I just wanted to add another point for framing.
My sense is that many posters don’t agree with the recommendations and direction of the DSR. That’s fine — I don’t agree with all of it either and it is totally appropriate for debate.
Posters also have objections to possible ship building programs based on what is practical and sensible and the approach RAN has taken In the past. Again those posters may be entirely correct (probably are) but they are not addressing the question that seems most relevant to me (again that’s fine).
The question is not what ship building program Australian government SHOULD start, or even what ship building program the government COULD successfully deliver, but what will the government ATTEMPT to deliver (perhaps to be cancelled by a future government)?
(remember 12 French submarines. Check back on DT for discussion before that). Apols for caps.
things like the folowing
DSR
https://www.defence.gov.au/about/reviews-inquiries/defence-strategic-review
“ Defence must move away from processes based around project management risk rather than strategic risk management. It must be based on minimum viable capability in the shortest possible time.”
and
“Enhancing Navy’s capability in long-range strike (maritime and land), air defence and anti-submarine warfare requires the acquisition of a contemporary optimal mix of Tier 1 and Tier 2 surface combatants, consistent with a strategy of a larger number of smaller surface vessels.”
and
“10.26 Henderson shipyard, near HMAS Stirling, faces some significant challenges to give it the requisite critical mass for shipbuilding. Under current plans there is simply not enough work to sustain the number of shipbuilders located at Henderson.”
Would not even be in the public report if the government did not want to see them. Same will be true for the surface fleet review (If the draft report says “ build 18 Flight III Burkes“ we will never see it).
balanced against that is:
10.27 Henderson currently plays a crucial role with regard to naval sustainment, maintenance and upgrade of our naval vessels, as well as the construction of smaller surface vessels. The completion of a Henderson-based large vessel dry-dock is a critical enabler for the construction and sustainment of our naval vessels. Henderson’s critical role in Australia’s naval shipbuilding and maintenance needs to continue, but Government intervention is required to consolidate activities.
Not sure if that leaves open a frigate build at Henderson or means amphibs.