As time entered April 1913, Arthur also entered a relatively relaxed and pleasant leisure time.
With the arrival of batch after batch of aid from the United Kingdom, Australasia once again entered a rapid development stage.
With the talent support from the United Kingdom, Australasia quickly mastered the new British and French technology and techniques they had acquired.
One of the technologies that Arthur valued more was the submarine technology from France.
Under the efforts of a group of British experts and Australasian experts, the Royal Shipyard quickly cracked the French submarine technology and even planned to build one or two for experiments.
In its early days, France's submarine technology led other European countries. However, due to many detours taken, the current leading advantage has narrowed a lot.
One of the more important factors was the French indecision when choosing the power source for their submarines.
In terms of submarines, France was one of the first countries to use a combination of diesel and electric engines. However, they have been indecisive, and they have continued to use steam and electric engines in their submarine designs.
Although it seems to be an exploration of diversified submarine power systems, it actually wasted the advantage France maintained in the field of submarines, which was later surpassed by the United Kingdom and the rising Germany.
In comparison, British submarines and German U-boats established the torpedo launcher as the primary weapon loadout early on, canceling the Jeveczki Rack that would break the hull shape, and having a more reasonable hull development. With a more focused choice of power systems, British and German submarines maintained a long-term lead in terms of underwater speed over French submarines.
For French submarines in the period before and after World War I, the most iconic example might be the cruiser submarine Narval-class, which has a 4330-ton displacement and carries a twin 203mm gun turret. Although seemingly powerful, it still belongs to the "wrong technology tree" type.
On the one hand, the turret is slow to rotate in battle, has sealing issues, and disrupts the submarine's hull shape. On the other hand, the huge vibrations and recoil caused by the cannon cause the hull to struggle, making it far less practical than medium and small caliber deck guns - a classic example of being flashy but impractical.
However, for Australasia at present, there are still many areas to learn from French submarine technology.
Australasia currently holds the German submarine U-3 technology and is the last of seven series of submarines.
It should be noted that when Germany built submarines, it adopted a group construction method.
This also makes the performance gap of the seven series of U-3 submarines, with each series differing greatly from the others.
Germany began to equip submarines with diesel engines beginning with the seventh series of U-3 submarines.
Having undergone the evolution of seven series and 22 submarines, the current U-22 submarine has advanced performance.
Because it is equipped with two eight-cylinder two-stroke diesel engines, the total power reaches 1,700 hp, which also makes the displacement of the submarine reach 837 tons, with a maximum surface speed of 15.4 knots and a maximum underwater speed of 9.5 knots.
In addition, the main weapon of the submarine was replaced with a 500mm torpedo launcher, which is a deadly blow to unarmored cruise ships and transport ships.
This also gives submarines a unique strategic significance; underwater, submarines are elusive assassins for cruise ships and transport ships.
Of course, due to the current submarines' performance not being very advanced, submarines have no room to resist when facing regular main battleships.
Fortunately, the submarine technology of this era is not that complicated, and the technology is not as good as in later generations.
As long as the German and French submarine technologies are mastered, and their essence is extracted, it is not difficult to develop advanced Australasian submarines.
After all, Australasia currently has the capability to independently design and build dreadnoughts and super dreadnoughts. Compared to dreadnoughts and super dreadnoughts, is submarine technology still considered difficult?
Even if it were not for the shipyard experts to master the French submarine series earlier, Arthur would have given the order for the experts to start developing a new submarine series.
For Arthur, there is good news: although Australasia has joined the Allies, it does not need to bear the naval pressure from Germany.
The naval mission of Australasia is just to help Britain maintain the order on the western and northern shores of the Indian Ocean, that is, the East African coast and the southern Indian coast.
Generally speaking, the German fleet would not appear in this area, as they would have to break through the blockade of the Allied fleet to reach it.
Moreover, the British would never allow the Germans to appear in this area.
Because this area is not only an important transportation route for Australasia to Europe, but also the connection between the British mainland and the Indian colonies.
This means that even if World War I breaks out in the future, Australasia will still have plenty of time to build its own military.
And because of Australasia's excellent geographical location, it is almost impossible for it to be invaded during World War I.
The only possibility of invasion is either the island nation joining the Allied Powers, or the United States joining the Allied Powers.
However, both conditions are unrealistic. The island nation is still a loyal follower of Britain before Britain cuts off its aid.
They don't have a good relationship with Germany, and the island nation needs to weigh the strength of the British Empire in order to join the Allied Powers.
As for the United States, it is the same case. Although it has become a real power in terms of economics and industry, its military strength, especially in the army, is not even comparable to that of some lesser powers.
Moreover, throughout World War I, Australasia's homeland will be protected by the Allies.
Anyone who is an enemy of Australasia is equivalent to being an enemy of the entire Allied Nations.
Even after World War I in history, the combined remnants of Britain and France were much stronger than the military strength exhibited by the United States.
Moreover, in this current situation that has changed the world, it is basically impossible for the United States to achieve rapid development as it did in World War I.
In this way, the gap between Britain and France and the United States after World War I will become larger and larger. At least until World War II breaks out and the power of Britain and France is completely exhausted, the United States cannot be a rival of the two countries combined.
Even if the colonial system of Britain and France does not collapse, the British Empire and France will always be traditional powers and one of the world's strongest countries.
Nowadays, Australasia is also a member of the world's colonial system. If the United States wants to destroy Britain and France's colonial system as easily as it did in history after World War II, it must consider whether Australasia agrees or not.