Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[gf0012-aust]

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 ?

I suspect that everyone except the Japanese were in various stages of planning.

It's been discussed at numerous levels for the last 10 years - and visibly so within the SIA

(btw the Brits were knocked out as well - both companies. So that came as a surprise to some)

 

[Aussie optimist]

With all the crap from all sides about the sub replacement. As much as I would prefer local build, I will be happy as long as the ran gets what they want and not be told by the government. This should really be more directed by them as they will be using them and maybe fighting in them. I hate the way these replacements become a political football.

 

[Volkodav]

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

Everyone except the government and their tame thinktanks are saying around 20bn for 12 subs and 20-25bn for an Australian build but now the former Labor governments 30bn, which grew to 40bn last year, is now apparently 50bn. As the dollar and commodity prices continue to drop the price of new subs will just keep on going up, in particular an overseas build.

Unless we are prepared to accept a completely MOTS Japanese option, including combat system, the subs, if not a new design, will need to be modified quite extensively, effectively making them a new class. Just wait until the new class encounters the same teething problems that every first of class does. About the only time we have avoided major problems with a new project, besides FMS, is the ANZAC build which was a simple adaptation of a proven export design from a designer highly experienced in supporting local builds.

We have seen what can happen with unproven paper designs and also with MOTS solutions from contractors inexperienced in exporting their designs or supporting local builds. I actually wonder if better results would be gained from from engaging a competent designer, experienced in supporting local builds, who is prepared to listen to customer requirements but prepared (able) to say no when the demands are unrealistic or unreasonable.

 

[koala]

I do wonder if any of the politicians or media have read the book.

At least Bob Hawke, Bomber Beasley and associates had some balls back then, makes a mockery out of our current and recent governments.

Our country is struggling to manufacture a paper clip these days.

I am in the petroleum industry, so don't start me on our redundant refinery's and the bad bad petrol from SE Asia.

 

[Volkodav]

I heard something recently about the succession of professional politicians we have had in recent years i.e. those who were involved in politics from uni onwards, just about every, if not every, job they have held before entering parliament was part of the plan to get there, mostly working as political staffers, union officials or lawyers, interspersed with set up jobs with friendly, party supporting companies and organisations. Gillard and Abbott both fall into that category, while Rudd was surrounded and sponsored by many like that. They live in a make believe world with little connection to reality.

 

[StingrayOZ]

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

Given other overseas sub builds I can possibly see how they might manage it. But with the Japanese who knows? I have a feeling it might be more about bringing whole teams over from Germany or Japan to do it. I would imagine with a contract like this there would be the ability to do that.

Its a bigger project than collins was (twice as big?). At this stage government would be keen to give them any concessions they need to see the project through. Only IP/ITAR stuff would hold it back.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Given other overseas sub builds I can possibly see how they might manage it. But with the Japanese who knows? I have a feeling it might be more about bringing whole teams over from Germany or Japan to do it. I would imagine with a contract like this there would be the ability to do that.

Its a bigger project than collins was (twice as big?). At this stage government would be keen to give them any concessions they need to see the project through. Only IP/ITAR stuff would hold it back.

Its early days, but from my experience I reckon that the $20bn will be a long stretch

I suspect that the $20bn claimed as do-able by the germans does not include our preferred/mandated systems

the cost is not in building, its not in labout costs, its not even really an issue about local labour competency - the touchstone is about integration

from a number of vectors, a local build would have been far smarter - however, without knowing what the risk matrix was that was used by PM&C, then its hard to make sensible comment.

this hasn't been driven by Defence, its come out of PM&C.

 

[rockitten]

Given other overseas sub builds I can possibly see how they might manage it. But with the Japanese who knows? I have a feeling it might be more about bringing whole teams over from Germany or Japan to do it. I would imagine with a contract like this there would be the ability to do that.

