Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Sounds like German is going to lost an Aussie sub deal to an export newbie not once, but twice.

In fact, it seems kicking out the only European bid that US may willing to share sensitive data with (Sweden) is to guarantee Soryu will win.
none of what you say is correct in real life

sweden is out
germany is in
framce is in
japan is in
ASC will be a participant in sustaining and integration

I'm not going to go into specifcs as its not worth getting hosed at work for blabbing on social media
 

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Sounds like German is going to lost an Aussie sub deal to an export newbie not once, but twice.

In fact, it seems kicking out the only European bid that US may willing to share sensitive data with (Sweden) is to guarantee Soryu will win.
Do you have an Australian/English speaking background ? I know you said you are an Engineer working in Australia, but the intent and meaning of your posts are really hard to understand as you make a lot of spelling and grammatical errors in your sentences ?

Not meaning this to be a dig at you, its just really hard to follow what you are saying
 

rockitten

Member
Do you have an Australian/English speaking background ? I know you said you are an Engineer working in Australia, but the intent and meaning of your posts are really hard to understand as you make a lot of spelling and grammatical errors in your sentences ?

Not meaning this to be a dig at you, its just really hard to follow what you are saying
That's okay, I am a zero generation immigrant from Hong Kong. English is not my 2nd or 3rd or even 4th language.

From my point of view, the best 2 horse race should be an evolved Collins and the Soryu. Other European vaporware(s) are no match to the option J.
 

Stock

Member
Nope, ASC are out of designing or building

Its the french, germans and japanese

kockums and ASC are out
What are your thoughts on the exclusion of Saab (Kockums)?

Saab is well advanced on the A26 design for Sweden (design contract expected mid year) and has teamed with Damen to develop a replacement submarine for the Dutch Walrus-class, with long range and extended endurance apparently one of the key requirements.

Saab also has an existing and significant physical footprint here, a successful track record supplying the ADF and a lot of corporate knowledge resident in Australia from Collins.

What have TKMS and DCNS brought to the Sea 1000 table that Saab has not?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
What are your thoughts on the exclusion of Saab (Kockums)?

Saab is well advanced on the A26 design for Sweden (design contract expected mid year) and has teamed with Damen to develop a replacement submarine for the Dutch Walrus-class, with long range and extended endurance apparently one of the key requirements.

Saab also has an existing and significant physical footprint here, a successful track record supplying the ADF and a lot of corporate knowledge resident in Australia from Collins.

What have TKMS and DCNS brought to the Sea 1000 table that Saab has not?
Far be it for me to decipher how rapidly this has moved (and this would have been well advanced for it to be announced today) but I suspect...

  1. some residual ill will towards Kockums and their prev engagement
  2. a desire by Govt to clean slate this and get traction
  3. a long term view on ASC that involves getting rid of it as a GBE asap
  4. a view that the chances of realising better resale of ASC would be better served by tasking it with what the Govt of the day regards as "safe work"

In light of the rapid announcement on a Friday PM, I suspect that Whylie had already been briefed of the Govts intention so his performance in front of the Senate Committee was a deliberate dead bat

ASC still can pull in some serious integration work with respect to the combat system etc...... as she already meets the ITARs issues, so State Dept would be less inclined to be twitchy and only needs to address how they firewall the prime

I will be more than curious as to how the primes offer the build solution as I can see that it has the potential to cause the biggest headaches

Govt has been far more keen on using Damen for "off the book skimmer builds" and the Dutch were still running on a relative handicap vis a vis actual offers
 

Stock

Member
Far be it for me to decipher how rapidly this has moved (and this would have been well advanced for it to be announced today) but I suspect...

  1. some residual ill will towards Kockums and their prev engagement
  2. a desire by Govt to clean slate this and get traction
  3. a long term view on ASC that involves getting rid of it as a GBE asap
  4. a view that the chances of realising better resale of ASC would be better served by tasking it with what the Govt of the day regards as "safe work"

In light of the rapid announcement on a Friday PM, I suspect that Whylie had already been briefed of the Govts intention so his performance in front of the Senate Committee was a deliberate dead bat

ASC still can pull in some serious integration work with respect to the combat system etc...... as she already meets the ITARs issues, so State Dept would be less inclined to be twitchy and only needs to address how they firewall the prime

I will be more than curious as to how the primes offer the build solution as I can see that it has the potential to cause the biggest headaches

Govt has been far more keen on using Damen for "off the book skimmer builds" and the Dutch were still running on a relative handicap vis a vis actual offers
Thank you.

Is there any possibility that TKMS and DCNS are mere stalking horses in all this?
 

Milne Bay

Active Member
Thank you.

