Wow.


Australia to get no new, only old, Virginia-class submarines under Aukus

Australia will no longer receive any new Virginia-class submarines from the US, with all three of the Aukus vessels to be second hand.

The defence minister, Richard Marles, welcomed the new proposal alongside his US and UK counterparts yesterday.

Australia had been expecting to receive a mix of old and new Virginia-class submarines for its own use in the early 2030s as it prepares to adopt nuclear-powered submarines.

Marles announced the plan had changed in a joint statement on Saturday. It read:

The Deputy Prime Minister and Secretaries welcomed the proposed approach to streamline Australia’s acquisition of Virginia-class submarines (VCS), simplifying supply chain management, operational and maintenance requirements, and maximising cost efficiencies.

This approach would enable Australia to acquire three in-service VCS in lieu of a mixture of new and in-service VCS variants.

US shipyards have been under pressure as they struggle to boost manufacturing to their goal of building an average of 2.3 new submarines a year by 2032.

::)

The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned.

How old are the used subs?

tallowood wrote on May 31^st, 2026 at 11:41am:

The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs?

That's a good question.

For sure, the lifespan of these subs will be somewhat shorter than most people were imagining.

What a waste of money - ridiculous.


Not one world leader is talking about arms reductions agreements between major powers to

reduce the military power and prevent wars -

they only talk about increased military spending by everyone.  ::)

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/australia-now-to-get-in-service-virginia-class-subs/

May 30, 2026


The AUKUS partners have streamlined Australia’s planned acquisition of US-built Virginia-class submarines under Pillar 1, with the country now set to receive three in-service boats rather than a mixture of new and in-service variants, the UK Defence Journal understands.
The change was confirmed in a joint statement issued by Australian Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and UK Defence Secretary John Healey following a meeting at the US Embassy in Singapore on 30 May.

The statement said the ministers “welcomed the proposed approach to streamline Australia’s acquisition of Virginia-class submarines, simplifying supply chain management, operational and maintenance requirements, and maximising cost efficiencies,” adding that “this approach would enable Australia to acquire three in-service VCS in lieu of a mixture of new and in-service VCS variants.”

Where's the money coming from?.   :(

whiteknight wrote on May 31^st, 2026 at 6:18pm:

Where's the money coming from?.   :(

The RBA will print the money and we'll pay for it with inflation.



https://m3.gab.com/media_attachments/9d/be/ca/9dbeca9081e22f14e6779d5a650f4413.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/bW1vZqC.jpeg

tallowood wrote on May 31^st, 2026 at 11:41am:

The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs?

Wrong. The nuclear fuel in the reactor is replaced every 25-30 years. The submarine itself can be used for longer than this.

Bobby. wrote on May 31^st, 2026 at 1:03pm:

What a waste of money - ridiculous. Not one world leader is talking about arms reductions agreements between major powers to reduce the military power and prevent wars - they only talk about increased military spending by everyone.  ::)

We aren't getting nuclear arms on these subs, only nuclear power, hence arms reduction agreements are irrelevant here.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 1^st, 2026 at 9:12am:

tallowood wrote on May 31st, 2026 at 11:41am: The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs? Wrong. The nuclear fuel in the reactor is replaced every 25-30 years. The submarine itself can be used for longer than this.

You don't know what you talking about as usual.
Australia’s planned nuclear-powered submarines feature intended lifespans of roughly 33 years for newly built vessels.

tallowood wrote on Jun 1^st, 2026 at 10:14am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 1st, 2026 at 9:12am: tallowood wrote on May 31st, 2026 at 11:41am: The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs? Wrong. The nuclear fuel in the reactor is replaced every 25-30 years. The submarine itself can be used for longer than this. You don't know what you talking about as usual. Australia’s planned nuclear-powered submarines feature intended lifespans of roughly 33 years for newly built vessels.

An interesting article on US Subs. How second hand are our second hand subs going to be when we get them?    What will be the impact of upgrading Collins to allow Nuclear Subs to be in a patrol - short term maintenance - long term maintenance cycle?  The cost of maintaining two distinctly different boats will probably be more than the cost of purchase

https://www.inthewarroom.com/us-navy-submarine-structural-hull-fatigue-addressing-the-risks/

Vic wrote on Jun 1^st, 2026 at 11:55am:

tallowood wrote on Jun 1st, 2026 at 10:14am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jun 1st, 2026 at 9:12am: tallowood wrote on May 31st, 2026 at 11:41am: The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs? Wrong. The nuclear fuel in the reactor is replaced every 25-30 years. The submarine itself can be used for longer than this. You don't know what you talking about as usual. Australia’s planned nuclear-powered submarines feature intended lifespans of roughly 33 years for newly built vessels. An interesting article on US Subs. How second hand are our second hand subs going to be when we get them?    What will be the impact of upgrading Collins to allow Nuclear Subs to be in a patrol - short term maintenance - long term maintenance cycle?  The cost of maintaining two distinctly different boats will probably be more than the cost of purchase https://www.inthewarroom.com/us-navy-submarine-structural-hull-fatigue-addressing-the-risks/

Very good explanation about "Submarine Structural Hull Fatigue" and here is more info about boats we are getting - class Virginia Block IV.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_submarine

Sadly BOTH sides need to take carriage of this disaster

---

making any 'deal' with trump is foolish

tallowood wrote on May 31^st, 2026 at 11:41am:

The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs?

But the rest of the boat would still be serviceable, convert the boiler to oil fired, the submersible capacity would be lost but surface performance would still be the same.😇😇

“The "rusted scrap" you are referring to is likely the Kanimbla-class amphibious transport ships (HMAS Manoora and HMAS Kanimbla). These vessels were built as Newport-class tank landing ships for the US Navy and were purchased by Australia in 1994.The acquisition quickly became notorious due to major issues:The Problem: The "bargain buy" was heavily plagued by deep hull rust, asbestos, and severe mechanical defects.The Cost: Modifications and extensive rust repairs saw the project cost skyrocket from the initial estimate of $70 million up to $400 million.The End: After failing to meet operational readiness for decades, both rusted ships were docked in 2010 and decommissioned in 2011.The Disposal: In 2013, the Australian government sold both vessels to the US-based Southern Recycling company. They were towed to New Orleans and broken up for scrap metal”.

“AI

What could possibly go wrong buying second hand US warships. Again?

A letter in today's The West Australian.

;D

---

It’s ok .Albo old mate Peter Garret is going to write a report on it all for a quarter of a million dollars.

Great work when it’s already been written for you?

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2026 at 10:51am:

tallowood wrote on May 31st, 2026 at 11:41am: The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs? But the rest of the boat would still be serviceable, convert the boiler to oil fired, the submersible capacity would be lost but surface performance would still be the same.😇😇

How about environment friendly man powered version

something like build in 1724 by Yefim Nikonov, the "hidden vessel".
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/640x480q70/921/FJ338e.jpg

or more recent
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ifVqN_7iPk

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2026 at 10:51am:

tallowood wrote on May 31st, 2026 at 11:41am: The nuclear reactors in Australia's planned nuclear submarine are designed to last 30 years. After roughly 30 years, the submarine itself is retired and decommissioned. How old are the used subs? But the rest of the boat would still be serviceable, convert the boiler to oil fired, the submersible capacity would be lost but surface performance would still be the same.😇😇

I’ll just add that they could then be called ‘’Oil Powered’’.