tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post9045373656433763676..comments2024-03-30T00:14:23.992+11:00Comments on Submarine Matters & Australian Nuclear Weapons: Minister Andrews Phone Call to Minister NakataniPete2http://www.blogger.com/profile/06134037393078707072noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-55550849648358033102015-05-16T21:57:35.936+10:002015-05-16T21:57:35.936+10:00Hi S
Thankyou for all your research. I need to do...Hi S<br /><br />Thankyou for all your research. I need to do a separate article to do all your analysis justice. <br /><br />From your May 13, 11:43 comment:<br /><br />"Defence Programs and Budget of Japan Overview of FY2015 Budget Request" http://www.mod.go.jp/e/d_budget/pdf/261003.pdf is especially useful on many topics - as it is a summary in English. It includes (on page 4) the important point: <br /><br />Japan will <br />"・ Implement life extension measures for Oyashio-class submarines in order to increase the number of submarines from the current 16 to 22 ships."<br /><br />This is important because Australian subs are expected to last about 30 years so building of 28SS Soryus to last 30 years will be important.<br />----------------------------<br /><br />From your May 16 comments:<br /><br />That "LCC (life cycle cost) of 28SS seems to be cheaper than reported." may be good news. Australia, as a possible customer, would appreciate "cheaper" rather than more expensive :) <br /><br />Thankyou for http://www.mod.go.jp/epco/about/pdf/26lifecyclecost_houkokusyo.pdf <br /><br />I aim to do an article on Tuesday on this information you have provided from Japan. Meanwhile Germany and France appear to have little to offer publically.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-67736280002542088312015-05-16T10:29:07.896+10:002015-05-16T10:29:07.896+10:00Hi pete
Deviation (-+10%) of estimation is based ...Hi pete<br /><br />Deviation (-+10%) of estimation is based on the case of US Department of Defence. Costs include consumption tax which is 8 and 10% for FY2014-2016, and for FY2017-, respectively.<br /><br />Regard<br />S <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-81565488236972319502015-05-16T08:40:44.549+10:002015-05-16T08:40:44.549+10:00Hi Pete
According to the latest Japanese governme...Hi Pete<br /><br />According to the latest Japanese government report, LCC (life cycle cost) of 28SS seems to be cheaper than reported. EPCO (Equipment Procurement and Construction Office) of MOD (Ministry of Defence) submitted “FY 2014 Annual Report for LCC (life cycle cost) Management” in March 30th 2015. LCC includes unit price in production and total costs in conception, development, production, operation/maintainance and desposal. Aim of LCC management is to optimize LCC of equipments. This report showed LCCs of various equipments (from Jet Fighter to 28SS).<br /><br />1) Coclution<br />LCC of two diesel+LIBs submarines for 24 years is ca. 207 Byen (=2.1 BAUD), cheaper than reported cost which is ca. 1.1 BAUD (one submarine) for 15 years service (Reuters Japan Nov19, 2014).<br /><br />2) Explanation ( http://www.mod.go.jp/epco/about/pdf/26lifecyclecost_houkokusyo.pdf page 77-80)<br />2-1) page78 table 3 <br />Two FY 2015 type (diesel + LIBs), which JMSDF gets one in FY2015 (to be commissioned in FY2019) and another in FY2016 (ibid FY2020). Development cost is based on basic design of analogous subs. Building cost is based on latest analogous subs. Operation/maintainance cost is based on demonstrated cost for analogous subs. <br /><br />2-2) page79 figure 4<br />LCC estimation (100,000,000 yen vs FY; H26=FY2014----H56=FY2044).<br />Solid line is LCC estimation, dashed lines are LCC estimation +10% and -10%.<br /><br />2-3) page80 upper figure; cost for each stage of life (unit=100,000,000 yen) <br />Development cost (H26=FY2014) =0. Building cost (H27-32) =1288 (16 for first year, 1,272 for product). Operation/maintainance cost (H32~50)=783(40 for operation, 783 for logistics support), Disposal cost (H50-)=1.<br /><br />Regards<br />S<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-31675698624672152972015-05-14T13:17:50.861+10:002015-05-14T13:17:50.861+10:00Thanks S
