Aussie to build Nuclear Subs

France lost out on $90B business on that one.

Australia isn't going to build anything. It's all technology transfer. They will be receiving a lot of help from U.S . You do understand nuclear in this context means nuclear powered and not nuclear armed.

A few months back there was a news story about a woman Australian politician who was really so stupid she thought the submarine could only stay submerged for 20 minutes because it was nuclear.

Fred Bloggs wrote crap: ===================

FYI

Up till now a big issue has been refuelling of such subs - given that Aussie has no nuclear industry. But the new reactor design is such that it will be one time fuelled, for the life of the boat.

Eventual disposal of nuclear waste should be no problem either. Here or elsewhere for reprocessing.

Aussieland has taken a big leap into the future.

I expect China to soon extract a serious revenge. To add to the nasty little ones they have done already.

..... Phil

I believe they can be fitted with nuclear warhead. BGM-109A Tomahawk Land Attack Missile – Nuclear (TLAM-N) with a W80 nuclear warhead. Retired from service sometime between 2010 and 2013.[2] Reports from early 2018 state that the U.S. Navy is considering (re)introducing a (yet unknown type of) nuclear-armed cruise missile into service.

China really doesn't have a Navy that can compete with western powers- not even close. All this stuff about China being a threat is overblown.

Fred Bloggs wrote: =============

Since Aussies are pals and trade with all three, we are being seriously threatened for even hinting that we may assist them. Numerous agricultural industries here are no longer able to export to China - a few have been wiped out. All tourism and 250K uni students will stop soon.

Coal and iron ore are next.

.... Phil

U.S. has weapons that can turn China's entire surface Navy into a floating debris field within minutes.

Australia is going to have to adapt.

Fred Bloggs wrote: ==================

Vague BS is all you have - f uckwit.

...... Phil

You seriously think Australia is in danger of being invaded by China, or anyone else??? LOL- you're a halfwit mental case.

Phil Allison snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

snip

"Nuclear subs" does not mean nuclear armaments, it refers to the powerplant.

Phil Allison snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news:8cad2958-ecdd-48a9- snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

The ones we sell to Australia and other allies are.

You can bet that.

Which is going to cost us billions - you can't back out of deal like that without paying a lot in compensation

It wasn't in the newspaper this morning, but it was on the TV news tonight.

Scott Morrison - frequently known as Scotty from Marketing - wants to to win the next election, which is coming up soon. He hasn't had a good pandemic, and a big deal giving the navy the nuclear submarines it wants may be his ticket to victory.

I hope the electorate isn't that gullible.

The twelve French submarines were looking as if they'd end up costing us $A90 billion. The nuclear submarines seem unlikely to be any cheaper.

Tooling up to look after their nuclear reactors isn't going to be cheap either. Australia has just one nuclear reactor - at Lucas Heights, just south of Sydney, which is a research reactor, used for all sorts of stuff - including making short-lived isotope for medical work. It's also set up for neutron diffraction with a French imaging neutron detector which is essentially a copy of a 1980s French one-off system at Grenoble, which they are looking to upgrade.

Not a great basis for looking after a bunch submrarine reactors.

It probably would if I bothered to watch it

Of the dimmer kind. Tony Abbot lost the leadership of his party - and the Prime Minstership - because he wasn't up to the job. Petra Credlin's performance as his chief of staff hadn't won him any friends, either. Even the other coservatives realised that he was dim twit.

Snipped the rubbish from Sky News, Australia. It's owned by Rupert Murdoch, and seems to be as bad as Fox News in the US.

Taiwan is a Maltese falcon, it's the source of a lot of drama but at the end of the day China doesn't really want to incur the potential costs of actually invading it, and the West doesn't really want to incur the potential costs of actually defending it.

Fred Bloggs wrote: ==================

Instead of answering your own bullshit ones.

... Phil

We have coal and iron for international sale here in Canada - it won't be as subsidized as the Chinese, but then we won't be trying to take over your country either!

John :-#)#

$6bn has already be *wasted* on the Frog deal.

Rest of his mindless, autistic crap sniped.

Apart from the fact that we will be stuck with the Collin's class submarines as only submarines for even longer.

That may be what Morrison was told. He may even believe it.

My guess is that the actual long-term plan is to go with

https://hb11.energy/ who are working up Heinrich Hora's boron-hydrogen fusion scheme, which could fit inside a submarine - if it can ever be made to work at all - and fit that inside the nuclear submarine hulls that we will put together in South Australia. Boron-hydrogen fusion doesn't produce neutrons which is handy in a submarine that you don't want people to detect, and Heinrich Hora has a scheme to get high-voltage electricity directly from the reactor rather than extracting the power generated as heat and using that to boil water to spin turbines, which would mean that there was a whole lot less waste heat to be got rid of, which is also handy in a submarine that you don't want people to detect.

I doubt if anybody has bothered to tell Scott Morrison about this - he's not all that clever, and we'd prefer to keep it from the Brits and the Yanks until we've got the submarine hulls. Happily, nobody is going to take me seriously, so I don't have to worry about the security services going nuts.

snipped-for-privacy@ieee.org wrote: =================

F****ng human ostrich.

...... Phil

Australia doesn't have to build copies of the Virginia class AFAIK it can build the UK's Astute class which might be a more appropriate-sized sub, the Virginia class is a big fatty designed to be serviced at Cold War-era US sub bases sized to handle them and roam all over the planet, Australia's probably not sending its subs to the North Pole or wandering around off the coast of New York City on the regular.

bitrex wrote: =========== >

Rest of your made up drivel snipped.

..... Phil

I think I saw something that said the French subs were going to be diesel! For $A90b they should have gold-plated reactors instead.