Todjaeger
Potstirrer
I still am of the opinion that how they (gov't) seem to be approaching the Tier 2 vessel build seem to be going about it in what I consider to be the wrong fashion.The tier 2 vessels are replacements for the Arafuras and instead of the proposed corvettes.
This is so much better than I expected. The ships will be superior in every way to the upgraded ANZACs, which were I should add, actually intended to be replaced by the Hunters. The Hunters are now, by default, becoming replacements for the FFGs and a timely replacement for the Hobart's is now pencilled in.
Best of all, not an Arafura class "battleship" or Cape class "missile cruiser" insight!
If the objective is a combat-capable patrol vessel, have a vessel designed as such. If there is concern about getting at least some units into RAN service ASAP then fine, seek out a design which an overseas yard can rapidly get into production whilst an Australian yard or yards get configured to build to such a design. However, trying to quickly find an essentially MOTS design which is rapidly available from an overseas yard and then can be built in an Australian yard is IMO asking for trouble. By going with whatever might be available from overseas ASAP, one is trading possibly rapid availability for future/ongoing issues with operations, support and sustainability.
I suspect it would be better for a small overseas build of 3-4 vessels of whatever design is available that most closely resembles what is needed, while a design (not necessarily the same design) is Australianized for production in Australia.
I do recognize the political want/need to have shipbuilding in WA, still not convinced that doing so advantageous for Australia.