We start with some words about the Avalon air show last week. The mood among Australian companies was a bit subdued because Defence expenditure is drying up – but top marks to the RAAF for engaging with the media and doing their best to be open and frank.
On that note, an apology to AVM Nick Hogan for how some sections of the press (not us) misinterpreted his comments about F-35s. There is a lot of official support for Boeing Australia’s MQ-28A Ghost Bat uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft and hopefully it will be in series production next year.
Then there was a very important AUKUS seminar on March 31 organised by Malcolm Turnbull – and the overwhelming consensus of participants is that Australia will not receive nuclear powered submarines from the US or the UK. To make the situation worse, there is no plan B. We say: invest in underwater drones – an area where Australia has a lot of capability.
Finally on US threats to take over Greenland by force. The last time we checked, Denmark – which is responsible for Greenland – is part of NATO and therefore the island is already well protected by the alliance, of which the US is an important part (for the moment). The only person currently threatening Greenland is President Donald Trump.
To listen to the podcast, click here.
For Editorial Inquiries Contact:
Editor Kym Bergmann at kym.bergmann@venturamedia.net
For Advertising Inquiries Contact:
Group Sales Director Simon Hadfield at simon.hadfield@venturamedia.net
Thanks for the podcast, Kym. It looked like you were having fun at the NPC yesterday!
Regarding AUKUS plan B – I noticed that the Danes have just announced their intention to construct a new class of subsea combat vessels, focused on mine and UUV deployment. These vessels will also have an environmental emergency response capability, designed to assist in the containment of oil spills.
I can’t imagine that this vessel class will be cutting-edge. It is more likely an adaptation of an existing commercial vessel with upgrades, including towable sonars and some hefty gantry capacity to allow for the operation of a highly capable UUV(s).
Surely Australia has the capacity to get moving on a fleet of this type of vessel and seems the type of project that would suit a group like CIVMEC given their strengths in oil and gas and defence construction.
This, and as you suggest, an increase in the Triton order from 4 to 7, doubling down on the Ghost Shark UUV, and investment in pods of smart sea mines would cover much of the capability gap that will inevitably be emerging late this decade – at least in the littorals and northern archipelagos.
Imagine what the $360 billion savings could be used for.
Thanks Mike. There are plenty of good ideas around but I see no evidence that any politicians – let alone Defence itself – have the slightest interest in changing direction or searching for alternatives. They have collectively convinced themselves that everything is going wonderfully well. The situation is depressing.
It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic.
Trump has just torn up the US/Australia FTA and flushed it yet the fools in Canberra still insist AUKUS is a goer.
What will it actually take before it finally sinks in that the US has gone from being an unreliable pseudo ally to a hostile state?
Yes – our politicians have their fingers in their ears singing lalala.
Thanks Kym
An excellent, if dispiriting, summary of the AUKUS problems and AUKUS sub’s dire distortion of our whole defence budget.
I think you are spot on that our next submarines should be unmanned (remote controlled and using considerable AI).
Chinese undersea sensors, in the South China Sea are sensitive already to pick up even small conventional manned subs. Running their diesels gives them away.
By 2030, Chinese sensors will be strung between Indonesia’s straits (the Collins patrol beat) and sensitive enough to pick up any manned subs.
On unmanned subs our big hope is the Anduril GHOST SHARK. I’m concerned that as it heavily relies on US high tech that tech might be removed from non-US use under the US presidential authorised Export Control Reform Act of 2018. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_Control_Reform_Act_of_2018
Regards Pete
I would hope that some sign to rebuke Trumpets actions is forthcoming from our jelly spined leader . Although with crucial elections in early April maybe it will be up to Peter Dutton as new Prime Minister, to create ripples in the US. Cancellation of our orders for Nuclear Subs and further supplies of F35s , along with any other armaments would be a good start
Not sure ‘Negativity or Doom’ has been directed at the development – performance of Ghost Bat itself, more the deceptive pretense it’s been funded under as a Force Multiplying Collaborative Combat Aircraft. Its demotion from all rounder to ISR a year ago was another failure of 21st century Australia to develop platforms capable of actually intercepting threats detected by its growing pool of ISR resources .
Excerpt from fro Australian Aviation article July 24, 2024
In a surprise change of plans, the MQ-28A Ghost Bat drone will not carry weapons, instead being shifted to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) roles.
A government source this week confirmed to The Australian that plans to make the Ghost Bat a “killer drone” had been shelved after manufacturer Boeing lost out on a US program to make autonomous combat jets.