Regarding "I do not why 27SS is so ...Thanks S<br /><br />Regarding "I do not why 27SS is so expensive." The higher cost may be due to 27SS being an experimental model rather than the first of a production run. Basically Japan cannot cost 27SS as one unit in a production run of 10 over ten years. This is because 27SS may represent a unique combination of AIP and LIB that may not be repeated. That is if 28SS onwards are no AIP but LIB subs. <br /><br />Also 27SS may carry much of the LIB introduction costs - which relate not only to new batteries but a whole new electrical system (wiring etc throughout the sub). <br /><br />Thanks for the detail. The ability of Japan to give precise and rapid answers regarding a submarine (the Soryu) already in production is a major advantage over the German and French competitors.<br /><br />Meanwhile Germany's suspected entry the TKMS 216 is a paper submarine only - while France's "conventional Barracuda" is very underdeveloped and if 4,750 tons (surfaced) is just too heavy (equaling too expensive) to be considered.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-22324166449293825762015-05-13T23:43:39.758+10:002015-05-13T23:43:39.758+10:00Hi Pete
FY2014 budgetary assessment of submarine ...Hi Pete<br /><br />FY2014 budgetary assessment of submarine building cost is 51,996,801,000 yen for one 16SS (lead acid batteries+AIP Soryu), and FY2015 budgetary request is 65,964,619,000 yen for one 27SS. I coud not find submarine refit section in FY2015 budgetary request for warship renovation cost. So we can judge that TSS-3608 refit cost for LIBs is not also requested. I do not why 27SS is so expensive.<br /><br />[1]http://www.mod.go.jp/e/d_budget/pdf/261003.pdf, “Defence Programs and Budget of Japan Overview of FY2015 Budget Request” page 5 <br />[2] Details of Defence Programs and Budget.<br /><br />Regards<br />S<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-69216552424722460532015-05-13T21:28:41.079+10:002015-05-13T21:28:41.079+10:00Thanks S
How about Oyashio (was SS-590 now TSS-36...Thanks S<br /><br />How about Oyashio (was SS-590 now TSS-3608)?<br /> <br />http://datab.us/i/Oyashio%20class%20submarine indicates it was converted to a training submarine as recently as 6 March 2015?<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />Pete<br />Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-48163827803373894292015-05-13T21:14:07.430+10:002015-05-13T21:14:07.430+10:00Hi Pete
Refit of Asashio (TSS-3601) for LIBs will...Hi Pete<br /><br />Refit of Asashio (TSS-3601) for LIBs will not be conducted. Because Ministry of Defence requested the 27SS (LIBs + AIP Soryu) building cost for FY2015 submarine budget allocations, but did not request the TSS-3601 refit cost.<br /><br />Regards<br />S<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-6778622251676657642015-05-10T15:06:01.902+10:002015-05-10T15:06:01.902+10:00Hi S
Looking at those issues in order:
(1a) Yes ...Hi S<br /><br />Looking at those issues in order:<br /><br />(1a) Yes its hard to compare Soryu performance to design board TKMS 216 performance or to the mainly design board conventional DCNS “Barracuda”. Although if the DCNS sub weighs the publically quoted 4,750 tonnes (surfaced) it should be automatically eliminated as a choice. <br />(2a) Yes there is growing Soryu performance data – being provided by Japan to the RAN – and even this blog is recording more detail. Also one must consider that data (on the future Soryu Mark 2s (28SS) and TKMS and DCNS subs) are necessarily estimates.<br />(3a) Issues on AIP seem to draw the most mistakes and false claims. One major mistake is that there are distinct “AIP subs” that don’t even have diesel engines.<br />(1b) yes German diesel-LIB + AIP performance will be superior however dangers of AIP must be considered AND Japan may be quietly developing its own AIP.<br />(2b) Yes the current Soryu Mark 1 (16SS) are too short in range. Although the Mark 2 may be much longer range – to not only satisfy Australian requirements but also satisfy Japanese longer range requirements. <br />(3a + 3b) Yes the claim that AIP approaches nuclear performance is the result of selling company propaganda, navy claims and the usual ignorance of many/most journalists including those from Australia<br /><br />Also see my response above over the upcoming 2+2 Australia-Japan talks (from http://dfat.gov.au/geo/japan/Pages/japan-country-brief.aspx )<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-41485522986813191792015-05-10T14:38:25.372+10:002015-05-10T14:38:25.372+10:00Hi MHalblaub
