There's been reports that the French haven't been happy with the UK in the joint UCAV project as the UK hasn't been able to share knowledge gained from the F-35 program.
Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates
- Thread starter icelord
- Start date
- Status
A little historical perspective is needed. France is the US's oldest ally (Even though the Netherlands was the first to officially recognize its independence) and the US could not have gained independence without French aid. Ties remained close and, indeed, US ties with France were closer than with the UK during the First World War. France became a problem for the US during WW2 when De Gaulle gave them no end of problems. France was an original member of NATO but when De Gaulle decided to withdraw from the military command of NATO in 1966 and ordered all American forces to withdraw from France, the relationship became very frayed and has not recovered since. In fact, President Lyndon Johnson ordered his Secretary of State, Dean Rusk to ask De Gaulle if his order included the bodies of American soldiers in French cemeteries. De Gaulle refused to answer the question when Rusk posed it to him.
Relations have remained frayed ever since and did not improve when President Chirac threatened to veto a UN resolution threatening war with Iraq. That led to extremely bad blood and is the origin of the US pejorative of "surrender monkeys" when referring to the French. To put it bluntly, the vast majority of Americans just don't like or trust the French.
American defense and intelligence agencies have been aware for decades of a concerted French espionage attempt to steal American secrets. As late as May 2014, ex- Secretary of Defense Gates accused the French of breaking into hotel rooms of Americans in an attempt to steal or download secrets from their laptops. American counterintelligence agencies put the French just behind the Chinese and Russians as the main espionage threat. Congress is very suspicious of the French and any administration wishing to pass on sensitive technology to the French would immediately generate a backlash in Congress.
I hope that helps to answer your question.
US has also spied on Germany. Well so some claim.
Merkel calls for 'sensible talks' over alleged US spying on Germany | World news | The Guardian
Germany and the US may be able to patch things up however, incidents seem sporadic and not a pattern. I'm not sure if the situation is the same with France. France has always marched to a beat of its own drum. Its previously sold weapons to some pretty questionable people at questionable times. Sometimes hard to pick exactly where their loyalty lies or what they will do.
Merkel calls for 'sensible talks' over alleged US spying on Germany | World news | The Guardian
Germany and the US may be able to patch things up however, incidents seem sporadic and not a pattern. I'm not sure if the situation is the same with France. France has always marched to a beat of its own drum. Its previously sold weapons to some pretty questionable people at questionable times. Sometimes hard to pick exactly where their loyalty lies or what they will do.
Awww, the poor French. They can easily gain all the knowledge they'll ever need on F-35.
Just buy a squadron or two...
Can't remember where I heard it but I'd been told that anyone attending a French flight show were briefed that they should have nothing on their laptops or in luggage that was confidential, because the DGSE *would* enter their hotel rooms and snaffle as much as they could.
when I was contracting overseas there were a few countries we were pre-briefed on. apart from red team, the french were also included ....
Not exactly unique in any of that. In fact, that's how countries normally behave. The UK, for example, was rightly pleased & grateful for the generous US response to the Falklands invasion*, but there've also been occasions when the USA has stuffed us, for its own (usually internal political) reasons. I'm singling the USA out for mention only because it's the biggest: I could give long lists from many supposedly friendly countries - but I'm not going to get into that.
*And the French reaction, which included help over & above what was asked for.
Senator Xenophon grills Defence over sub report bungle
Questions seem to be about that german submarines can use US weapons (ie Harpoon).
I was of the belief that harpoon was relatively easy to integrate, going on Oberons, FFG's, Anzacs, even a stanflex module. That wasn't really the issue (firing harpoon). it was more about using the US combat/command system
Questions seem to be about that german submarines can use US weapons (ie Harpoon).
I was of the belief that harpoon was relatively easy to integrate, going on Oberons, FFG's, Anzacs, even a stanflex module. That wasn't really the issue (firing harpoon). it was more about using the US combat/command system
Time to get back on track
Joe Black
Active Member
What the Admiral was thinking that the HDW subs haven't been known to shoot Tomahawk missiles. Yes, Type 209, 214s have been known to shoot Mk48 torpedoes and Sub-Harpoons, but what RAN really desire is to have the new subs shoot cruise missiles. That would be my guess.
On the other note, I think it is right to assume that HDW hasn't integrated US combat systems into their subs yet. I can't recall or confirm though.
