Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

National Security & Defense

DetroitLegalBeagle

(2,349 posts)

3. You'll probably know better then me, but I was always under the impression that this was a risk from the beginning

Reply to S/V Loner (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 7, 2025, 08:30 AM

Mar 7

For the Australians, this deal is a significant part of their defense budget and was dependent on future increases that may not happen. Plus, they have no native nuclear industry and will be entirely dependent on the US or UK for both training and technical support as well as fuel and maintenance of the reactors.

For US, our capacity to build additional subs has been a known problem. Newport News is currently busy with the Ford's and Groton is busy with getting more Virginia classes out to replace our Los Angeles class subs and also trying to get the Columbia class production up and running.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Surface tension: could the promised Aukus nuclear submarines simply never be handed over to Australia? [View all] Eugene Mar 7 OP

And who will control those US subs? China, Russia? Irish_Dem Mar 7 #1

I'm not surprised this is happening... S/V Loner Mar 7 #2

You'll probably know better then me, but I was always under the impression that this was a risk from the beginning DetroitLegalBeagle Mar 7 #3

To answer the first part... S/V Loner Mar 7 #4