Australia will only buy second-hand Virginia nuclear-powered submarines from the US during the AUKUS stopgap phase, with some analysts criticising the move and others believing it is a positive change of plan. \u00a0<\/p>\n
The plan, as of last week, was for Australia to buy two “in-service”, that is, second-hand, submarines in 2032 and 2035, and a third brand-new submarine in 2038.<\/p>\n
As of this week the plan is for Australia to buy three used submarines which the government is now arguing has been its preferred option all along.<\/p>\n
Defence officials fronting up to estimates hearings this week have been copping questions on the surprise shift.<\/p>\n
Was the optimal pathway of last week actually not “optimal”? And if so, why was it called the “optimal pathway”?<\/p>\n
“You can absolutely have two constrained optimal pathways,” new Defence Secretary Meghan Quinn told Greens Senator David Shoebridge.<\/p>\n
The exchange led Senator Shoebridge to accuse AUKUS of “not only damaging the public purse, but destroying the English language”.<\/p>\n
Any economist will tell you constrained optimisation is taught in first year uni. It’s basically finding the best option with the cards you’ve been dealt.<\/p>\n
But the exchange highlights the trouble the government is having explaining the changes it’s made and the risk to public confidence in Australia’s biggest ever defence project.<\/p>\n
![\"David](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/7f76a65f239addcc029948cbb2ed8226.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
Senator David Shoebridge has accused AUKUS of “damaging the public purse”. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)<\/p>\n
Substituting subs<\/p>\n
Back when the “optimal pathway” was first announced in 2023, questions about the complexity of the plans were already being asked.<\/p>\n
As Richard Marles and others have pointed out over the past few days, that plan would have left Australia operating four types of submarines.<\/p>\n
Australia is spending billions stretching out the life of its aging fleet of Collins Class submarines, so the last will still be in the water deep into the 2040s.<\/p>\n
There are the used Virginia class submarines, which are being built in the US this decade and will be delivered in 2032 and 2035.<\/p>\n
![\"A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/0869dc6e22686eeba998844ba793a7d3.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n
Richard Marles says the new deal reduces the types of submarines Australia will have to operate simultaneously. (ABC News: Adam Kennedy\u00a0)<\/p>\n
The new Virginia class submarine would have arrived in 2038, and while details of exactly what it would have looked like aren’t known, it would likely have had some significant differences to its 2020s counterparts.<\/p>\n
And the first Australian-made AUKUS submarine would have hit the water in Australia by 2042.<\/p>\n
Marles has since argued Australia always held concerns about that plan and our preference from the outset was to acquire three in-service Virginia class subs to try and simplify things.<\/p>\n
The ‘plan B’ for AUKUS<\/a><\/p>\n Defence industry experts argue Australia should consider how to prevent a naval “capability gap” \u2014 or risk being left exposed.<\/p>\n It was the United States that was insisting Australia take a brand new submarine rather than taking three in-service submarines.<\/p>\n Essentially, the US was placing a greater value on its older submarines than its newer submarines and wasn’t comfortable giving us three in-service submarines, until now.<\/p>\n Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy addressed the shift on Radio National Breakfast.<\/p>\n “Submarine availability [and] maintenance has improved in the US system, which means that the US Navy feels comfortable releasing a third in-service submarine,” he said.<\/p>\n “That means it’ll be cheaper and simpler for us to run.”<\/p>\n There’s quiet acknowledgement within the government that the argument sounds counter-intuitive, and the communication has not been great.<\/p>\n It has found itself arguing that ten-year-old submarines are more valuable than newer, more advanced submarines.<\/p>\n It says the Virginias Australia buys will arrive in the prime of their life, having been in the water for a few years to iron out any early problems, and with decades of life ahead.<\/p>\n And it argues the US recognises that a submarine in the water is in many ways more valuable than a new submarine, which is why there was reluctance to offer three in-service submarines to begin with.<\/p>\n For some Australians it might look like the government is arguing a ten-year-old Toyota Corolla (with a responsible owner, of course) is actually a better option than a brand new model straight off the lot.<\/p>\n Settling the AUKUS caucus<\/p>\n When AUKUS was first announced in 2021 by the Coalition, Australia’s first nuclear-powered submarine wasn’t expected for more than a decade and a half.<\/p>\n The changes made in 2023 under the current government to acquire the Virginia class submarines means the first Australian-flagged nuclear-powered sub is now a little over five years away.<\/p>\n It’s getting more real. It’s costing much more money, up to $96 billion between now and 2036, shipyards are being built, and sailors are being trained.<\/p>\n AUKUS is also going to attract much more scrutiny.<\/p>\n
![\"Man](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/australia\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/9cf4ac283a5fe34e10c2a280428c12a4.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n