Firms like Raytheon should have a reasonable footprint in Japan to service the 7th fleet and their SSNs. Will that make integration work easier?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Firms like Raytheon should have a reasonable footprint in Japan to service the 7th fleet and their SSNs. Will that make integration work easier?

there's a difference between sustainment and intregration

in addition, if the competitors are going to offer solutions with the RAN preferred systems then there are ITARs issues to be addressed

ASC already has ITARs arrangements in place but they are null and void on a new contract unless State Dept become inclined to fast track and use a transfer variant of the existing arrangements - and thats no guarantee

If any of the overseas competitors include the RAN preferences then they either partner up with ASC and bank on extended goodwill from State Dept to extend the existing ITARs deeds or they have to arrange another US partner who State also have to approve.

Military technology sold overseas is not owned by US companies - it comes under the purvue of the State Dept - and they can actually give direction to the Aust Govt about who they will allow to manage that technology usage outside of CONUS

that's why excluding ASC is a somewhat curious proposition for future subs as they are incredibly critical in whatever partner is selected.

 

[Volkodav]

there's a difference between sustainment and intregration

in addition, if the competitors are going to offer solutions with the RAN preferred systems then there are ITARs issues to be addressed

ASC already has ITARs arrangements in place but they are null and void on a new contract unless State Dept become inclined to fast track and use a transfer variant of the existing arrangements - and thats no guarantee

If any of the overseas competitors include the RAN preferences then they either partner up with ASC and bank on extended goodwill from State Dept to extend the existing ITARs deeds or they have to arrange another US partner who State also have to approve.

Military technology sold overseas is not owned by US companies - it comes under the purvue of the State Dept - and they can actually give direction to the Aust Govt about who they will allow to manage that technology usage outside of CONUS

that's why excluding ASC is a somewhat curious proposition for future subs as they are incredibly critical in whatever partner is selected.

To me it stinks of political bloody mindedness and an extension of the original John Moore BS. To me this is anti unionism taken to the extreme the irony being it was the unionised production workers who actually did their job successfully and the non unionised contracts, project management and procurement areas that struggled for various reasons. This is where beaming in TKMS, or even EB to take over the PM side of things and introduce their procurement, document control / data management systems while keeping the experienced technical and production personnel i.e. replace the broken bits and keep the bits that weren't.

 

[gf0012-aust]

To me it stinks of political bloody mindedness and an extension of the original John Moore BS. To me this is anti unionism taken to the extreme the irony being it was the unionised production workers who actually did their job successfully and the non unionised contracts, project management and procurement areas that struggled for various reasons. This is where beaming in TKMS, or even EB to take over the PM side of things and introduce their procurement, document control / data management systems while keeping the experienced technical and production personnel i.e. replace the broken bits and keep the bits that weren't.

In a parallel universe if I was not employed by the Govt in my current capacity I'd be far more vocal.

if you get my drift

 

[Volkodav]

In a parallel universe if I was not employed by the Govt in my current capacity I'd be far more vocal.

if you get my drift

Well I'm free as a bird now considering my current situation. There are lines I won't cross but future promotion and employment prospects are no longer a limiting factor. I am proud of the work I did and respect and admire many I worked with, it sh!ts me to tears the way they are being treated but above all I am horrified at the shortsighted, politically motivated decisions that IMO will be damaging to defence and the economy as a whole.

Damn Labor for not executing Collins better and for not taking up the options on boats seven and eight, damn the Coalition for politicising the project and despite the huge sums spent failed to authorise simple fixes to not so sexy propulsion and auxiliary systems. Damn Labor again for sitting on their hands (other than forcing damaging cost cutting reorganisations of ASC) and not kicking of the replacement project proper in 2010, damn the current government for pissing away three decades of work and achievement because they are too ignorant and arrogant to see what is in the nations best interest.

 

[t68]

Well I'm free as a bird now considering my current situation. There are lines I won't cross but future promotion and employment prospects are no longer a limiting factor. I am proud of the work I did and respect and admire many I worked with, it sh!ts me to tears the way they are being treated but above all I am horrified at the shortsighted, politically motivated decisions that IMO will be damaging to defence and the economy as a whole.

