Significant risk if Sweden can't play

As much as the current Labor leader gets on my nerves, he is correct about the Collins replacement issue.

I also accept the current government's sub story that Labor sat on their hands while they were in government last.

To date Australia has committed over $200 million to look at a Collins submarine replacement. One independent expert states it could be as much as $500M when you add up different colours of money. Either way we don't have much to show for the money.

Ignoring Sweden in the bid process is a bad idea. They have a lot of knowledge. Yes there were goofs in the Collins development but for the first time at such an effort there are lessons learned.

Those that think Sweden should not be involved, are the kind that don't know much about the Collins history, and what they did for us.

Ditto for those that think we can't build a high percentage of the Collins replacement at home: no appreciation for the history, what was achieved, what was learned (both good and bad).

So, don't involve Sweden, but involve Japan? The Japan idea is full of unworkable problems with hair on them. Less the technology and more so the understanding of what Australia should expect out of this. In this regard, Japan is unable to deliver.

Australian Defence has to provide a deterrent.

I am OK with building 12 subs an kicking out a new one every 2 years. No stopping production. It goes on forever.

Germany--I hope they have a firm understanding of what Australia wants this time around. Germany is used to customers with requirements, but this one is a big stack.

Sweden--Good relationships can be reestablished. Lessons learned on real history.

France--Big boat. BIG BOAT. Big submarine industry. Knows how to build nuke subs too. I have a feeling with all the wonderful potential they have with the submarine specs, that they will be unable to communicate and want to drive the customers requirement to their needs. Good luck.  I hope I am wrong.

Japan--I could go on about the Soryu and what it doesn't offer. More important is the personal relationships, the tough issues of them exporting significant weapons that politically they do not have a want to do. And the relationship in their own military industrial complex...for their own defense force, isn't all that great.

Relationships...relationships.

I would really like to see the French take it. I think the relationship end of it (like Japan for different reasons) makes it impossible. Again, I hope I am wrong.

Second would be Sweden. I like the potential relationship angle. Of all the contenders, they seem the most "Australian". We can still learn a lot from them.

If I was going to buy a sub off the showroom floor it would be Germany. That would not meet the Australian requirement but still, nice subs.

I see the only purpose of Japan as a stalking horse.

Just like when the Collins was done, people do lose competitions even if their product is good. If they fail to communicate that they understand the customer requirement, both by intent and deed, its over for them.

You can't win if you don't play.

Bring Sweden to the game.

Learn from the Collins history. Most of the answers are still there.

.