Either way the poor old sub squadrons continue to be a political football.
The Opposition seems to be oblivious of the fact that it wasn't RAN who came up with 12 in the first place - but that perhaps they should look at the strategic reasoning behind why more than 6 were identified.
Maybe, just maybe they should ask why RAN's having crewing and sustainment problems - and if they're honest they'll see that their own hands are just as black from poor decision making.
You did notice that the gentleman talking about subs also is nervous about actually having to handle the issue? Key phrases like "capability shortfall" etc..
"...This whole thing is a recipe for worse than disaster - it's a capability shortfall..."
He has no clue himself, so chose to deflect and dive out as quickly as he could.
Why is that? I mean, really, its just a sub, right? Conceptually you would think that its easy enough to get your hands around (and it is). The white elephant is Australia's work force and I suspect that neither political party fully understands the "black art" of quantifying risk when one (1) human factor is thrown into the equation, let alone multiple HF stages that can (and will) arise from the desire to create dispersed manufacturing nodes within your submarine construction program. Ergo;
- Australian politicians will want to create jobs foremost
- Australia doesn't have the localized infrastructure to fulfill a project like this
So now, you are kind of forced to select a modular approach. modularity requires an abundance of EIE (Experience, Intuition, Education) for the customer (CofA) to be able to control costs.
So the challenge for you guys in civil service is to figure out a way where you can artificially create the environment that the local free market cannot sustain, in order to reduce overall risk of the whole venture.
Anyway, you only have to look at the f-35 program to see how a defense project can get into trouble when it stops being a "defense program" and becomes a "jobs creation" program.
I think that is the best litmus test to apply. In every future decision making process you guys will make concerning future subs, ask yourself this:
"Are we doing this to create jobs, or are we doing this to get the product?"
As you are already hamstrung by lack of critical mass for the market to naturally provide the resources you need aka: Off-The-Shelf and/or "walk-in-Talent".
DMO is (I imagine) already having a lot of fun with this very subject
cheers
w
(not me).