The Australian government has conjured up photos (one above) and a newspaper story (below) implying Australia will be acquiring an (Astute-class) AUKUS submarine very soon. Such an acquisition, too late for Astutes, may occur in the 2040s or the 2050s.
The Canberra Times newspaper, on October 29, 2021, reported:
"[Australian] Defence Minister Peter Dutton has flagged the arrival of Australia's first nuclear-powered submarines earlier than officials have said.
Mr Dutton said the new nuclear submarines Australia was looking to acquire would not be pushed out into the late 2040s.
"I know there has been speculation about dates out into late 2040s, but that is not going to be the case," he told reporters, standing in front of a UK nuclear-powered Astute class submarine [docked in Western Australia, on October 29, 2021]..." ---------------------------
Pete's Article Below:
Why is Australia not buying the UK's Astute-class SSNs as THE "AUKUS-class" submarines? Reasons are many including the Astutes' general obsolescence by Australia's AUKUS sub launch date in the late 2030s.
Also see the UK shipyard built Astute-class'"cost overruns and delays". But we Australians should feel right at home with UK defence project cost overruns and delays. We specialise in that already. But Hey! We blamed the Attack class debacle on the French, just as we'll blame the AUKUS submarine debacle on the British.
You'll note that the UK designing most of "Australia's" AUKUS SSN (especially the hull) is taken as a given by the Sub Punter-tariat. In that regard see the photo of a UK design (yes an Astute, with no Virginia in sight) on Australia's (AUKUS) Nuclear-Powered Submarine Task Force website.
Returning to the safe subject of sub tech. The major specific reason Australia is NOT buying the Astute is the Astute's PWR2 reactor and in connection with that, safety. The PWR2 (on UK Vanguard SSBNs as well as the Astutes) will not only be obsolete by the 2030s, but there are safety concerns that now cannot be fully reversed.
A submarine reactor is the most expensive and safety sensitive component of a nuclear sub. You basically build a submarine around the reactor. Even fitting a new, safer reactor to an Astute class sub would change so many things (eg. the whole submarine's dimensions, displacement, reactor management electronics, buoyancy and "quieting") that it would fundamentally be a new submarine - with a new name.
The authors of Wiki report that, by 1997, the UK realised:
“the size of the Rolls-Royce PWR2 required a much larger [SSN, in terms of] (width and length) and significantly improved acoustic quieting. A new understanding was reached between the [UK Ministry of Defence] and GEC-Marconi that this would be an entirely new class [called Astutes], and far more complex than originally envisioned.[8]"
PWR2 Safety
The authors of Wiki further report:
"A safety assessment of the PWR2 design by the [UK] Defence Nuclear Safety Regulator in November 2009, was released under a [UK Freedom of Information] request in March 2011.[8][9] The regulator identified two major areas where UK practice fell significantly short of comparable good practice, loss-of-coolant accident and control of submarine depth following emergency reactor shutdown.[10][9]
The regulator concluded that PWR2 was "potentially vulnerable to a structural failure of the primary circuit", which was a failure mode with significant safety hazards to crew and the public.[9][11]
In January 2012 radiation was detected in the PWR2 test reactor's coolant water, caused by a microscopic breach in fuel cladding. This discovery led to HMS Vanguard being scheduled to be refueled early and contingency measures being applied to other Vanguard and Astute-class submarines, at a cost of £270 million. This was not revealed to the public until 2014.[12][13]"
-----------------------------------
Tomorrow I'll write about UK and some Australian trends that point to a larger AUKUS SSN (than the Astute) for Australia.