Damn Labor for not executing Collins better and for not taking up the options on boats seven and eight, damn the Coalition for politicising the project and despite the huge sums spent failed to authorise simple fixes to not so sexy propulsion and auxiliary systems. Damn Labor again for sitting on their hands (other than forcing damaging cost cutting reorganisations of ASC) and not kicking of the replacement project proper in 2010, damn the current government for pissing away three decades of work and achievement because they are too ignorant and arrogant to see what is in the nations best interest.

Yes when you consider if the replaces boats every twenty years even only having 8 boats is one every 2.5 years

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am surprised at the DTC comment though as that just smacks of deperation (ie Japanese don't do MLU or SLE or deep cycle maint.)

The Japanese decision is not about the build quality inherent in the initial construction - so to infer that the build quality is an issue due to their half life philosophy is disingenuous

You can still prosecute an argument without resorting to that kind of appeal for work

I think SA Govt could have approached this differently, but that's a side bar issue.
Its not helped by some of the fear and loathing coming from some in the house of review

the SA senator who sought assurances during the spill should be feeling a bit of a mug though - as he's been played like a harp by his own team

 

[rockitten]

Yes when you consider if the replaces boats every twenty years even only having 8 boats is one every 2.5 years

Actually, if every major overhaul is costing nearly as much as building a new one, why most navy still go for a MLU rather than rolling new boats every 16 years to 20 (just like what Japanese does)?

Then the whole industry, from design to construction, will have plenty of work in the pipeline for practically the same cost of a MLU but getting much better bang for the bucks

 

[John Fedup]

I heard something recently about the succession of professional politicians we have had in recent years i.e. those who were involved in politics from uni onwards, just about every, if not every, job they have held before entering parliament was part of the plan to get there, mostly working as political staffers, union officials or lawyers, interspersed with set up jobs with friendly, party supporting companies and organisations. Gillard and Abbott both fall into that category, while Rudd was surrounded and sponsored by many like that. They live in a make believe world with little connection to reality.

.

We have the same BS in Canada at all levels of our over-governed country, federal, provincial, county, and municipal. It why $hit is always happening here.

 

[Bluey 006]

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

I am wondering why the French raise more red flags than the Germans for the US ITAR sensitivities?

The UK (one of US closest allies) and France have extensive Defence tech sharing agreements (including some relating to nuclear weapons and submarine technologies) and the Germans have been much more anti US than France in recent years, particularly in light of the furor over the NSA revelations.

I understand that historically Germany has been a close US ally and France not so much ( on the other hand half of France was never part of Warsaw Pact) -

I find it rather curious that Germany gets a Green light and France a red flag ( based purely on open source information). I would suspect that both have issues.....

Even Japan have a poor reputation for protecting sensitive US technology - leaked plans for the Aegis Combat System among others spring to mind.....

 

[Todjaeger]

I am wondering why the French raise more red flags than the Germans for the US ITAR sensitivities?

The UK (one of US closest allies) and France have extensive Defence tech sharing agreements (including some relating to nuclear weapons and submarine technologies) and the Germans have been much more anti US than France in recent years, particularly in light of the furor over the NSA revelations.

I understand that historically Germany has been a close US ally and France not so much ( on the other hand half of France was never part of Warsaw Pact) -

I find it rather curious that Germany gets a Green light and France a red flag ( based purely on open source information). I would suspect that both have issues.....

Even Japan have a poor reputation for protecting sensitive US technology - leaked plans for the Aegis Combat System among others spring to mind.....

AFAIK there have been a number of French intel gathering missions, aimed at the US and/or US companies.

I would not be surprised if there were/are similar German missions, though I have heard less about it.

These are among the security concerns involving any French-sourced kit, never mind any accidental leaks.

-Cheers

 

[Bluey 006]

AFAIK there have been a number of French intel gathering missions, aimed at the US and/or US companies.

I would not be surprised if there were/are similar German missions, though I have heard less about it.

These are among the security concerns involving any French-sourced kit, never mind any accidental leaks.

-Cheers

Kerry and Clinton
VW stealing secrets from GM

As i said, I think both have issues

link
link
link

 

[gf0012-aust]

Kerry and Clinton
VW stealing secrets from GM

As i said, I think both have issues

link
link
link

the germans less than the french