Joe Black
Active Member
Found some nice photos of the HMAS Perth that is undergoing the upgrade at Henderson:
follow this link:
Steven Ciobo MP
follow this link:
Steven Ciobo MP
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
It may well be true that neither Defence nor Navy sought 12 but former Prime Minister Turnbull and former Defmin Payne certainly stated 12 as the number to be acquired:
"Prime Minister, Minister for Defence - Joint media release - Future submarine program
26 April 2016
The Turnbull Government today announces that the next generation of submarines for Australia will be constructed at the Adelaide shipyard, securing thousands of jobs and ensuring the project will play a key part in the transition of our economy.
DCNS of France has been selected as our preferred international partner for the design of the 12 Future Submarines, subject to further discussions on commercial matters."
Prime Minister, Minister for Defence - Joint media release - Future submarine program | Department of Defence Ministers
Obviously numbers projected for major contracts will often vary from the numbers actually ordered (e.g. 100 F-35A projected - 72 ordered so far, 15 P-8A projected - 12 ordered so far, 7 MQ-4C projected - 6 ordered).
To me the most important things are continuous build and evolution of the design so an initial order for 8 in two batches would be fine as the performance of Naval Group in building the earlier boats and the operational performance of the boats themselves would be known before Defence and Navy have to commit to the same design and builder for boats 9 -12.
Tas
Given that construction for boats 9 through 12 might not even commence until post 2040 I don't think it is a big issue that only the first 8 are being considered at this stage. The US plans to build 66 Virginia class submarines but so far only 34 have either been built, are under construction or are on order.
t68
Well-Known Member
I suppose they still have to continue making these announcements even if it only looks like they will be packing their bags next year, but Gee whillikens a Bill Shorten lead government scares the crap out of me.
I accept that an ALP Govt is historically perhaps less Defence orientated.
But they will benefit from the boost in employment and economies.
They also will, i presume get the same strat briefings as the present govt gets so its a more contested world than their previous tenure.
Defence in the latter period has been basically bipartisan, i suspect the current defence structuring is generally acceptable to the ALP & and significantly, supported by the electorate.
Im not so concerned.
But they will benefit from the boost in employment and economies.
They also will, i presume get the same strat briefings as the present govt gets so its a more contested world than their previous tenure.
Defence in the latter period has been basically bipartisan, i suspect the current defence structuring is generally acceptable to the ALP & and significantly, supported by the electorate.
Im not so concerned.
Actually all work on Perth stopped earlier this year when she finished her LOTAP. She was then scheduled to go back to sea, but instead has been put into mothballs due to a lack of engineering personnel. She is now due to remain on the hardstand until her AMCAP starts in 2020 after Warramunga. CheersFound some nice photos of the HMAS Perth that is undergoing the upgrade at Henderson:
follow this link:
Steven Ciobo MP
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I think people are getting a little bit too excited by the AFR headline, it's very much a Chicken Little 'The Sky is Falling!!" headline.
Putting aside the journo's headline and commentary, and reading the actual quotes attributed to Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, I don't read anywhere that he is saying that the Government's overall 'plan' for 12 boats has been reduced to eight.
If this was true, why hasn't other media outlets (and especially Defence media outlets) picked up on that? Why isn't the Opposition getting stuck into the Government? Why isn't the Shipbuilding industry up in arms??
Why? Because it's a misleading headline that's why.
Very Senior Sirs don't just make "off the cuff" comments, especially suggesting that the future submarine fleet is going to be cut by a third, if anything the timing of the comments could more likely be a bit of politicking by the Government to have a Senior Sir make comments about the Strategic Partnering Agreement (SPA), if we want to get into conspiracy theories!
And it's not unusual for a Government (here or overseas), to say that there is a plan for X number of something and end up ordering them in progressive batches.
Anyway, don't think I'm going to loose any sleep over the AFR article.
Cheers,
Putting aside the journo's headline and commentary, and reading the actual quotes attributed to Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, I don't read anywhere that he is saying that the Government's overall 'plan' for 12 boats has been reduced to eight.
If this was true, why hasn't other media outlets (and especially Defence media outlets) picked up on that? Why isn't the Opposition getting stuck into the Government? Why isn't the Shipbuilding industry up in arms??
Why? Because it's a misleading headline that's why.
Very Senior Sirs don't just make "off the cuff" comments, especially suggesting that the future submarine fleet is going to be cut by a third, if anything the timing of the comments could more likely be a bit of politicking by the Government to have a Senior Sir make comments about the Strategic Partnering Agreement (SPA), if we want to get into conspiracy theories!
And it's not unusual for a Government (here or overseas), to say that there is a plan for X number of something and end up ordering them in progressive batches.
Anyway, don't think I'm going to loose any sleep over the AFR article.
Cheers,
Thanks for that info Pusser01.
It is disappointing to hear that a shortage of key personnel has forced the navy to temporarily lay up the newest of the Anzacs. However, it does explain why there are three on the hardstand at the same time.
Tas
I tend to agree with you.
Regardless of which of the two major party's are in, I suspect most of the larger defence projects outlined in the 2016 DWP will continue as is.