Is there any possibility that TKMS and DCNS are mere stalking horses in all this?
That was the general assumption about the Navantia inclusion for the AWD - a stalking horse for the mini Burke, and look how that panned out.
Don't write off the Germans IMHO
MB
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
I will be more than curious as to how the primes offer the build solution as I can see that it has the potential to cause the biggest headaches
Which IMO I think might level up the field a bit as I think (or it seems) the Germans might have more of a plan and be prepared to take it on, fixed price (but how?). But then again not a lot of detail from either side.

Wonder what Shorten will have to say on the matter if it comes down to these two. I hope its secured before the next election.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Which IMO I think might level up the field a bit as I think (or it seems) the Germans might have more of a plan and be prepared to take it on, fixed price (but how?). But then again not a lot of detail from either side.
I wouldn't bank on anything

the kicker is how they build the combat system and comms room plug.

you can't build the entire sub offshore and then bring it back for a combat room fitout - unless you uplift the entire Oz integration team overseas - and the ITARs issues will make that very much an uncetainty

all the other chat is just fluff in my opinion as the above is the key to determining who will build it and how Oz companies participate

all the chat about high australian participation revolves around addressing the fitout - and you can't build the hull, uplift and then fitout

and if any of them know that and want to fit out their own combat system then IMO they will sign their exit papers
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The real shame here is ASCs strength is on the fabrication and assembly side, not bad at integration but definitely world class at metal bashing and that's what's being out sourced.
 

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
That's okay, I am a zero generation immigrant from Hong Kong. English is not my 2nd or 3rd or even 4th language.

From my point of view, the best 2 horse race should be an evolved Collins and the Soryu. Other European vaporware(s) are no match to the option J.
Ok, thanks for the background, that will make it easier to understand where you are coming from, appreciated
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
Another F-35B on LHD Article by Steve George

Making the STOVL F-35B Work for the ADF by Steve George
Defence Technology Review Feb 2015

"STEVE GEORGE TAKES AN IN-DEPTH LOOK AT THE TECHNICAL INTEGRATION ISSUES OF OPERATING THE F-358 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER FROM AUSTRALIA'S CANBERRA-CLASS LHD.

To date, most of the on line discussions about the value and practicality of this option have lacked complete information and technical depth; in many cases, the 'information' has been wholly inaccurate. This short brief is intended to help DTR readers gain a better appreciation of the issues."

Defence Technology Review : DTR FEB 2015, Page 1
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Making the STOVL F-35B Work for the ADF by Steve George
Defence Technology Review Feb 2015

"STEVE GEORGE TAKES AN IN-DEPTH LOOK AT THE TECHNICAL INTEGRATION ISSUES OF OPERATING THE F-358 JOINT STRIKE FIGHTER FROM AUSTRALIA'S CANBERRA-CLASS LHD.

To date, most of the on line discussions about the value and practicality of this option have lacked complete information and technical depth; in many cases, the 'information' has been wholly inaccurate. This short brief is intended to help DTR readers gain a better appreciation of the issues."

Defence Technology Review : DTR FEB 2015, Page 1

what a load of self serving rubbish/

the first line is incorrect and it goes downhill from that point on
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Interesting. Thanks
if I was to be clinical I'd argue that from a:

political perspective its the japanese
delivery perspective its the germans

I can't see the japanese addressing the requirements in the 10 month solicitation period.

the germans will walk all over them from a contract delivery perspective

I cannot see the french getting up at all due to some ITARs sensitivities - and I have no doubt that they will come back with their own combat system and a UK heavy torpedo solution
 

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
if I was to be clinical I'd argue that from a:

political perspective its the japanese
delivery perspective its the germans

I can't see the japanese addressing the requirements in the 10 month solicitation period.

the germans will walk all over them from a contract delivery perspective

I cannot see the french getting up at all due to some ITARs sensitivities - and I have no doubt that they will come back with their own combat system and a UK heavy torpedo solution
GF, obviously within the constraints of what you can comment on, where are Singapore and HDW at with the development of the 218SG ? As I understand it contracts were signed last year for 2 Subs with delivery from 2020, so would be assuming they would be well into planning and development of full designs and ready to start construction soon ?

OPSSG, do you have any updates available from Singapore you can chime in with ?

The HDW play will be interesting, lots of political pressure on the Abbott Gov at the moment for an Australian build, it has become a media circus with Shorten playing games, didnt HDW say late last year they could do an Aus build of 12 subs for 20b ?

Cheers
 

t68

Well-Known Member
With the swedes out of the running does that mean an evolved Collins has no chance of getting up if JPN/DE/FR buds measure up.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
With the swedes out of the running does that mean an evolved Collins has no chance of getting up if JPN/DE/FR buds measure up.
none of them would have any interest in extending Collins

they will be box flogging
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top