't aware of that before.
@@apterachallenge Thanks yes they have been there for years I do not know if they pay anything to us.
Great job. You communicated it well. Hope more will listen.
So the Aussies asked France to make them a non-nuclear version of their nuclear submarine only to ditch them for nuclears from elsewhere. If one sees who loses and who benefits from this, one gets who was behind this change. Forgot to mention AIP tech.
More complex than this, the contract with the FRA was incredibility unfavorable to AUS and the subs were incredibility over-budget. Check out Sub Brief for the full story.
My video is not about the specifics of the deal but why Australia needs nuclear subs. Sub Brief is a great source.
My analogy: One goes to a steakhouse and asks for vegan dishes and for them to be prepared at ones home. While they prepare them, one walks to a friend's steakhouse and eats steak, calling from there to cancel.
No australia asked for a diesel submarine, everyone else (germany and japan) submitted built from the ground DE subs (type 212 and soryu), france submitted nuclear sub converted to diesel. Due to the general requirement australia wanted DCNS/NG used the nuclear hull as base because of large displacement, the PM at the time actually admitted in his memoirs that he selected the barracuda due to the possibility of changing the contract to nuclear subs at some stage of the a contract. Also note the suffren which is the first of the new class france built took 13 year launch and still not yet commissioned
Our strategic circumstances have deteriorated very quickly since the SSK deal was signed in 2016. As the Prime Minister explained, SSK are now too little capability due to this deterioration in our strategic situation, and the submarines are literally needed now. it has nothing to do with much else, really. if the French press is saying that this is somehow about money, then they do not understand the strategic situation in Asia.
Consider that this decision is popular - even five years ago there was very little support for SSN outside strategic circles. Now the decision has broad-based popular support. That is a major reversal of threat perceptions in just five years.
Also consider that this announcement was 'bundled' with others such as rapid acquisition of long range strike capabilities, cyber and AI capabilities. This is a major enhancement of Australian maritime capability across the board. That alone should tell you just how worried we are about the chances of a major war in this region, and we mean something on the scale of the US segment (41-45) of the Pacific War of 1937-45.
Had to laugh when the picture of the french recalling their ambassadors came up. In Australia, the people who whinge about everything complained that we had gone back on our word with our close allies. Close allies? All they have done is let Australians die defending their country, set off nukes in the Pacific when we asked them not to and blew up a greenpeace ship. I was pissed when the new labor government paid them anything.
I tend to think the PLAN is not as scared by the USN as you think. The USN in the Pacific is composed of undernamed, broken and rusty ships that keep running into freighters or reefs. Plus the LCS, the 'find one mine ever' MCM vessel. The USN antiship missiles are short ranged, slow and not particularly numerous, unlike the PLAN's. The USN also got rid of all their long-ranged strike aircraft in favor of fighters with less than half the range. But that's OK, because the USN also got rid of all their tankers, which means to launch a strike mission a carrier needs to be deep inside the PLAN's aircraft range.
The Woke Chief of Staff's plan to fix this is get rid of all the actual MCM vessels and all cruisers today to save money so they can build more ships in ten years. Probably more $8 billion giant destroyers without any ammo or volume air-search radars, billon dollar short legged popgun armed LCS (still awaiting the first working mission module 13 years after commissioning) , and $13 billion dollar aircraft carriers whose bomb elevators and catapults still don't work 5 years after it was commissioned. What could possibly go wrong?
ROFL
The PLAN wouldn't know if it's arse was on fire.
Between the nepotism, cronyism, outright corrupt, and political nobbling, their ships have already killed more of their own sailors and pilots than any conflict.
"Woke" immediately lost you any credibility.
Wouldn't anyone rather be awake than asleep?
Just remember that the PLAN has never fought a war. Vietnam absolutely kicked their arses (dispute over fishing limits) a few years ago and don't forget that about 100 Indians put about 1000 Chinese soldiers to flight in the Himalayas (The Chinese High Commands' officail view was their soldiers spent too mcuh time palying with themselves and playing video games). I don't suppose their sailors are very different. It is also a factor that the One Child policy means that every soldier/sailor lost is the end of a family bloodline - important in CHineses culture.
@@jamesgunn5103 We'll see. BTW, how many USN ships carry supersonic anti-ship missiles with a 300km or more range? How about the PLAN?
Wrong flag.....but great video...I spent nearly 20 years in the RAN. Loved every minute of it.
This seems like an incredibly belligerent move by Australia, the US and the UK. Trade is not a one-party thing. China is trading with other nations. And threatening this trade is basically threatening these other nations too. The Aussies and their English speaking buddies may think this gives them leverage. But most of the world's population will look at this and think they are assholes. What they are doing to China is basically the same that Fascist Japan did to China. They are not the good guys in this.
Was thinking the same thing. China did nothing to deserve this treatment from Australia. Australia and the UK only started trade wars with China because the US told them to. We know why the US is out to get China and Russia and that is because these countries threaten the US's petrodollar and the US hegemony. Not only did they start an unnecessary trade war with China but they escalated a military power flex war with China and Russia. Then there is Europe which will remember this betrayal. I will not trust the US in any deal. I will in fact ask countries to pay the full price in cash in front with no refunds just in case the US tries to torpedo the deal. This has happened before. I remember when the UK favourite the South African Rooivalk attack helicopter over the US Apache. Unfortunately, South Africa was getting missiles or missile components from the US who simply said that if South Africa won the UK bid then the US would stop supplying South Africa with those missiles. Just now Norway is cancelling a 20-year deal of helicopters with Airbus due to the helicopters not performing as expected. Guess who is the new supplier? The US of course. How does it take twenty years to realise a helicopter is not performing or that there are issues? The US, UK and Australia are all making more enemies with their little games.
