More sub misinformation from the usual sources

It is that time again. About every few months or so the discussion comes up about Australia's useless submarine fleet.

Then we have those that want to continue under the fantasy that subs can be built here at home.

Those stating that off-the-shelf subs will not work, (due to the nonsense-need called "Australianisation" of the product)..guarantee a plan to have no subs.

The ASC, DMO, Navy and rent-seekers are a poisonous team that  ensure failure by their own incompetence on managing the current 6 subs we have.

They do not deserve the taxpayer's trust when talking about submarines.

Off-the-shelf subs make it certain that we can have a continuous, skilled, crew capability. Off-the-shelf subs make it certain that the RAN has some submarine capability as opposed to none.

Not a hard choice if ones only goal is the defence of the nation.

-

-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
-How dangerous is the Defence Material Organisation to our Defence Industry?
-Australia's Failing Defence Structure and Management Methodology

Goal of new sub not to defend country

The goal of the new sub program is to provide jobs for the rent seekers.

But we knew that already.

IF Australia goes with a Japanese design for its Future Submarines it must build the vessels in SA to keep taxpayers dollars and jobs in this country.

Defence Teaming Centre chief executive officer Chris Burns was commenting about the head of the Royal Australian Navy's Future Submarine Program heading to Japan this month to look at its Soryu-class vessels.

"If we can take a Japanese design and adapt it to Australia's needs and then fabricate it in SA then that's investing in Australian jobs, Australian innovation and Australian security for the future," Mr Burns said.

Just a few challenges ahead, I suspect. Behaviour and all that.