I don't think HDW's reputation is that great of late. Just look at how they have bungled the Greek's Type 214 subs, and the Koreans are having issues with theirs as well, apparently due to the noise produce by the drive shaft.
the road runner
Active Member
If you put a piece of metal in a salty environment ,surrounded by pressure while having moving parts there is always bound to be problems IMHO.
Id like to see a politician talk about .. the size of the sub needed.what government expects of the sub,allies and support and how important it is to have IP rights of the design ect..,they seem to waffle and nit pick about trivial matters.
It would be good if both political parties could come to an agreement regarding our future subs and instead of using it as a political football ,just put their energy into giving us the design that the RAN truly needs.
Id like to see a politician talk about .. the size of the sub needed.what government expects of the sub,allies and support and how important it is to have IP rights of the design ect..,they seem to waffle and nit pick about trivial matters.
It would be good if both political parties could come to an agreement regarding our future subs and instead of using it as a political football ,just put their energy into giving us the design that the RAN truly needs.
I think xenaphon is against the japanese design because he is worried about local jobs and belives the germans to be better in that area.
Im sure a whole lot of liberals and labor mps feel the same way.
The japanese option has a bit of a captains call about it. Maybe tony is a masterful negociator and the japanese option fully meets our requirements. Or maybe its a complete mess.
Im sure a whole lot of liberals and labor mps feel the same way.
The japanese option has a bit of a captains call about it. Maybe tony is a masterful negociator and the japanese option fully meets our requirements. Or maybe its a complete mess.
Yes, maybe Abbott promised to buy Japanese subs to secure a FTA with Japan but then leadership problems lead him to apparently renege on this promise.
Xenaphon looks to have been briefed on what to ask and the fact defence appears unable to answer correctly, even though the information is available in the public domain, suggests they have been given an official answer to repeat. The question was on notice so, considering the politically sensitive nature of the topic, would have, as a minimum, been vetted by the ministers office, if not PM&C, or even the PMs office.
This whole discussion appears to be being controlled to the nth degree with a particular outcome in sight, first ASC, now the RAN and DMO looking awkward, wooden and uninformed. These are smart people but they are coming across as anything but, I personally suspect because they have been given a script to read and have been made aware of the consequences if they divert from it.
This whole discussion appears to be being controlled to the nth degree with a particular outcome in sight, first ASC, now the RAN and DMO looking awkward, wooden and uninformed. These are smart people but they are coming across as anything but, I personally suspect because they have been given a script to read and have been made aware of the consequences if they divert from it.
I believe the question was primarily about torpedoes and Harpoon as it made specific mention of the need to use existing RAN stocks, as well as the need to maintain commonality with the USN. I do not believe any conventional sub currently uses Tomahawk so what ever the selected design, it will have to be modified to fire Tomahawk.
As to problems with German subs all I have to say is as far as I know the only new design subs (or those from a new yard) that have ever been comparatively problem free have been the US Virginia class. Subs are complex beasts and unless you are talking evolutionary builds, as Japan does, there are nearly always developmental or teething problems. If the Japanese subs are modified to meet Australian requirements we will likely see problems there too, especially as they have never designed or built a submarine for anyone other than the JMSDF.
absolutely. unfortunately the press have taken it as a sign that they don't know what to say.
its about what they can say.
PM&C are driving this - something that xenophon seems oblivious about
the boss resigned today at short notice.... that seems to me to be indicative of more afoot which conflicted with his sensibilities
Maybe Xenophon wanted to point how how silly and wooden the whole thing is becoming, he doesn't have a lot of platforms to ask questions. Xenophon has to get elected too, so he has to ask the questions the electorate are also asking. He is going to apply pressure where ever he can.
If you look at what Xenophon is saying.
Submarine program: Nick Xenophon calls for clarity on number of new subs Australia will buy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
He doesn't overtly care about the technical details of the submarines, he is more concerned with jobs. He is quite clear in putting out the idea that Tony has already chosen the Japanese subs. Well ok, but how many subs, what modifications and what price and will they meet the requirements, and how much work is in it for (South) Australia.
If you look at what Xenophon is saying.
Submarine program: Nick Xenophon calls for clarity on number of new subs Australia will buy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
He doesn't overtly care about the technical details of the submarines, he is more concerned with jobs. He is quite clear in putting out the idea that Tony has already chosen the Japanese subs. Well ok, but how many subs, what modifications and what price and will they meet the requirements, and how much work is in it for (South) Australia.
thats not going to be released ahead of "first principles" and the white paper
there are better questions to ask which will have greater traction......
- Status