Nope.
You seem to have this idea that fabrication, pre fit out, erection, consolidation, integration of CoA required systems, activation and testing is nothing, or at most a minor part of the process, also following your definitions Navantia was more an assembler than a builder of the Amarda's ships. You seem to have a mindset that Australians are not capable of doing this type of work, when in actual fact we are very good at it, I suppose its a cultural cringe thing that ignores the fact that different people have different strengths and abilities but even the best can not shine when some dipstick ignores professional advice and doesn't let the experts do the job they have trained to do.
There were too many people on the project from outside of defence and engineering fields who thought they knew better than the experts, they were the ones who made mistakes and missed the stuff ups from suppliers and subcontractors because they assumes a signed affirmation was sufficient evidence that what was being supplied was to spec and fit for purpose. People who assumed there was no need for a vendor QC/QA function, nor a build assurance, or even design assurance one. I didn't know this stuff but I was at some the meetings and reviews (many before any steel was cut) where RAN, DMO and industry people with years of experience on similar projects brought up this stuff and were mostly ignored.
It would be quite easy though also a pointless waste of money to have manufactured the GTs etc locally with the planned buy of three hulls, but with a continuous build the numbers may work out differently. You don't seem to realise just how much work goes into looking after stuff in a warehouse, or how many issues it causes when multiple shipsets are ordered from overseas suppliers at the start of a project, sometimes it is definitely neither the cheaper or less risky option. If the overseas suppliers were actually as good as they were expected to be there would have been less pain but seriously in my personal experience many of them would not have made the cut as supplier to the now deceased Australian passenger car industry, let alone a major naval program with Australian engineering control.
This issue is if we don't build our own ships our ability to maintain and upgrade them is diminished, as is our ability to actually ensure the suppliers we are forced to rely on are competent or even honest. If we don't build our own ships we don't grow the experts we need to get everything else done through the life of the capability and onwards ensuring the mistakes of the past are not repeated. I am being panelled for a couple of roles on new projects at the moment because of the skills and experience I gained on AWD and other projects, it is that experience that is the key, not what I have read or discussed on internet forums, not what I learnt at school TAFE or UNI, it is experience I would not have had the AWDs not been built in Australia, and I am one of many. I am currently working about as far away as you can get from shipbuilding, in a project that seems to fit your idea of what the RAN should be doing, i.e. a minimum change MOTS solution with the overseas designer / builder controlling just about everything bar first line maintenance, and I know which model I prefer.
