Tomahawk missiles coming before Australia gets AUKUS nuclear submarines

Australia will field long-range Tomahawk strike missiles on submarines years before it takes possession of its first US Virginia-class nuclear-­powered boats.

The Collins-class HMAS Sheean arrives in Hobart. Picture: Australian Defence Force via Getty Images

Australia will field long-range Tomahawk strike missiles on submarines years before it takes possession of its first US Virginia-class nuclear-­powered boats in the early 2030s, well informed sources say.

As part of the Defence Strategic Review, which will be released in April, the government is likely to announce it will integrate Tomahawk missiles into the nation’s existing six Collins-class submarines.

At the same time, it is believed that former defence minister Stephen Smith and former chief of the Defence Force, Angus Houston, in writing the DSR have made some recommendations that the government has found too expensive to include in its immediate plans.

The government has budgeted $9bn for the nuclear submarine program over the next four years of budget forward estimates. Of this, some $6bn will be money saved from the cancelled French Attack submarine. The government has said it will find the extra $3bn from savings elsewhere in the defence portfolio.

The Australian understands no further money will be spent on acquiring tanks and the number of Infantry Fighting Vehicles on order will be drastically cut.

It is believed a number of smaller defence programs regarded as low priority can yield savings quickly if they are cancelled.

The decision to equip the Collins-class subs with Tomahawk missiles will significantly increase their strike power.

The nuclear-powered Virginia subs Australia will acquire have vertical launch cells that routinely fire Tomahawks.

The Collins subs do not have vertical launch systems.

However, British Astute submarines already fire Tomahawk missiles from their torpedo tubes.

American submarines do not routinely fire Tomahawks from their torpedo tubes. The adapted US combat system which the Collins subs use therefore are not presently equipped to fire Tomahawks.

They would need work to integrate the Tomahawk into the Collins combat system.

This is likely to occur during the life of type extension process that all six Collins are due to undergo, beginning with the first one in 2026.

Each LOTE will take at least a year and involves a complete renewal of all the sub’s systems.

The 220 Tomahawk missiles, at a cost of $1.3bn, which the US State Department has approved for sale to Australia, are intended mainly for the three Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyers.

It is likely that Australia would seek to buy more Tomahawks for the Collins subs and later for the Virginias.

The exact range of the Tomahawk missile is unknown but it’s likely to be more than 2000km.

It can also hit targets with a great deal of accuracy.

Tomahawks fired by submarines can be directed at land targets or at shipping.

The addition of the anti-shipping Tomahawk variant to the Collins weapons inventory would allow it to strike enemy shipping at a great distance. To do this effectively it would need to work with US targeting information.

The Collins can carry far fewer torpedoes and missiles than the Virginia but an increasing trend in all weaponry is to be able to strike accurately from longer and longer distances.

Defence Minister Richard Marles has talked of Australia ­ emphasising “impactful projection” and exercising deterrence at distance from Australia.

The Collins sub already has the heavy Mark 48 American torpedo. It is designed to hit even nuclear submarines far below the surface, as well as surface combatants. If it misses on its first try, it is capable of making repeated efforts to hit a designated target.

Adding either the anti-ship or land target Tomahawk to the Collins would make it a much more lethal submarine, which would pose more difficult questions to any potential adversary.

The government is confident that through implementing most of the recommendations of the DSR, it can achieve significantly increased strike power for the Australian Defence Force.

This can happen even while the defence funding envelope doesn’t change over the next four years.

However, DSR recommen­dations will require increased ­defence spending over time.

This is on top of the extra money that the nuclear submarines program will absorb.

Anthony Albanese and Mr Marles have both remarked that they expect the nuclear sub­marines program costs to stay within 10 per cent of the total defence budget.

The British are believed to spend something closer to 20 per cent of their defence budget on nuclear submarines.

However, as well as their ­Astute Attack-class nuclear-­powered subs, the British operate a fleet of four ballistic missile submarines, which are much larger than Attack-class submarines.

These carry nuclear weapons and ensure Britain’s ability to execute a second nuclear strike if it should suffer nuclear attack.

Australia will not have any submarines like this so the cost of its nuclear submarine fleet will be much less than that of the British.

The government is expected to release its response to the DSR in early April.