The variable will be the international stuff. EG ,economic down turn or major military dynamics.
If none of the above; then the question will be when decisions actually have to be made about forth coming defence acquisitions in the next five years.
So regardless of who is in, I trust project procrastination does not win out.
Have we learn't from history?
Regards S
This is concerning.
Is there a fix?
At the moment has some cover for these ships with both the HMAS Melbourne and Newcastle still in service. The Newcastle will decommission sometime next year.
That will be going on for four years out of the water by the time she is finished.
Not a good look for navy
MB
Joe Black
Active Member
This report from APDR on the Shortfin does not bode well for the French....
SEA 1000 - The future submarine project in trouble
If the issues persist. it is probably good to start working on a Plan B.
SEA 1000 - The future submarine project in trouble
If the issues persist. it is probably good to start working on a Plan B.
If I was a betting man, which I'm not, I would put a couple of bob on this blowing up in the face of the French big time. At the end of the day the CoA are in the box seat because they are the ones who sign the cheque and they will have a Plan B - its just not in the public domain.
Look, Kym is a nice old fella, but a Defence expert he is not, first few paragraph's tell the tale, a lot of basic errors, and some big tell tale signs he does not know what he is talking about. Pay no attention, he means no harm, like I said a nice enough old fella, but no idea of the subject
Cheers
It does bring up some interesting points such as the possibility France will be penalised if it fails to meet production goals. I have a feeling that this part of the contract would be not negotiable for Australia. I wonder what the deadline for the signing of the Strategic Partnership Agreement is ... and I wonder what plan B might be.
I'm sure your correct in that there is a Plan B for SEA 1000 locked in a draw somewhere.
The devil is time.
This project was late to start with, so rumours of pending bad news is not a positive sign what ever the reality.
In a perfect world, given we want to enlarge the submarine force, construction would have started years ago with the first boat already in the water working up to IOC as we speak.
I hope plan B has time on it's side, because Plan A's timing looks a worry even if all goes well.
Regards S
Never met the bloke but I generally have time for his point of view.
I recall a series of three articles he wrote on the contenders for SEA 1000 before the winners announcement.
I think the French were the last section, and I was some what convinced with his enthusiasm that they may be the dark horse in the competition.
Not saying he knew the winner but he appeared to have a good insight into their offering.
Anyway good research is taking in many opinions of which he is but one and you are another.
All the best
Regards S
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Kym's comment the Barracuda delay is not due to the reactor is pure speculation. Just because the company has built many reactors and the design is a derivative of a previous design is no guarantee. AECL's two non-functional Maple medical isotope reactors are a good example. Frankly if the delay was due to the reactor, it would be better news as this shouldn't effect the Australian design.
As for plan B, it might start to leak out if there is no progress on contract resolution soon.
I have nothing concrete to add, other than even those I know on the project have no idea what the French are doing (or going to do). One thing I am fairly sure of though is following the experience with the Tiger, MRH and MU90 (as well as with Navantia to be honest), the likely hood of an Australian government signing a deal with any prime, but particularly a European / French prime, that doesn't force them to have skin in the game, is approximately zero.
One thing that does come to mind is BAE has demonstrated how it should be done. The had diabolical trouble with the hull blocks for Hobart, this cause pain and embarrassment and saw the head shed send in the reapers to clean out Williamstown and get back on track. My understanding is that by the end of the build they were pretty much out performing everyone where Forgacs was still plodding along and Navantia had managed to introduce their own funny methods into Adelaide making them not as bad as Ferrol, but not as good as they had been. Out of the options out there I would now rate BAE up with BIW as the best partner, which considering my opinion of them when I was seeing the excrement they built for ship one, is a massive turn around. Same workers, just much better management.
This raises an interesting possibility, or perhaps a what if, i.e. BAE and a conventional evolution of Astute? I don't think the French are gone yet, and to be honest I believe they will fold and come back in line, but if were are going clean sheet there are still a lot of Poms in ASC with Astute experience and a repommification could be easier than a frogification, and definitely less painful and soul destroying than the Spanish experience. There could even be synergies and savings from BAEs involvement in the Frigate project.
One thing that does come to mind is BAE has demonstrated how it should be done. The had diabolical trouble with the hull blocks for Hobart, this cause pain and embarrassment and saw the head shed send in the reapers to clean out Williamstown and get back on track. My understanding is that by the end of the build they were pretty much out performing everyone where Forgacs was still plodding along and Navantia had managed to introduce their own funny methods into Adelaide making them not as bad as Ferrol, but not as good as they had been. Out of the options out there I would now rate BAE up with BIW as the best partner, which considering my opinion of them when I was seeing the excrement they built for ship one, is a massive turn around. Same workers, just much better management.
This raises an interesting possibility, or perhaps a what if, i.e. BAE and a conventional evolution of Astute? I don't think the French are gone yet, and to be honest I believe they will fold and come back in line, but if were are going clean sheet there are still a lot of Poms in ASC with Astute experience and a repommification could be easier than a frogification, and definitely less painful and soul destroying than the Spanish experience. There could even be synergies and savings from BAEs involvement in the Frigate project.
- Status