Tim Sheehy’s Post

The antipodeans Sir Ernest Rutherford "father of nuclear physics" and Sir Mark Oliphant, "Opposer of the fission bomb" were the first experimental demonstrators of nuclear fusion. Why then are the Australian Government and the Federal Opposition not working to get it developed in Australia and bring it back home? New Zealand has, so why not Australia? Interesting articles about Nuclear and I know you haven't looked at Fusion. So let's look at the nuclear or Fission option versus Fusion 1. Fission (Nuclear) Not able to be licenced. https://lnkd.in/gbm2t5uU 2. Authorities have the power to grant licenses for fusion, which is not explicitly covered by the Nuclear Act or the ARPANSA definition. https://lnkd.in/gjKFABpy The above ARPANSA link defines nuclear as fission—no mention of Fusion. 3. A fission (Nuclear)reactor without fissile fuel is a building. 4. A fusion reactor without fissile fuel is a fusion reactor building 5, Fissile (Nuclear) fuel availability and the future cost is a concern, especially for economists and users Dittmar, M. (2011). The End of Cheap Uranium. ArXiv. /abs/1106.3617 Even the UN has identified this, so why does the Fission(Nuclear) industry persist in denying its death like fossil fuels https://lnkd.in/gze5rwpr 6. Should the focus in Australia be on nuclear fission advancement or the promotion of fusion technology? 7, Fission (Nuclear) is only at present in 39 countries out of 189. 8. Is Dutton doing a Menzies and wanting a loophole to get fission (Nuclear) weapons to start with for the subs? 9. Australia still has no high-level radiation waste storage facility 10. Helion Fusion has committed to having its fusion version working in 2028 11. The FIA (Fusion Industry Association) has postulated that commercial power fusion will be available in the 2030s. 12. In its fusion conference report in 2023, the IAEA postulated that all International nuclear (Fission) Laws like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty do not consider fusion, so it seems it can be built in Australia now. 13. Fusion is also being developed "Small Modular Fusion Reactors" like Zap Energy and Avalanche Energy. 14. HB11 and the UNSW Tokamak project have positioned Australia prominently in the trillion-dollar international fusion industry. Instead of relying on fission with a limited lifetime, wouldn't it be preferable to support Australian renewables, batteries, and hydrogen energy generators and back them up with a fusion power plant? This would eliminate the traditional waste problem while still providing medical isotopes and advancements in medical technology like MRIs. Let's focus on creating a sustainable future for Australia instead of perpetuating pollution and leading to an energy crisis. https://lnkd.in/ekakyifA

The Tourville (S637) is the third Suffren-class SSN. The first sea trials, also known as “Alpha Trials”, was conducted off the Naval Group submarine shipyard of Cherbourg in Normandy, with the submarine setting sails 12 July 2024. The Tourville first sea trials follow the commissioning of the nuclear boiler room in April 2024 and the dock tests carried out since the submarine was transferred to its launching gear on 20 July 2023. The operations carried out in the integration bay, in the dry then water-filled docks, enabled the equipment and systems to be tested beforehand at quay. The Barracuda series is well underway and the pace is quickening: the remaining three submarines in the program (de Grasse, Rubis and Casabianca) are all currently under construction, at different stages of completion. Their deliveries will be staggered at a rate of one every two years until 2030. With a lifespan of more than 30 years, the Barracuda program commits submarine forces until at least 2060, making it one of the major weapons systems of this century. It should be noted that, once the Tourville is admitted to active service, the French Navy will operate more Suffren-type submarines than Rubis-type submarines.

New #USNavy long-range #shipbuilding plan details decommissioning 19 ships in FY 2025. The latest 30-year shipbuilding plan sketches out two paths to get to a larger fleet – one bounded by flat budgets and a second one that seeks to build the ships the Navy needs to reach its goal of 381 ships. Both plans would seek to buy two attack subs per year from FY 2026 through FY 2043. Both plans also show the Navy buying one Columbia-class #submarine per year from FY 2026 through FY 2035, reflecting the goal of recapitalizing the sea-based leg of the nuclear triad and the need to replace the Ohio-class #submarines one for one as they retire. | https://bit.ly/3x9SRq0 The plan also breaks down the significant investment in the submarine industrial base that Navy officials argue is required to both build the boats the U.S. needs for AUKUS. | Download the Document: https://bit.ly/3x3uOsY ⚓ #submersibles #silentservice #defensecontractors #defenseindustry #nationalsecurity