According to the source cited in The Australian, pivoting the Ghost Bat to ISR will provide fewer hurdles for Defence, as it would not require “rules of engagement” for its weapons and will offer important military capabilities.
https://australianaviation.com.au/2024/07/no-weapons-for-the-ghost-bat-as-drone-program-shifts-to-recon/
Boeing announced last week that Ghost Bat weapons testing would begin in the next couple of months so it’s not, yet, been totally demoted to being solely an ISR platform
There has been some misreporting on this topic. It has a large internal bay that you can use to carry anything – sensors, missiles, bombs. The confusion might have arisen because in the current phase the RAAF only wants to trial sensors – but in future phases weapons may well be carried. The forthcoming weapon trial is a Boeing-led activity, not RAAF.
https://www.flightglobal.com/defence/boeing-cues-up-mq-28a-air-to-air-missile-test/162342.article#:~:text=Boeing%20Defence%20Australia%20is%20planning,at%20the%20Avalon%20air%20show.
Is Boeing the only company able to arm Ghost Bats? Surely hordes of other companies can do it? Is Boeing the only supplier worldwide?
I’m not sure I understand the question. Boeing is the prime contractor and is responsible for integration issues.
The spinelessness of our so-called leaders is a complete disgrace. They are not only terrified of saying anything that might possibly upset Americans but they are too weak to offer any support to Canada (a fellow Five Eyes country) or Denmark. I have never before seen such gutlessness from both sides of politics.
Boeing lost out for the first increment of CCAs but a lot has happened since then. For starters they have won selection for the crewed component of the NGAD program. I am thinking the MQ-28 could be a strong contender for the uncrewed component of that program. Boeing is going to test firing Air-to-Air missiles from the Ghost Bat so read into that what ever you like.
I imagine Boeing is now a strong contender for the USN F/A-xx program as well. Add to that Japan giving Boeing a contract to test aerial drones for their own Loyal Wingman program.
Hi Alan
I think the fools in Canberra – both sides at Parliament House – continue positive about future AUKUS Virginias happy in the knowledge they’ll be long gone by the US decision year of 2031. Inflated parliamentary pensions + private industry jobs await them
Even in 2031 Albo, Dutton and their successors, will falsely claim total surprise that too few SSNs for the USN will drive (heaven forbid) future President Vance to quash any thought of Virginias for Australia.
While the current government and opposition seem very supportive of SSNs (at least in public) programs such as Ghost Shark are quietly being accelerated. For the cost of single SSN you could build you a massive fleet of AUVs. Personally I am doubting the viability of crewed submarines going into the 2030s let alone the 2040s, 2050s and 2060s.
Couldn’t agree more. USN wargaming for the 2040s is all about the use of drones in places like the South China Sea. By that time we will have to focus on protecting Australian waters, not conducting offensive operations thousands of kilomentres away.
The next generation of crewed submarines will probably be the last until we transition to uncrewed systems anyway. This whole exercise of buying SSNs could simply be a gigantic waste of money anyway.
My advice would be scap the AUKUS subs, scrap the Collins LOTE, buy a smallish number of Japanese or Korean subs and invest the rest on uncrewed systems.
Same with crewed aircraft. The MQ-28 will probably end up spawning a whole generation of UVAVs for the RAAF. It is a case of “Crawl, Walk, Run”.
Hi Doug, couldn’t agree more. I could easily go on about so much more, that we could and should be doing, but in this day and age of the small sound byte, detailed, informed idea’s loose out. We are definitely in a very different world, than 6 weeks ago. I have young adult children, that will bear the cost of our inaction in the (near) future. The utter lack of leadership, from BOTH sides of politics, the refusal of both sides to see the current world as it is now appalls me. As Kym said, they are sticking their fingers in their ears, hoping they have moved on before the sh#t hits the fan. What could you spend $368B on in the next 5-10 years, that would ACTUALLY make a meaningful difference?
Interesting Pod Cast Kim, I’m not convinced we will ever see AUKUS boats and am bloody sure we will never see Virginia’s in the RAN . I also believe the Collins Class LOTE is a WOFTAM, The idea of an Uncrewed Drone Submarines and Combat Aircraft ADF is something I think that should be pursued intelligently and urgently. Ghost Shark and Ghost Bat are not the only systems available ( an unhealthy dependence on U.S. Tech isn’t a good thing) . Also I think the Triton, a nice piece of kit, is overly complex and way over priced (something I believe you pointed out in one of your posts). A pairing of Global Hawk ( which I believe Triton is based on) and Sea Guardian Would do the Same job ( please correct me if I’m wrong, UAVs aren’t my strong point) .
I’ve long been a fan of Sea Guardian but I’ll have to think about whether it would be better pairing it with Global Hawk rather than Triton. I don’t think Global Hawk is that much less expensive because the cost isn’t in the air vehicle it’s the massive IT infrastructure you need on the ground to process all the data. I think that’s similar for both systems.