Australia’s plans to build nuclear submarines with US-provided technology could cost a staggering $ 122 billion, according to an analysis by a leading think tank.
In a new report, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) found that the most economical approach to implementing the Australia-UK-US (AUKUS) submarine partnership signed in September would cost around $ 83-92 billion . This “economical build” option assumes that the submarines will be built in Adelaide and built in parallel with a quick delivery time.
If the subs were built sequentially using a “continuous build” approach, with a delivery every three to four years, the construction would take longer and the total delivered cost would be higher – between $ 109-122 billion, inclusive the effects of inflation.
“This new company will be a daunting undertaking, and possibly the largest and most complex, that Australia has embarked on. The challenges, costs and risks will be enormous. It will likely take at least two decades and tens of billions of dollars in sunken costs for Australia to have decent nuclear-powered military capacity, ”the report said.
The cost drivers include both the US and UK switching to larger submarine designs; Choice of building strategy; and the broader support system and infrastructure required to operate nuclear submarines. The authors added that once these cost drivers are fully understood, it is entirely possible that estimates could soar significantly and put a heavy burden on taxpayers.
In September the Australian government announced that it would acquire a nuclear submarine (SSN) with support from the UK and the US. this pre-existing arrangement was already facing the possibility of cancellation due to concerns about schedule and performance. Acquisition costs would have been in the constant US $ 40 billion range, although cost growth was a growing problem.
As part of AUKUS, the Australian government has announced that it will acquire at least eight nuclear submarines with a size range from 7,000 to 10,000 tons.
According to ASPI, Australia’s decision to invest in the deadly, high-powered submarines was largely influenced by the shift in the military balance in the Indo-Pacific region, where China “uses military might and intimidation to achieve its goals”.
“The Australian government believes that the risks and uncertainties associated with China’s continued aggression and coercion towards its neighbors warrant taking the substantial political and economic risks associated with this decision,” the report said.
Australia sees nuclear powered submarines as a significant deterrent as they are vastly superior to conventional submarines, particularly due to their speed, endurance and ability to generate time on the station.
As an example, the report found that it takes a diesel submarine 20 days to reach the South China Sea from a base at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia, and then another 20 days to return – which remains on patrol for only 11 days . During this time, the sub would have to break through the surface several times to recharge its batteries, exposing it to detection by ships, submarines, planes and satellites due to its increased radar, noise and heat signatures.
In comparison, a faster nuclear submarine would take about seven days to reach the area of operations and another seven days to return, allowing 75 days of patrol with its greater endurance. That would mean 600 percent more time on the station for a single mission, and the submarine would never have to break through the surface.
Comments are closed.