Bids submitted for the Collins submarine replacement

It will be interesting to see how this all works out.

Tokyo (AFP) - Three international bidders are seeking a contract worth up to Aus$50 billion (US$36 billion) to build a next-generation submarine fleet for Australia, it was confirmed Monday.

Submissions have been received from DCNS of France, Germany's TKMS and the Japanese government, Australia's Defence Minister Marise Payne announced as the deadline closed.

The contract is to replace the nation's current diesel and electric-powered Collins Class submarines.

Besides matching their range and endurance, the next generation of subs are expected to offer superior sensor performance and stealth capabilities.

The tender process has been politically sensitive, with Canberra keen to maximise Australian industry involvement and jobs. There are fears that any off-the-shelf purchase could kill off the domestic shipbuilding industry.

Payne said in a statement the assessment of the bids "will include the level of Australian industry involvement that will be possible under each option".

In Tokyo a defence ministry official said Japan's proposal includes plans to build the submarines in Australia.

The official said Tokyo was "confident" its bid would win but disclosed no details.

Japan's current submarine is excellent. However it was designed to meet Japan's operational methods. We have been told that the Collins replacement must be able to leave out of Perth, go up near China, patrol around and, if needed, launch long-range cruise-missiles.

How is Japan and the entrenched defence bureaucracy going to take that base Soryu design which has a range of 9700 kilometers and have it match or exceed the range of the Collins which is 17,000-21,000 kilometers? You can read this on how bad assumptions of weapons platforms are made inside of a bureaucracy (the bit about Soviet Backfire assumptions and people not liking what they hear).

The crew accomodations for the current Soryu are insufficient for Australian crews. How will that be addressed?

It appears that no long range cruise missiles will be fired from the Soryu design. This was a fantasy want in selling the Collins replacement in the last two, previous, defective, defence white papers?

Will the modified Soryu for Australia go with the current AIP boats that are in the water or future production Soryu boats which will not have AIP but instead, Lithium-Ion batteries? What are the risks with that battery technology (on that larger scale) with submarines?

How will Japanese industry--who will not tolerate the foolishness of the entrenched defence bureaucracy--be able to come to agreements?

If those performing the Collins submarine replacement project were to run through, step-by-step, existing, government risk evaluations for this massive project, how many items for the Japanese option, would be "High-risk"? How many would be "Extreme-risk"? Risk is allowed if teams have the skill to work it. But the deskilling of the entrenched defence bureaucracy does not live in that world.

To date, there isn't evidence at the most basic level, that the Japanese option for the Collins replacement can be low or medium risk.

Or is there?

.