This Friday news cycle release from Defence (h/t - Johnno). I will put in a few of my comments and then the next post above will be a shocker.
Minister for Defence – Strategic direction of the Future Submarine Program
20 February 2015
Today the Government announces the acquisition strategy for the Future Submarine Program. This announcement sets out further details of the competitive evaluation process that will be undertaken by the Department of Defence.
Submarines are an essential component of Australia’s naval capability and the Government will ensure that the future submarine provides the best possible capability and value for money for Australian taxpayers while maximising the involvement of Australian industry.
Submarines are the most complex, sensitive and expensive Defence capability acquisition a Government can make. (This is a common Defence group-speak statement. The world "complex" is thrown around quite a bit. Many times when Defence doesn't understand the complexity. It is a throw-away statement.)
Australia’s national security and $1.6 trillion economy depend on secure sea lanes. We need the best possible submarine to protect our trade and support our maritime security. (Note that 6 submarines under the current management paradigm were nowhere near Russia's shirt-front, when they sent a surface combat group down here a few months ago. So obviously submarines, the way they are employed by the ADF are unable to protect our trade and support our maritime security. Without a credible tactical aircraft plan, there is no such thing as maritime security; protecting trade or securing our sea lanes. WWII Germany had hundreds of submarines. A loss of air supremancy ended their sea and land influence.)
It must be delivered in time to avoid a capability gap in the mid-2020s when the Collins Class submarine is scheduled to be retired from service. The decisions we make on the Future Submarine Program will determine what kind of capability we have to defend Australia and Australian interests into the 2040s and beyond. (The red paragraph above already pulls the rug out from this paragraph.)
The process outlined by the Government today provides a pathway for Australian industry to maximise its involvement in the program, whilst not compromising capability, cost, program schedule or risk. (Historically, mismanagement by the Entrenched Defence Bureaucracy has always compromised capability, cost, program schedule and risk. Just by involving the faulty DMO assures this. As Defense reporter Bill Sweetman stated about another high-risk project which fits perfectly here: "You are promising something better than Star Wars and Gone With The Wind but your record is Ishtar and Howard the Duck, and you say "trust us, we know what we are doing". Hard to believe when many troubled ADF projects show that known risks were ignored.)
The Government expects that significant work will be undertaken in Australia during the build phase of the future submarine including combat system integration, design assurance and land based testing. This will result in the creation at least 500 new high-skill jobs in Australia, the majority of which will be based in South Australia. ("At least 500, new high-skill jobs" is just a magic number since there has been no selection process yet.)
The Future Submarine Program is the largest Defence procurement program in Australia’s history and represents an investment in the order of $50 billion in Australia’s security. These costs will be subject to refinement through the competitive evaluation process. A significant proportion of this investment will be spent in Australia during the lifetime of the future submarine. (The way the Entrenched Defence Bureaucracy mis-manages large projects, this could be our biggest broken window yet.)
Successive governments have used various kinds of competitive evaluation processes for major Defence capability procurements. (Or just magically picked winners after consulting unicorns. Example: The failed F-35 program and the previous Defence Minister, recently fired, who had to sell the idea of the Japanese Soryu class submarine. A sub that has half the range of the current Collins with less crew space. Not "similar" range as mentioned below.)
As part of this competitive evaluation process, the Department of Defence will seek proposals from potential partners for:
a) Pre-concept designs based on meeting Australian capability criteria;
b) Options for design and build overseas, in Australia, and/or a hybrid approach;
c) Rough order of magnitude (ROM) costs and schedule for each option; and
d) Positions on key commercial issues, for example intellectual property rights and the ability to use and disclose technical data.
In addition to this – and on the advice of Defence – the Government has endorsed a set of key strategic requirements for our future submarines:
a) Range and endurance similar to the Collins Class submarine;
b) Sensor performance and stealth characteristics that are superior to the Collins Class submarine; and
c) The combat system and heavyweight torpedo jointly developed between the United States and Australia as the preferred combat system and main armament. (More on b: "Sensor ... ...performance superior to Collins and c: demanding a U.S. combat system. This, by their own requirement shows the government has not looked at risk and has killed these requirements. By depending on a U.S. combat system, they, the Entrenched Defence Bureaucracy have screwed themselves. More on this show-stopper in the next post. This is what a $214M Collins replacement study buys you: Unicorn dreams.)
Defence advises that for Australian industry to have the best opportunity to maximise their involvement in the Future Submarine Program, it needs to work with an international partner. ("Opportunity", that magic word is killing jobs already with the troubled F-35 program. The "international partner" especially if they are the U.S. holds the reins.)
Based on work completed by Defence, France, Germany, and Japan have emerged as potential international partners. All three countries have proven submarine design and build capabilities and are currently producing submarines. (Japan doesn't trust our ability to keep a secret. Their sub doesn't meet the requirement and Japan has no credible infrastructure management to export weapons technology. Up until recently France and Germany have been ignored. The Swedes are out because the government claims they haven't built a sub in 20 years...even if they have --Damn you Google!)
France, Germany and Japan will be invited to participate in this competitive evaluation process that will assess their ability to partner with Australia to develop a Future Submarine that meets our capability requirements. (So since Japan is uncomfortable with the idea of weapons competition, they are out. And as stated before, the Soryu can't meet the requirement.)
The Department of Defence will invite potential international partners to seek opportunities for Australian industry participation in the Future Submarine Program.
The competitive evaluation process will help the Government balance important considerations including capability, cost, schedule, and risk. Interoperability with our alliance partner, the United States, will also be a fundamental consideration. (The career seekers and nest featherers in the Entrenched Defence Bureaucracy have another word they love besides "complex". It is "interoperability" They do not understand that you can have a variety of systems and still have combat-killing interoperability with your allies. Since U.S. Industries already have their hooks into our graft and nepotism management system of government contracts...it looks like they helped to write this document.)
The competitive evaluation process will take around ten months, after which an international partner will be selected for Australia’s Future Submarine Program. Further details about Australian industry involvement are also expected to be known at that point. (10 months because of well...Federal elections you know.)
The competitive evaluation process will ensure that capability, cost, schedule, and key strategic considerations, along with Australian industry involvement, are carefully and methodically considered, and avoid unnecessary delays to the Future Submarine Program. (Hard to believe given the Ishtar track record. We will evaluate that statement in...10 months or not.)
The Department of Defence will soon be holding industry briefings to inform Australian industry about the process and how they can engage with potential international partners. ("Listen up peasants.")
An expert advisory panel will also be appointed to oversee the competitive evaluation process. Further details about this will be announced once individual appointments are confirmed. ("Expert"?)
Media contacts:
Brad Rowswell (Minister Andrews’ Office) 0417 917 796
Defence Media Operations (02) 6127 1999
No comments:
Post a Comment