New budgetary analysis for the US Congress has outlined the difficulties America’s shipyards face to increase nuclear-powered submarine production so that Virginia-class boats can eventually be sold to Australia under the $368 billion AUKUS program.
The blunt assessment of US industrial challenges has been published as senior military figures express confidence that the ambitious AUKUS endeavour will succeed and predict future Australian submarines are “highly likely” to carry hypersonic missiles.
Under the AUKUS plan Australia is expecting to receive at least three second-hand Virgina-class boats from the US beginning in the early 2030s, before eventually building a new class of boat with the United Kingdom known as SSN-AUKUS.
Before Australia receives its first Virginia-class boat in 2032, the US government must increase its current annual SSN production rate from roughly 1.2 boats to 2.3, so that it can maintain its overall submarine force numbers while transferring others.
However, in its latest analysis, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) details how the US Navy’s “priority” program to build new larger Columbia-class ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) is behind schedule and could further delay Virginia-class (SSN) production.
“It would be very difficult and expensive for the U.S submarine industry to increase production of attack submarines while also building 1 Columbia class ship per year,” the CBO document published in January states.
“Columbia class SSBNs are two and one-half times the size of Virginia class SSNs, and the amount of work required to produce ships scales roughly with ship size.”
“Moreover, SSBNs are the Navy’s highest acquisition priority. As a result, the sale of SSNs to Australia could reduce the number of attack submarines available to the Navy.”
The CBO report titled “An Analysis of the Navy’s 2025 Shipbuilding Plan” also discusses the potential strategic advantages and disadvantages to the US for giving up some of its submarine capability to its alliance partner Australia under AUKUS.
“That loss might even be more than offset because the Australian submarines would be based in the Western Pacific region and therefore could respond more quickly to any conflict with China over Taiwan or other issues in the South China Sea.”
“However, Australia would control its own submarines, and their participation in any particular conflict would not be guaranteed,” the report warns, citing comments made by Defence Minister Richard Marles in 2023.
AUKUS unravelling: Greens
Greens Senator and outspoken AUKUS critic David Shoebridge described the report as “damning”, claiming it is further proof that Australia’s nuclear-submarine endeavour is unravelling.
“This congressional budget office report states a hard truth, that any submarines the US sells Australia under AUKUS must come from a seriously limited supply needed by the US Navy.
“Despite the billions invested, including from Australia, the US shipbuilding industry is nowhere near producing enough nuclear submarines for their needs with no credible way to fix that.
“In fact, the US submarine shipbuilding troubles will only grow in the next decade as it has to produce a whole new class of extra large Columbia class nuclear missile submarines as its first priority.”
Hypersonic missiles ‘highly likely’
Ahead of the publication of the CBO analysis in Washington, the head of the Australian Submarine Agency (ASA), Vice Admiral Jonathan Mead, said he was confident the AUKUS nuclear submarine endeavour was progressing well.
“There is a lot of work that happens behind the scenes, some of it is sensitive work but we are making strong and tangible progress in delivering this capability,” Vice Admiral Mead said.
Speaking to ABC Radio National’s “Global Roaming” podcast late last year, the ASA Director said it was “highly likely” that the new SSN-AUKUS submarines being designed with the UK would have the capability to launch hypersonic missiles.
“I think it gives you greater capability, many countries are embarking upon hypersonic missiles, there’s a lot of work being done around the world on hypersonic technology.
“Hypersonic missiles are really just a variation of some current class of missiles except that they have far greater speed and manoeuvrability and harder to intercept.”
Late last year the ABC revealed former Defence Secretary Dennis Richardson had been asked by Mr Marles to examine the operations of the ASA amid concerns raised from within and outside the organisation.