S-81 Class Submarine of the Spanish Navy 🇪🇸 - The S-81 is a Spanish class of four submarines—late-1990s design, initial production order in 2003, redesign/rebuild mid-2010s, and currently in production—being built by the state-owned Spanish company Navantia at its Cartagena shipyard for the Spanish Navy. In common with other contemporary submarines, they feature air-independent propulsion. They are oceanic submarines of medium tonnage with the capacity to carry out long duration missions in scenarios far from their base, acting with a minimum level of indiscretion. They will have an integrated platform control system that allows operation with a reduced endowment and a high degree of automation with remote control. The characteristics of this class of ships place them at a level close to those of nuclear propulsion. The lead boat in the class, the Isaac Peral (S-81), the first unit in the series, was launched by King Felipe VI and his daughter, Princess Leonor, heir to the throne, on April 22, 2021 at the Cartagena shipyards, with plans to enter service in 2023, after originally being targeted for 2011. The remaining three boats are slated to be delivered in 2024, 2026 and 2028. The S-80 class has also been offered for export.

1%, 2%, 5%. Incremental improvements in critical aspects of maintenance planning and execution have an exponential effect on project outcomes. We must invest in the digital transformation of our repair and logistics activities. We must provide those efficiencies that get BOISE and her crew back on the gun line forthwith.

The US Navy awarded a contract to start #repair work on a #nuclear attack #submarine that returned from its last #deployment nine years ago, according to a Friday Pentagon contract announcement. Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.’s #NewportNews #Shipbuilding won the $1.17 billion contract modification to start the long-overdue #overhaul of Los Angeles-class attack boat USS Boise (SSN-764) at the company’s Virginia yard on the James River. “This contract modification includes options which, if exercised, would bring the cumulative value of this contract modification to $1,238,312,189,” reads the announcement. “Work will be performed in Newport News, Virginia, and is expected to be completed by September 2029.” The yard previously won a contract to gauge the scope of work needed for the overhaul. “The contract covers work that will include #maintenance and restoration of the ship’s hull structure, tanks, #propulsion systems, electric plant, auxiliary systems, #armament and furnishings, as well as numerous ship alterations,” HII said in a statement to #USNI News. #Boise has been the poster child for the #Navy ’s submarine maintenance backlog in its own public #shipyards. The boat was initially set to enter dry dock for the overhaul in Fiscal Year 2016, but there was no room at Norfolk Naval Shipyard. Attack boats are the lowest maintenance priority in the four public yards after nuclear-powered #ballisticmissile #submarines and #aircraftcarriers. If those repairs run long, the attack #subs are bumped from the schedule. Bosie was moored at Naval Station Norfolk and eventually lost its dive certification in 2017. The #USNavy instead looked to private new construction yards to chew down the backlog by having those yards take on the repair work the public yards couldn’t get to. The submarine moved to a dry dock at Newport News in May 2020 as part of a contract to determine the scope of work needed to repair the submarine. #mai #marineacoustics Commander, Submarine Forces | Commander, Submarine Force Atlantic Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) #underseawarfare https://lnkd.in/e79CcApQ

At the christening ceremony of the #USNavy USS Idaho, a Virginia-class #submarine, General Dynamics Electric Boat celebrated the contributions of its skilled workforce and supplier community. Kevin Graney, the President of Electric Boat, emphasized the company's purpose of delivering the advantage that protects sailors, families, and freedom. The relationship between the ship's sponsor, Teresa Stackley, and the crew was highlighted as a special bond that lasts a lifetime. The submarine, which began construction in 2017, will be the 26th Virginia-class fast attack submarine and the fifth U.S. Navy ship to be christened with the name Idaho. The last ship named Idaho was battleship BB 42, commissioned in 1919. The Virginia-class, also known as the VA-class or 774-class, is a class of nuclear-powered fast attack submarines in service with the U.S. Navy. The submarines are designed for a broad spectrum of open-ocean and littoral missions conceived as a less expensive alternative to the Seawolf-class attack submarines, designed during the Cold War era, and are replacing older 688 Los Angeles-class submarines. The Idaho may have fewer sister boats than planned in the future, as the Virginia-class attack submarines face budget cuts in the Fiscal Year 2025, threatening to reduce their procurement rate. With 23 of a planned 66 submarines already in service, these cuts could significantly impact the U.S. Navy's undersea dominance. The reduction to one submarine from the planned two per year has alarmed House Armed Services Committee members, highlighting risks to the defense supply chain and geopolitical standing. The shift suggests a strategic focus on maintaining technological superiority and fleet effectiveness in the immediate future, even as concerns about the fleet's size and capability in a potential conflict persist.