I agree that the US provision of its...Hi MHalblaub<br /><br />I agree that the US provision of its combat system (including weapons) is a key deciding factor. The combat system is especially (though quietly) important as it is a “key” to many US and Japanese installed undersea sensor arrays throughout the region. More on arrays in future weeks as ANU Press has recently published a major work on that subject.<br /><br />Australia has sent submariners to Japan about the propulsion system. The RAN head of the Future Submarine project might attend Australia’s upcoming and regular “2+2” talks with Japan which includes Defence Ministers. Those talks may next occur in Tokyo around June 2015.<br /><br />See http://dfat.gov.au/geo/japan/Pages/japan-country-brief.aspx “The JDSC also established the regular '2+2' talks between foreign and defence ministers. At the fifth 2+2 talks in Tokyo on 11 June 2014, Ministers agreed on recommendations to enhance security and defence cooperation, including the conclusion of negotiations on a defence technology and equipment agreement.”<br /><br />When Minister Andrews visited TKMS-Kiel on April 23, 2015 the TKMS presentation included information on the Dolphins supplied to Israel and 209s being built for Egypt. Defence attaches may talk and visit about India and Brazil.<br /><br />If first-sale issues cause major delays in the Japanese sale Australia may go to Germany or France. Japan having an actual large sub in production (with the Soryu) is a legitimate selling strength for Japan.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-72029660295174889442015-05-10T08:21:59.261+10:002015-05-10T08:21:59.261+10:00Hi Pete
Japan’s participation in competitive eval...Hi Pete<br /><br />Japan’s participation in competitive evaluation process was widely reported here in Japan. But there were big misunderstandings in Sankei Shinbun, 5th biggest news paper in Japan. The repoter said<br />(1a) ‘“If you compare the French and German subs in terms of performance, Soryu class subs are seen as overwhelmingly advantageous”<br />(2a) “Unfounded story that performance of Soryu is insufficient prevailes in Australia.”<br />(3a) “Performance of Soryu is 80% of that of Nuclear subs.”<br />As I could not accept such an opinion, I complained Sankei Shinbun.<br />(1b) 1a does not reflect the fact. AIP submerged range and speed of German subs (30days at 5knot/h) are superior to Soryu (14days at 2-2.5knot/h), etc.<br />(2b) Australia government reported that no submarine satisfied future submarine requirements. In fact, Soryu’s range is much shorter than German or current Collins subs, etc. Aussie criticizes performance of Soryu based on the fact.<br />(3b) 3a is simply against commonsense on performance of conventional subs.<br /><br />Not only Japanese journalism, Australian journalism shows mistake. Like, “there is little information on Soyu”. But, we know outlines of hull structure/steel/welding, cells, indurance, and anti-vibration/sound absorption system.<br /><br />Regards<br />S<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-85490186176892299102015-05-09T17:33:01.024+10:002015-05-09T17:33:01.024+10:00Dear Pete,
this time the submarine will be chosen...Dear Pete,<br /><br />this time the submarine will be chosen according to the same standards as last time: someone wants an US combat system. Everything else is secondarily.<br /><br />To chose a submarine the best way would be to test the already available submarines. Did RAN ever send submariners to Japan, Israel, India, Brazil, to name just a few countries where Australia could get proper information? <br /><br />I did not list Germany or France because these countries are no real costumers. <br /><br />Regards,<br />MHalblaub<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-50364470756359856522015-05-08T14:25:11.660+10:002015-05-08T14:25:11.660+10:00Hi MHalblaub
Yes Germany is the main contender ag...Hi MHalblaub<br /><br />Yes Germany is the main contender against Japan. In the 1980s Australia was very close to choosing Germany to build the Collins. But some strange alchemy caused Australia to choose Sweden at the last tender hurdle.<br /><br />Germany's unmatched experience in selling reliable, low crew size subs should rate highly.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />Pete<br /><br />cc: a very enlarged Type 209 (no AIP but LIB please :)Petehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-76482636811619204862015-05-08T14:16:40.339+10:002015-05-08T14:16:40.339+10:00Hi Anonymous (May 8, 2:07AM)