Australia is Britain's brother
China is already threaten trade. Not just any Australian export going north but all trade within the East Vietnam Sea, by building forts and declaring all that waters theirs is illegal (international courts). Yet some how Australia is the bad guy for getting SSN.
Aussie here - I see this differently. Whilst the video describes ability to exert pressure that would cut off trade, that capability already exists. A simple sea mine operation at choke pointz would shut off shipping. You don't exclusively need nuclear subs to do this. But if someone else with an aggressive expansionist agenda were to unilaterally declare international waters with heavily used shipping lanes to be their private lake and enforce arbitrary shipping controls - in effect a blockade (and an act of war) - that would profoundly affect Australian trade routes and we would want the ability to prevent that. Submarines are profoundly powerful naval assets due to their stealthy nature.
From an aggression perspective: Not interested in imposing our will on other countries. But I am interested in being able to make aspiring aggressors think twice before using aggression, and coercion to enslave and extort others or illegally blockade, sieze and annex their territory.
And yes I'm aware of Australia's own blemished record and I still believe certain people who originated those orders need to face justice.
What are these submarines going to do? Torpedo any ship trading with China in peacetime? Take out their navy all by themselves? I don't understand this.
Great video thanks!
Really enjoyed this explanation, especially as an Australian. One point I felt uncomfortable with though, was your comment on how Australia can exert pressure on China. 30 million putting pressure on 145 billion people. The real fact is that it is only one Government arguing with another Government, not the people, so those numbers are truly irrelevant.
You also mention that China is looking elsewhere for it's materials because of a fall out with Australia. This is in fact quite true, but the part that nobody mentions is eighteen months before China started to cancel trade of certain items, our so called coalition government had imposed 26 breaches of the FTA on China, that were at best doubtful, yet upheld. We had started the trade war and when retaliation was put in place, it hit hard as it was our wine industry first, then seafood followed by others later.
The problem was our PM, the leader of our nation. His attitude towards these problems was not to discuss or negotiate, but bluster, abuse and lose more trade. He lied to the nation, did many callous acts of poor leadership during his term and placed the country in debt.
Our current government has been mending these trade issues and with some reasonable success. The nation is divided by this submarine deal so far, first we had arrangements with the Japanese, then the French, which has cost money to break contracts with.
Now we have a deal for S/h subs, that cannot keep their rubber coating on. I do refer to the Virginia class submarine and this problem is well known. I do believe it is in the realm of either a Senate inquiry or a Legal court case...endangering the lives of US Servicemen.
So, is this good enough for Australia...???
You correctly mention something which I believe the will call the AUKUS sub, Astute class with Virginia class operational equipment...like mating a Great Dane and a Chihuahua. A mongrel at best!
Lastly, why is there a need to have to threaten a country with control over their ability to travel sea routes...? What is the point of exerting power over another country because they do not purchase from you...?
This may be the way the USA has been doing its world contribution since 1945, but where has that got it, certainly no countries except dumbass Australia want to be friends with it. Others are forced by monetary control, but that could all change very soon. Every person globally is tired of the wars or correct terms should be Invasions and Coup D'etat that are caused by the USA, but more and more countries are standing up and saying NO. Recent news reports alluded to the USA, Australia and Israel, the UK was already bought and paid for during WWII and is just a vassal state. No one else is interested in being playmates with the bully any more and as we progress into this year, our Independent Senators are busy making the Australian Government answer the people for its actions. If they get it wrong, a vote of no confidence in the government is easy to move and sub deals go bye bye.
Loyalty to my country, Always.....Loyalty to governments, when they earn it..!
Well fricking said! Also, you know the Australian sub commanders of these new US subs will ultimately take their orders from Washington, thereby serving US interests over Australia's.
Awesome video content and context were excellent.
The dynamic of the German war was such that convoy operations were the 99% of all naval activity in the Atlantic. That dynamic was not the same in the pacific hence the large amount of submarines. With a naval war with china, it will likely be 50& convoys and 50 percent blockades.
thank you sir, you explained it better than any aussie politician could
The win here is relieving the US Navy from much of the burden of protecting the shipping lanes in that area.
The strait of malaka.
Hats of to the funny fella that named that one.
Surely he was greek.
I dont think you grasp the reality of the China -Australia "trade war". The first thing you missed was it was a one way trade war, China tried to punish Australia for demanding an investigation into the covid origins and they failed miserably. Australia's total exports during that period and the Chinese economy started to tank dues to power shortages that were a result of not having Australian coal. China's other source for coal was Indonesia who's coal is of lower quality and not suitable for China's power plants. So Indonesian companies started to just resell Australian coal to China with a 50% markup.
There's not just shipping from Fremantle/ Perth on the West Coast there's large volumes of shipping from the Pilbara region iron ore, salt, natural gas, manganese,etc.
Funny thing is, when I look around me here in Melbourne, it’s downhill all the way whichever way I look, and all the nice yanks and poms and eyeties and all are all upside down and have all their seasons arse about 🤣
Good wrap up mate. Even 12 months later, what you say is likely the reality.
Great analysis. Hope they go with the Virginia's