This week, the Australian Treasurer, Joe Hockey, is taken for a fool.
The Defence Materiel Organisation, in a written response to a question posed at Senate estimates by independent Nick Xenophon, has claimed: “Twelve years is not a realistic timeframe for a domestic build of a new design.”
OK let us look at that statement. This from an observer of Defence issues for over 30 years:
Even the highly challenging Virginia Class nuclear submarine (a new design) was completed in 6 years from Contract Award to commissioning of the first of class.
· USA Virginia Class (New Class - whole new design)
o Contract 1998
o First boat (SSN-774) launched 2003
o First boat commissioned 23 October 2004 (6 years)
The average time for recent submarine projects has been around 8 years.
Even the first of the Collins Class was produced in 9 years which included building an entire new shipyard!
Here’s the timeframes for recent submarine builds:
· Collins (Swedish design built in Australia)
o Contract between C of A and ASC signed 3 June 87
o 1989 ENTIRE NEW SHIPYARD COMPLETED
o HMAS Collins Launched 28 August 1993 (in the water but not tested – 6 years)
o HMAS Collins commissioned 27 July 1996 (9 years)
· Chilean Scorpions (French/Spanish design built in France/Spain)
o Contract 1997
o First boat launched 2003
o First boat commissioned 2005 (8 years)
· Italian Type 212 (German design built in Italy)
o Contract 1998
o First boat launched 2003
o First boat commissioned 2006 (8 years)
· South Korea (German design built in Korea)
o Contract 2000
o First boat launched 2006
o First boat commissioned 2007 (7 years)
· Israeli Dolphin II (Built in Germany)
o Contract signed 2006
o First boat delivered 2014 (8 years)
· Singapore 218SG (Build in Germany)
o Contract signed 2013
o First boat due in Singapore 2020/21 (7 to 8 years)
Is the DMO unaware of industry history on submarine building or do they just want to milk the taxpayer for all they are worth?
Business Spectator (subscription), also cross-posted in the Business section of The Australian.... certainly thinks Hockey and others are being taken for a ride.
The Abbott government has produced several first-class minsters whom are not unduly influenced by the public service and are doing a fine job, including (in alphabetical order) Julie Bishop, Mathias Cormann, Greg Hunt, Scott Morrison, Andrew Robb and Malcolm Turnbull.
Not on that list, unfortunately, is Treasurer Joe Hockey.
Joe is a great guy and a well-meaning minister, so it is particularly disappointing to realise that he has become a puppet of the Defence Materiel Organisation. The DMO does not appear to understand that having a local defence industry capability is an essential part of defence in wartime — particularly for an island nation.
For too many of our defence people, local industry is too hard to manage and mistakes can threaten their career. Joe was sucked in this week, making the totally ridiculous proposition that it would take 12 years to produce a submarine using local industry.
My message to Joe Hockey is: “You were conned — but you should have done the homework”. There are experts outside the public service who will show you how you can combine overseas and local industry and retain local involvement in submarine production and still be very competitive (the submarines must be ready by 2026).
Read the whole article. It is a different version of the same story. Pick the weapon system. Australia currently does not have the leadership capability in place, to lead us to a strong Defence and thus to a strong national security posture.
“Buying submarines is not like going down to the parking lot and buying a whole lot of cars,” Mr Hockey told ABC Radio.
Actually it can be. If so decided, there are existing designs. Other countries (some in the Pacific Rim) are doing exactly that. Now, that may not be politically possible here; but it is fact.
Scorpène Class Malaysian Navy submarine "Tun Razak"
And more on submarines. The first order of business for submarines is to protect our home waters...before crafting a requirement for something on the other side of the Pacific. As shown with the peaceful Russian Navy cruise into our area of interest, we do not have enough submarine resources to challenge future threats that think they can get away with this. This is only going to get worse since the RAAF is well on the way to losing local air supremacy...as a capability.
We do not need to be building giant dream-subs until we have the basic, local sub defense need taken care of. Want to built big long-range subs? Good. Do it after we have the regional combat capability taken care of.
I suspect 12 subs are not enough. I would prefer double that. But I would prefer they are small; affordable; produced here and can do the job. I want something that can have a really good sonar set (ISR). A handful of torpedos and mines. Having them fire sub-launched cruise-missiles, could be an invitation to have your ass kicked (hint: if you don't have local air supremacy and the other guy has airborne ISR/ASW). We also have to have enough subs to suffer losses in wartime.
I would think about 50 percent attrition rate.
It is an extremely dangerous job.
Something not even brought up by all the rent-seekers, entrenched defence bureaucracy and ill-informed politicians.
---
-New Defence White Paper fails to address Australia's core security needs
-2009 Defence White Paper Fantasy
-Analysing "The ADF Air Combat Capability- On the Record"
-Find out who is responsible for the Air Warfare Destroyer mess
-Analysis of Defence Materiel Organisation Major Projects Management and What Needs to be Fixed
-New DMO Boss warns the staff that business as usual is over
-How dangerous is the Defence Material Organisation to our Defence Industry?
-Australia's Failing Defence Structure and Management Methodology
-More on the dud-jamming gear Defence wants to buy
-ADF cost per flying hour
-I will wipe out bullying vows new Defence chief (Houston 2005)
-Vacancy
-Put Vol 2 Report of DLA Piper Review into the light of day
-Rory and Jim
-Parasitism as an Abstraction for Organizational Dysfunctions
-Hobart-class "Air Warfare Destroyer" to be fielded with obsolete radar guidance technology
-The Decay Of Critical Military Thinking And Writing-With Particular Reference To The RAAF
-Newspaper guy gets it right about sub project.... big time
-The great M-1 tank myth
-*UPDATE* Fear and loathing in Canberra - Audit released on MRH-90 helicopter project
-RAN bullies contractor over Collins sub replacement
-2014-15 ADF budget shocker - Star-ranks
-Air Warfare Destroyer -- Billions, not millions over budget
-Australia's M-1 tanks are... a downgrade compared to what it had
-Weak links put on rubber-stamp Defence panel
-Stop the nonsense (Collins-class submarine replacement)
-Insert Joke Here
-Tyranny of distance--Long, drawn out helicopter projects are unsustainable
-2014-15 ADF budget shocker - cost per flying hour over the last budget year
-Tiger savaged by Navy League of Australia
-Tiger helicopter update
-Overview of corruption in Australia
No comments:
Post a Comment