Yes the many stages ...Hi Anonymous (May 8, 2:07AM)<br /><br />Yes the many stages of the process of Australia (probably) acquiring Soryus will bring Japan and Australia closer together. No reason why it shouldn't be a positive process.<br /><br />Japan has certainly proven a good business partner in the commercial sector (from car factories in Australia to ships and iron ore and coal buying) so partnering Australia in the defence sector is possible.<br /><br />Also the Japanese military would be used to liaising in English with their American allies (since 1950). So this can extend to Japan-Australia liaison.<br /><br />A possible stumbling block so far is Japan getting used to the idea that China is more important economically to Australia than Japan is. <br /><br />If Japan bought more minerals and resources from Australia: <br />- Japan may surpass China in economic importance to Australia, and also<br />- a sort of balance of payments dynamic "submarines for minerals/energy" could develop between Japan and Australia.<br /><br />There is a precedent of such a trade dynamic in American weapons for Saudi Arabian oil.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-26704645603554749372015-05-08T13:58:47.266+10:002015-05-08T13:58:47.266+10:00Hi S
I think Andrews' phone call is a major s...Hi S<br /><br />I think Andrews' phone call is a major stage in an established series of Australian indications that Australia has already picked Japan. Major indications started during Abe's July 2014 visit to Australia http://www.news.com.au/national/australia-to-sign-new-submarines-deal-with-japan-as-prime-minister-shinzo-abe-visits-tony-abbott-in-canberra/story-fncynjr2-1226980720135 . <br /><br />The http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/english/news/20150506_17.html article certainly puts a different emphasis on the phone call. It appears much more like Andrews asking for Australia to become a partner in the future Soryu Mark 2 (Lithium-ion battery) Project.<br /><br />There is no pure off-the-shelf submarine as country customers always request a range of adjustments for their mission needs. In that regard Japan would certainly be unused to the concept of "jointly develop[ing] a submarine with another country". <br /><br />I'll place the above in the text of my article.<br /><br />Regards<br /><br />PetePetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624742078679760819noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-23815124376263226192015-05-08T04:14:05.875+10:002015-05-08T04:14:05.875+10:00Dear Pete,
I doubt that any Australian would have...Dear Pete,<br /><br />I doubt that any Australian would have to learn more than "Ein Bier bitte!" and "Die Rechnung bitte!" to learn something about a German submarine while in Germany.<br /><br />For engineers it is a daily business to speak English to foreign costumers. All men and women on German submarine can speak English. Also a lot of different nations were trained on German submarines. <br /><br />Regards,<br />MHalblaub<br /><br />C.c.: Type 210mod is the best solution for Australia.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-62960820926768405162015-05-08T02:07:35.237+10:002015-05-08T02:07:35.237+10:00The communications, cultural differences are manag...The communications, cultural differences are manageable if planned carefully. They can be very rewarding. <br />Over nearly 2 decades, I worked in a high tech industry with Japanese, French, German customers. As an English speaker, I always hired professional technical translators for face to face meetings. I am also backed up in my team by very able Japanese engineers. At the beginning, most of my high ranking Japanese customers can barely spoke English, but they made tremendous progresses in 1-2 years. Yes, certain things take longer, but that is how you develop a close mutual understanding of each other. After a few years, we become almost like family. Something that I cannot say the same with my French (although I speak French fluently) or German customers.<br />I am most impressed with my Japanese customers' attention to minute details. They always made 100% of their commitments, and I made sure I also met 100% of my commitments to them.<br />It always take time to develop a lasting and trusting partnership.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19245896.post-85473710552957975322015-05-07T23:50:47.951+10:002015-05-07T23:50:47.951+10:00Hi Pete
Judging from the situation, Minister Andr...Hi Pete<br /><br />Judging from the situation, Minister Andrews phone call was the diplomatic message that Australia selected Japan as a partner in next submarine development? Japan quickly responded to the message, deciding to offer classified information on submarine and to hold National Security Council for approval of submarine selling.<br /><br />Regards <br />S<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com