Whilst I think alliance and integration is important, I also think that having a balanced approach is equally compelling too. Whilst an "Australianised" Soryu class is a quicker solution, I don't think it is the best long term solution for Australia if ASC doesn't get to build any single hull. I hate to think that the skillset we have built over the last 2 decade just simply go to waste. If it were a proposal where the Japanese build the complete hull for boat 1 and 2 and the components for 3 and 4 where ASC assemble them, the rest are build from scratch in ASC yard, I would be very supportive of that notion.
Today's friend might be your enemy tomorrow. It was only half a century ago where the Chinese and Australia were close friends and the Japanese the opponent. Today the situation is the total reverse.
Lets not look at a short term gain and long term pain strategy. Neither do we want to be impractical and have a totally Australian built boat which may take a lot longer time.
An alternate strategy might be to rope in Saab together with the Japanese. Using Soryu as the base design, incorporate some of Saab's innovation for their A26 and derive an evolved Soryu class. Afterall, the Japanese are already looking post Soryu. Surely we don't want to incorporate some of the latest thinking and technology into an excellent hull like the Soryu to produce sometime that will last the next 30 years.
I spent a few years dealing with sig mgt/acoustic mapping on subs. The Oyashios/Soryus were regarded as being as close to as acoustically "perfect" within proscribed operating conditions - they were a golden mile ahead of anything out of europe.
if they can be built here then that's always the preferred option as its a national strategic interest and capability.
however, Defence can't continue to be held hostage to buying and building in Australia as the primary political selection driver - that's untenable
The capability of the Soryu's is being lost in this idiotic chatter bleating about "build in Aust etc..."
Its not difficult to work out the build and development model so that japan and oz wins
Unfort some of the commentary to date reflects the same kind of lunacy that I witnessed at AIDN Conferences over JSF and P8's
The capability should come first. Something that VADM Moffit tried reinforcing to industry at various SIA conferences.
Some of these politicians have very short memories about the things that almost bought Collins undone - they are basically falling over themselves to get european vaporware designs, And for a variety of reasons I cannot see a French sub getting up (I treat them differently to a spanish, swedish, german option)
I should add, that I strongly support ASC as a builder and they have been unfairly maligned by both political parties from the time of inception to the current state of affairs.
IMO there is a way to build an extant large sub with all the fruit we need in Australia.
I have almost zero appetite for a euro vaporware design as it will trigger the same problems that we had with Collins in the early days.
Subs shouldn't be politically driven - we've all seen the spectacular and continuing own goals that have come out of the parties as they oscillate between being the Govt of the day and then the opposition party. Both have treated subs with indifference and used them as point scoring footballs
its why the general public considers ASC to be hopeless and the subs to be useless - both are so far from the truth that its not funny
