Alan B- Interesting idea's. I still think that there really isn't a good substitute for petrol- maybe biodiesel can be grown and used in Australia for certain functions (in the form of rapeseed or similar)- but it'll probably be more expensive to produce.

Australia still has hydrocarbons- but I think we license the rights.

As previously stated we don't have an energy problem we have an energy storage problem- hydrocarbons are a very good storage medium- so is nuclear in a sense- smallest package for biggest energy- but it's not mobile except for navy.

The efficiency and scale of the business operation is often critical.

There is also the economic battle.

The reserves of lithium are in Bolivia, China, US- it generally is best to mine the largest ores first as they are most efficiently mined and processed. Lithium batteries have a much lower energy density and greater complexity and hence the vehicles will have a shorter range than hydrocarbon based vehicles- this will be critical in combat.

Other battery chemistries are being considered- but not established.

The oil reserves data below is a bit old- Canada has large oil reserves but it's in the form of oil sands- most of the reserves are based in the middle east.

http://u4d2z7k9.rocketcdn.me/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Lithium-map.jpg

http://earth.org/data_visualization/are-lithium-ion-batteries-compatible-with-a-sustainable-future/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium#Terrestrial

http://i.pinimg.com/originals/63/0e/30/630e30e5fdc65c531d42038cb22d951b.jpg

I like the bushmaster- not sure of it's capabilities- light armoured amphibious troop carrier with light weapons capabilities. Electrifying it would reduce it's range.

"graphene reinforced titanium" Interesting

In many cases it might be better to use Unimog's or similar rather than the Bushmaster. The classic Jeep was developed in huge numbers as a cheap flexible mobile reliable platform with interchangeable parts- it wasn't pretty- but it was a good design. The Hummer was to be it's replacement- with less success. But it can handle larger weapons than the Jeep with some protection.

If I were tasked with reequipping our defense force with weapons that would serve for specific self defense.

Then I would develop a local version of the German weasel, but with the steel armor replaced with graphene reenforced titanium. I'd keep the 20mm automatic cannon with it interchangeable anti-personal or armor piecing munitions plus the mounted, six tank destroying missiles.

Very rapid response infantry would have parachutable cross country dune buggies, and 200 mm mortars and remote controlled drones to guide their fire and drop smart bombs/fire missiles etc. And able to fly out/evac on a deployable chute and prop drive at the rear.

And our navy would be Sub hunting, nuclear armed, nuclear powered subs with props replaced with water jet propulsion and a top speed in excess of fifty knots and able to out pace out perform enemy subs and their torpedoes. With our torpedoes replaced with 100 plus knots, sub sinking, underwater capable rockets.

Nuclear power would allow us to make all the alternative fuels/hydrocarbons we'd ever need for all time, from inexhaustible seawater! And by extracting carbon (CO2) from seawater Then splitting the water molecule to extract the hydrogen. And then using chemistry, unite the carbon and hydrogen to make all manner of useful hydrocarbons/liquid fuels. As millions of litres monthly.

Its dated but still useful technology. Only nuclear power, i.e., MSR thorium makes it economical, volumous and for less than any imported fossil fuel!

Alan B- Your plan seems to have significant merit- Kudos. If you add to it Individuals national service we'll have the manpower to implement it. We will need to create a system to manage anti-national elements within our structures. Tell me where to assemble!

A bit of sanity. The US is the only country with the capacity to build the weapons & ships we need in a suitable time frame, if we want to be ready to defend ourselves any time soon.

If we reckon we have until about 2050 before we need any real arms, & want to do it ourselves, we have to start building a nuclear industry, buy at least one of every thing we want to start studying the designs, & start developing the industries to build the stuff.

Try doing it from scratch & we would end up with some lovely gear, but with a couple of simple basic mistakes that would make them death traps. It takes a lot of making mistakes, & fixing them to develop good weapons. We have no experience.

Personally I doubt we have a decade to get fully armed. If it is going to take much longer than that we would be better off spending the money on partying before we die.

Hasbeen- Given your engineering background your view is important. I feel that Oz may have the capability to build the superstructure of submarines- the time frame could be an issue.

This next anecdote is probably a good reason why I shouldn't have any input into the decision making process but here it is- I was watching War Factories on YouTube and they were talking about Kaiser's WWII Liberty Ships and how he built 1000 ships based on mass manufacturing principles in three months without having ship building facilities. In "modern" times the industrial relations problems would probably kill the project- Australian Unions could be a major factor in undermining Australian Defence. I'd be interested in some sort of shared ownership model for our workers in our defence upgrade. Kaiser took a large water front property and used the large work force to build the piers, docks, and scaffolding- using a hundred site cranes on the hundred docks.

Bolt on Weapons, systems, reactor, engines need specialists

Probably ship based reactors are very different to land based ones- hopefully some synchronicities exist- for modularity- maybe contractors could mass produce two hundred reactor/ engine systems.

There is also the military security aspect of this sort of project- probably the US is the only one that can provide it.

I share your concern that these bold and bright new technological marvels will be coffins two hundred metres underwater- for hundreds of our boys.

But you have to admire Alan B's impetus to at least do something.

Even if he needs to drop the big ticket Subs and Power Stations off his list- in favour of the more achievable projects- and let the American's do it.

What's life without risk.