Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Live Sex ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Research Begins on Shortfin Barracuda SSK (Patreon)

Published:
2020-11-18 14:22:00
Imported:
2023-02

Content

As you command!  By Patreon request, we return to the VERY FIRST Sub Brief homeport in South Australia. The successor to the Collins class submarine is Barracuda.  A modified non-nuclear Barracuda called Shortfin Barracuda.


Files

Comments

Anonymous

As a French, I will wait for a detailed review by the expert. By the way, the nuclear version of the Baracuda, the "Sufren" has just been delivered to the french navy, might have some insight info on the project?

subbrief

I haven't decided how I am going to format this. The is the first SUB BRIEF for a sub that isn't built yet. lol

Anonymous

We are strictly non nuclear and SSN is not an option, we have proven the Collins class is capable and worthy, we just need new and better capability from our SSGs, a Super Collins. I hate the Barracuda as its not designed from the ground up as a diesel boat so I think we should have either gone with the Japanese option or designed our own.

Anonymous

Use the total speculation format. That should be fine.

Anonymous
>>47961191

There is another problem with the Barracuda its availability. Can Australia afford a period without Submarines? because the Collins-class will be very old by 2030 which is a probably bit optimistic. And the RAN operating tempo will not be advantageous in preserving them.

subbrief

Teaser: I just found a major problem with the Shortfin Barracuda. Not going to spoil it here, will include it in the brief.

Anonymous

Can I suggest that you take a look at this site whilst prepping your brief: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=COMMITTEES;id=committees%2Festimate%2Ff714d311-39d2-4f05-97db-8b595281e700%2F0003;query=Id%3A%22committees%2Festimate%2Ff714d311-39d2-4f05-97db-8b595281e700%2F0000%22

Anonymous

This details the most recent updates to the ATTACK class submarine program. Also this is the BIO for Rear Admiral (retired) Greg Sammut: https://www.navy.gov.au/biography/rear-admiral-gregory-john-sammut

Anonymous

He is the the Head Future Submarine Program, and the General Manager Submarines. There is a pretty entertaining YouTube clip of him being questioned by one of our.........how should I say "less knowledgeable" politicians here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYF08jJi9Hg

Anonymous

I might also add that the Australian government has a responsibility for maintaining (which we pretty much dropped) a sovereign ship building capability. All of these new programs fit into this, we have managed this very poorly in the past. And politics being what they are it would be political suicide for a party to commit to any projects as big as the The ATTACK class submarine, Air Warfare Destroyer or the HUNTER class without an indigenous construction program. Yep without doubt it is ALOT of money (and that is an understatement). But these programs are all part of a larger strategy that ensures that Australia does not fall into "the valley of death" again (see the first link I provided for detail on this).

Anonymous
>>47961191

The proposed Attack class timeline is messed up, they're assuming full operation by 2060~ ... that's 40 years away!!! by then they will be obsolete lmao

Anonymous

Jive, you made an excellent point on twitter when you said "Nuclear power is not the answer or the problem. Paying 6 Billion dollars for a fossil fuel sub is incredibly dumb... Australia bought 12 of them". Definitely big bucks and yep we could have bought something cheaper and acquired it faster no doubt. And the US certainly would not provide all of the technology that goes into a VIRGINIA class, with the ATTACK class we get to own it all. But there is still a lot of work going in to the design of the ATTACK class which will ensure that it is a great boat. It will have bugs everything does, but COLLINS is an excellent boat and there is no reason to suggest the ATTACK class will be any different, just very very very expensive.

Anonymous
>>47999760

How tho, it hasn't been designed yet? The suspense for this breif is killing me

Anonymous

I am an Australian, from Adelaide in South Australia! As an engineer I stand to gain quite some employment from the build of this submarine - in saying that, I FIRMLY believe we should have just purchased ‘off the shelf’ AND I also think we should have just gone SSN.

Anonymous

BTW Aaron, it’s great to meet a fellow Aaron, I became a patreon for these briefs, they’re excellent! I especially enjoy them because my dad served on the RAN Oberon and helped commission the RAN Collins before retiring. One of my first serious jobs out of uni was working for a US company on a design of a hydrophone, not sure if it’s still secret or not so I won’t say too much.

Anonymous
>>48171557

What off the shelf meets our requirements tho? Also the cost of going nuclear tho, regardless of government policy, think of all the personal that you need to train and the experience you'd need to generate plus the big point of sovereign sustainable. We have no nuclear industry. Also its a contentious point as to whether the US would even let us buy Virginians.

Anonymous
>>48171557

We might not have what you regard as a nuclear industry but we have some of the worlds largest deposits, we have an internationally respected nuclear agency, we have a world class reactor and some extraordinarily well trained and internationally respected engineers operating it, it simply isn’t a kettle that spins a turbine for energy. As for ‘the cost of going nuclear’ - well I simply suggest you wait until Aaron has told us about this project and it’s cost so far, AND we don’t even have a keel yet! Make no mistake, and I will say again, I stand to make money from this project, by the time these boats are made, off the shelf Virginia (even slightly ‘denatured’ if required by the US) will be cheaper. Training isn’t a big deal, it would take probably three-five years, we could potentially start today training nuclear engineers and have fully qualified personnel BEFORE we even have a keel!!

Anonymous
>>48171557

Aaron, for whatever reason the nuclear option is not an option in Australia. It would also be political suicide for a standing government to go ahead with a nuclear solution based on this. There are plenty of experts out there who espouse the benefits of nuclear power but for some reason it is like a cancer to Australia - no one wants it. Greg Sammut said it was not even an option, so his hands are tied there. But the only option going forward is something where we get 100% ownership of the technology and with a US boat there is no way on earth that that will ever happen. AND it has to be built in Australia, we need a ship building (insert defence) industry AND we need to sustain it. We are already woefully behind the eight ball in this regard.

Anonymous
>>48171557

@G too right the only Nuclear Industry that Australia has in the millions of tons of Uranium that we export to Nuclear Powerplants around the globe. @G when we were shopping for the Oberon replacements, the US did offer up the 688i classes to us. so what's not to say the US didn't say "Hey we got Virginia Class boats here" when we announced we were replacing the Collins.

Anonymous
>>47999760

@Sisyphus2k2 Its Prawns, not shrimp, Shrimp is what the Chinese put in their combination fried rice :P