MALCOLM Turnbull’s myopic investment in yesterday’s technology, today, for tomorrow, even managed to skip nuclear in his race for the past.
In an interview with Defence News the US Navy’s top officer Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Michael Gilday says he has ordered his staff to develop a comprehensive strategy to field unmanned systems in the air, on the water and under the sea over the coming years.
“We’ve got a family of unmanned systems we’re working on,” Admiral Gilday said. “We’ve got extra-large, large and medium [unmanned underwater vehicles]; on the surface we have small, medium and large [unmanned surface vessels]; and in the air we have a number of programs.”
UNMANNED
The other big piece of the US strategy is something Gilday has previously referred to as akin to a new “Manhattan Project”, a rapid, well-funded project to field a network that can control all the various unmanned and networked systems, sensors and weapons.
That is the direction global naval strategy is heading in the next few years. Whether unmanned is a major or minor part of any strategy is not the point. The point is that better technologies are close and will be delivered in our lifetimes. Unmanned is one part of the strategy. It’s not here yet, but it’s not far off.
Meanwhile, here in Australia we’ve invested in diesel powered submarines which, when they are delivered late as they will be, will probably find themselves up against new technologies such as un-manned submarines, which presumably lie on the bottom or cruise around waiting ‘til a geek in a war room puts down his coffee, wakes them up and blows any boat to bits.
OBSOLETE
The US has unmanned ships and planes now and according to Admiral Gilday will soon have extra-large, large and medium unmanned submarines. By the time they are up and running, our $80-$200b sub program might be close to launching our first manned diesel submarine.
By the time we get Malcolm Turnbull’s old technology submarines working – sometime after 2030 – they will inevitably, just like his NBN, be obsolete. With technology moving so quickly we know that by the time we get the last Aussie sub there will be much better naval solutions.
The worst choice must be the one we have made, which seems much closer to Das Boot than Star Wars.
Cancel the program, pay out the $404m penalty clause, and bank on better technology being here soon.PC
Electric boats are quieter than nuclear. The Collins class can’t be found in military exercises. Being undetectable is the single most valuable attribute of a sub.
It was always a terrible idea. Given to Christopher Pyne in thanks for his vote!!
We committed to build diesel subs adapted from French nuclear subs at a hugely over inflated cost so we can feel good about not using the very stuff we sell the French to put in their reactors that makes the fuel they put into their subs. ($6B – $9B+ ea for the Short-Fin Barracuda vs $2B (2016) to just buy a nuclear powered Barracuda off the shelf, so to speak.)
Hypocrisy has a huge cost.
Agree 100%. CANCEL.
The Green movement will not hear of nuclear “anything” . They even opposed the nuclear medical facility south of Sydney. They managed to make nuclear energy illegal in Australia leading to the carbonization of our atmosphere. Malcolm Turnbull was/is a Greenie. It is is just luck that he did not opt for wind-powered submarines.
My guess will be that underwater drones will be more useful than any French Submarine in the very near future. Australia has enough debt being generated NOW, without Turnbull white elephants eating up the taxpayers dollars so needlessly. Come on Mr Morrison, listen to the people…most Australians consider these subs to be a total waste of time & money.
I have always questioned the motives and loyalties of those who oppose us having nuclear submarines. These subs have visited us for years. Why can’t we have them?
Why not park four or five US nuclear subs round Australia til we can get the latest tech? We could build a nuclear support capacity. Then buy nuclear subs from the States.