Australian Navy reportedly has only one of six Collins submarines operational
It has been known for several years that the SSN-AUKUS program, which is to enable the Australian Navy to equip itself with nuclear attack submarines, is, in many respects, a shaky structure. Until now, however, it was above all the difficulties encountered by the American naval industry, which must deliver 3 to 5 Virginia-class SSNs to the Royal Australian Navy, from 2034 to 2037, that focused the concerns.
Indeed, numerous reports, including from the audit bodies of the United States Congress, have expressed doubts as to the possibility for the US industry to jointly deliver a Columbia-class SSBN and the 2,3 Virginia-class SSNs, from 2030, necessary for Congress to authorise the sale of nuclear ships to Canberra.
But there is another problem at work in this case, and this time, it is on the Australian side. The Australian press has just revealed that the Royal Australian Navy currently has only one operational Collins-class submarine. Worse still, according to several experts, it would be illusory to hope that these ships could be extended until 2035, and beyond, to make the connection with the hypothetical delivery of the American Virginia-class SSNs.
In this section:
Only one Australian Navy Collins submarine operational according to Australian press
La Australian press has just revealed some very worrying information regarding the availability of the Royal Australian Navy's submarine fleet. According to the information obtained, five of the six Collins-class submarines are currently unable to put to sea, leaving only one ship available to protect Australia's approximately 25 km of coastline and 760 million km² of its Exclusive Economic Zone, located in the most active naval theatre on the planet.
Several factors explain this catastrophic availability of the Australian submarine fleet. In particular, the Osborne shipyards in Adelaide, which are hosting two of these vessels for a period of maintenance and modernization, are facing a major strike, blocking the process.
But the heart of the problem concerns the recent appearance of serious corrosion problems on all six hulls designed by the Swedish company Kockums, built by Australian shipyards and entered into service between 6 and 1993.
When questioned directly by Australian journalists, the authorities responded in the purest style of political wooden language, affirming that the availability of Australian submarines was in accordance with the established planning, and that the Royal Australian Navy had the necessary number of ships to carry out its missions, if necessary. Which, in itself, neither denies nor confirms the allegations of the Australian press.
And add " For operational security reasons, the defense does not confirm the precise locations and availabilities of specific platforms.", a very convenient screen to cut short a very embarrassing subject for the Albanese government which, if it was not at the origin of the SSN-AUKUS program, did not question it at all when it came to power in 2022.
Several Australian experts consider it unrealistic to extend the Collins submarines until the arrival of the Virginia and the SSN-AUKUS
The emergence of these corrosion problems seems to have loosened the tongues of some Australian experts, casting doubt on the possibility of the Collins being extended beyond 2036, in order to allow operational overlap with the arrival of the first three Virginia-class SSNs, which the United States must sell to Australia, as part of the SSN-AUKUS program.
There are 75% of this article left to read, Subscribe to access it!
The Classic subscriptions provide access to
articles in their full version, and without advertising,
from €1,99. Subscriptions Premium also allow access to archives (articles over two years old)
BLACK FRIDAY : – 20% on new monthly and annual Premium and Classic subscriptions, with the code MetaBF2024, until 03/12/24
Copyright : Reproduction, even partial, of this article is prohibited, apart from the title and the parts of the article written in italics, except within the framework of copyright protection agreements entrusted to the CFC, and unless expressly agreed by Meta-defense.fr. Meta-defense.fr reserves the right to use all options at its disposal to assert its rights.
It now seems obvious that the decision of the Australians to unilaterally denounce the contract with France, and to enter into the Aukus agreement with the US and Great Britain, is a lose-lose decision. On the one hand, the Australians will no longer have a submarine force before a long time 2040-2050, and on the other hand, the US has deprived itself by ricochet of very high-performance conventional submarines capable of effectively opposing the Chinese in the event of a conflict in the Pacific.
Yes, that's true. Unfortunate for us too by ricochet...
And it may be necessary to factor into this equation, which is already quite disastrous for the Australian submarine, the fire that occurred this week in Great Britain in the BAE System shipyard in Barrow-in-Furness, the same one that builds and maintains British nuclear submarines: - maintenance/construction of Astute-type SSNs, the 6th of which has just been launched while the 7th - and last - is in the assembly phase;
- maintenance of Vanguard-type SSBNs, design and construction of the new generation of Dreadnought-class SSBNs.
The risk is a shift in the construction schedule of British submarines, then impacting the schedule of the new SNA which must be designed by the British for themselves and the Australians within the framework of the AUKUS program.
More info on this?