assuming any part of that plan could be implemented where would the trained crews come from? The RAN is retiring ships with crew sizes close to 200 and replacing them with ships with smaller crews (lets say 50 fewer per ship but we don’t know). Your plan adds 5 more Tier 1s by (say) 2035 and possibly 1 new Tier 2. That is 1150 more sailors (less retired ANZAC crews). The government‘s plan says 1 more Tier 1 and 3 Tier 2 (by 2034). They are proposing 550 more sailors (a big ask, and I am not confident they will get there, but they are taking steps such as foregoing TRANSCAP and cutting OPVs that may help). We can play around with the dates and anticipated crew sizes to get the margin smaller but I think in the best case you are still proposing about 400 more crew positions than the government is in the mid 30s.The most obvious candidate for a MOTS build is the Hobart. We could have three of them built urgently in Spain, rather than the current plan to build three non-existant warship designs in a yet to be determined foreign yard. The other part of the plan would be to accelerate the production of the Hunter class. I think an aim to have at least three in service by the mid thirties should be quite achievable,
Sure your fleet is more capable on paper, and maybe exactly the right thing to have started 10 years ago, but it does not provide capability if it cannot go to sea. You are also proposing a fleet structure that requires hundreds more highly trained people (compared to the announced plan) for a service that is simultaneously acquiring SSNs.
Add to that the cost. Those extra larger ships need to be purchased and sustained and that money needs to come in the next 10 years. It needs to be a whole lot more than $11bn.