In what appears to be a vote of no confidence in home industry to successfully perform work on the third Air Warfare Destroyer, the government is sending a large portion of work back to Spain.
How this will play out is unknown but this will be a blow to future plans for military ship-building at home.
Which is confusing when you see this news item.
Then there is this from yesterday:
Local shipyards snubbed as Defence looks to Spain
BY: CAMERON STEWART From: The Australian
DEFENCE has delivered a stunning vote of no confidence in Australia's naval shipbuilding industry by asking a Spanish company to help build its third air warfare destroyer, in a move that will cost local shipyards hundreds of jobs and at least $40 million in lost revenue.
The controversial decision was made quietly last month, despite protests from local shipyards.
8 comments:
Let us get into perspective. The succesful shipbuilders are going gangbusters.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2012/03/09/minister-for-defence-and-minister-for-defence-materiel-allocation-of-block-construction-work-for-the-third-air-warfare-destroyer/
Thanks Per.
If all the work had been done at Ferrol in Spain by Navantia, we could have had 4 ships for the price of 3 and they would have been built faster and to a correct standard.
Locally we would have invested in a logistical and deep maintenance capability only.
There is more to it than such a simple sugestion.
The Anzac project of $5.6 billion generated between $3 and $7.5 billion in increased GDP, as well as about $1.8 billion in tax etc. It also introduced many hundreds of sme to new technology and innovation, many of which are still exporting there product.Exports also include product to the German Navy for example.
Your friendly 212/14 has Australian content.
In addition those of us who were around at the time will remember the sactions plac raiontesed on Australia by various European nations during the Vietnam War.
This also explains the situation a little more clearly.
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/37320259/INQUIRY-INTO-NAVAL-SHIPBUILDING-IN-AUSTRALIA
Sensationalist reporting by Cameron Stewart... nothing new here.
This is a re allocation of work from BAE to Navantia because of the manufacturing mistakes of BAE.
The no confidence is in the capability BAE, plain and simple... not the broader Australian Shipbuilding Industry.
Perplexed - you may have a point wrt to the impact of the ANZAC class (which ran to 10 ships) - but here we are building only 3, and the workforce will not be operational for long. I'm concerned that by the time the skills have been built - they will no longer be needed.
Plus that real priority is the deployment of effective military capability - not the construction of a local industry.
Ps - thanks for the link.
Australian-owned ship builders like Forgacs should of course be involved in production/maintenance of naval vessels; but why are multi-national conglomerates like BAE being allowed to siphon funding out of the country? Same story of course regarding the aircraft industry and other aspects of defence expenditure.
Australian ship building capacity ought to be kept in perspective. Could we have progressively built say 6 amphibious support vessels of suitable design - a bit larger than Manoora/Kanimbla - to keep the industry ticking over for maybe 15 or so years? Or maybe some enhanced corvette style warships in lieu of AWDs? Yes on both counts.
But, ship building implications requiring import of expertise and foreign labour aside, will a technically deficient RAN be able to cope with LPDs, AWDs and 12 home-built submarines?
The Army dominated ADF envisages moving largish expeditionary forces around on aircraft carriers. Platform protection requirements, operating and maintenance costs plus manning considerations will be daunting. Inability of most armour (except M113 APCs) to operate satisfactorily in the regional wet tropics plus shipboard operating deficiencies for MRH90 and Tiger helicopters highlight very serious shortcomings in a broader defence planning sense.
Successive Australian governments are misjudging the nation's capacity to involve in the bigger defence league and there seems inadequate focus on more modest capabilities for regional operations. That is the level at which Australian ship builders ought to be involved.
Post a Comment