OPINION: "The strategic potential of Submarine Rotational Force-West, the AUKUS initiative that commits the United States and United Kingdom to forward-deploy a small flotilla of nuclear-powered attack submarines to HMAS Stirling, near Fremantle, isn’t adequately appreciated. "Fortunately, history has set an instructive if insufficiently known precedent. During World War II, from a precarious start, Fremantle was a key base in one of the most effective sea-denial campaigns ever, hosting 127 American submarines, over 30 British boats, and a handful of Dutch vessels. The parallels are revealing from various angles. "As with all things AUKUS, Submarine Rotational Force-West (SRF-West) has met criticism, including on the grounds that the offer to host foreign submarines at HMAS Stirling from the late 2020s supposedly undermines Australia’s sovereignty, even though the arrangement is on a rotational basis and modest in scale—starting with up to four American and one British nuclear-powered attack submarines (or SSNs). "SRF-West is nevertheless the main effort under AUKUS to bridge the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN) looming submarine capability gap, as its six ageing Collins-class boats are progressively retired from the 2030s and before nuclear-powered replacements can be commissioned in numbers. As such, it is one of AUKUS’s potentially most impactful and within-reach initiatives, utilising Australia’s unique combination of positional advantage and strategic depth to maximise a key allied capability, wherein the US Navy (USN) retains a qualitative edge over China." Full article link in comments.

Sidelined at Sea: U.S. Navy's Premier Submarines Stuck in Dry-Dock Limbo In a troubling revelation, it has been disclosed that out of the forty-nine submarines currently in commission within the U.S. Navy, a staggering sixteen nuclear attack subs are incapacitated, either languishing in dry-docks or tethered to piers. This constitutes nearly a third of the Navy's formidable submarine fleet, its primary offensive arm. What's more concerning is that these submarines lack the essential dive certifications necessary for deployment. The root cause? A daunting three-year maintenance backlog that has plagued the U.S. Navy. The Current State of Affairs: These incapacitated submarines, unable to get underway, represent a critical shortfall in the readiness of the American submarine force. Often hailed as the "point of the spear" in terms of American military might, these vessels are integral to numerous military strategies and operations. However, their current state of unreadiness poses a significant challenge to meeting the demands of the prevailing threat landscape. Unveiling Decades of Neglect: The dire situation facing the U.S. submarine force did not materialize overnight. Rather, it is the culmination of decades of neglect, stemming from a series of misguided assumptions and poor decisions. The repercussions of this neglect are now starkly evident, as the Navy grapples with the consequences of its deferred maintenance and inadequate resource allocation. The Very Slow Path to Recovery: Regaining the lost ground in submarine readiness will be no easy feat. It will require not just months, but years of concerted effort and substantial investment. The road to recovery entails not only the construction of new vessels but also a significant expansion of submarine repair capacity. Only through such comprehensive measures can the U.S. Navy hope to restore its submarine force to its former capability and meet the challenges of the present and future. The revelation of a substantial portion of the U.S. Navy's submarine force being sidelined due to maintenance backlogs underscores the urgent need for action. As the cornerstone of American naval power projection, the readiness of the submarine force is paramount. Addressing the underlying issues will demand a sustained commitment from military leadership, policymakers, and stakeholders alike. Failure to do so risks compromising national security and strategic interests on a global scale. The time for decisive action is way past due.

... As the AUKUS security partnership between Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States continues to make headlines with its nuclear-powered submarines, another non-nuclear weapon state’s pursuit of the same capability went unnoticed. On October 4th, the Brazilian state-owned defense company Itaguaí Construções Navais and the Brazilian Navy cut the first steel plates of a test section of the Álvaro Alberto submarine, a small but significant milestone in Brazil’s quest for a nuclear-powered, conventionally-armed, attack submarine. The cut is a symbolic first step for a program decades in the making. One year after the landmark re-election of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and on the back of a second Brazilian presidency of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) this year, the Brazilian case warrants revisiting. Still lacking a convincing strategic rationale, its pursuit of naval nuclear propulsion fulfills a long-held ambition for great power status, which has challenged nonproliferation norms. (...)