November 28, 2014

DCNS Opens Submarine Office in Australia


Hervé GUILLOU, CEO of DCNS Group (left) opens new DCNS Australia subsidiary on November 19, 2014 in presence of Australian Defence Minister David JOHNSTON. Photo courtesy of http://en.dcnsgroup.com/news/dcns-opened-a-new-subsidiary-in-australia/

I have bolded some parts below for empahasis. The Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter November 20,  2014 reports 
 http://www.asiapacificdefencereporter.com/articles/541/DCNS-opened-a-new-subsidiary-in-Australia .

 DCNS opened a new subsidiary in Australia

Hervé GUILLOU, CEO of DCNS Group opened the new DCNS Australia subsidiary on Wednesday, November 19th, in the presence of the Australian Defence Minister, the Honourable David JOHNSTON, top management of local defence industries and numerous key personalities of government.
By setting up a long-term base in Australia, DCNS aims at taking the lead on coming discussions on SEA 1000 program between Australian stakeholders and a combined French government/industry team, including THALES Australia. Through this program, Australia plans to replace its current Collins Class submarines and DCNS is considering to propose a “conventional Barracuda” submarine, offering to Australia access to the most advanced French design and engineering know-how.
Hervé Guillou, CEO of DCNS, commented: “I am very pleased to officially announce the creation of DCNS Australia Pty Ltd. Australia is a key objective for the Group and for the French defence industry. Thanks to our dual expertise in design, build and through-life support of submarines of all sizes, including combat systems integration, we intend to bring a key contribution to the Commonwealth of Australia. Using sea proven solutions and robust industrial roadmap for the Future Submarine Australian program (SEA 1000), we’ll mitigate both program and technological risks while ensuring proper delivery strategy and capability continuity”.

 Background
Also see http://en.dcnsgroup.com/news/dcns-opened-a-new-subsidiary-in-australia/

For location of DCNS (in Canberra) see http://directory.facci.com.au/ACT/2012-dcns-group-australian-branch/

Pete's Comment

The "conventional Barracuda" ("SMX Ocean") was reviewed on Submarine Matters at http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2014/10/revised-frances-dcns-announces-smx.html on October 31, 2014.

For interest - a DCNS Youtube featuring some DCNS products

4 comments:

  1. Anonymous11/28/2014 9:10 PM

    "Sea the future"?

    According to DCNS' innovative VIPERE® buoy see Callisto buoy for Type 212-II submarines: http://www.gabler-maschinenbau.de/maschinenbau/en/entwicklungen/kommunikationssysteme/
    Notice the difference in hydrodynamic design of both buoys.

    According to DCNS' underwater drone deployment and recovery see:
    http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/what-we-do/naval-weapons/seahaker-mod4/
    Through the fiber optic link the torpedo is also a drone with a capable back link for sonar. The same fiber link is used for the IDAS missile with TV back link or could be used for expandable UUVs like SeaFox:
    http://www.atlas-elektronik.com/what-we-do/unmanned-vehicles/

    For sure DCNS provides nice videos and CGIs but no innovations.

    Regards,
    MHalblaub

    P.S.: UUV recovery is a nice feature but remember the Space Shuttle. The costs should stay reasonable.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Pete11/29/2014 1:08 AM

    Hi MHalblaub

    Thanks for the Callisto link. It is more likely Australia will buy American communication bouys. These bouys would be more compatible with the US built communications satellite and the US Seaweb network.
    see http://www.ultra-os.com/underwater.php#Anchor-ECB

    Interesting links on the SeaHake and SeaFox though I again think Australia would buy American - partly because we a re likely to continue using the US combat system.

    Regards

    Pete

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous11/29/2014 2:45 AM

    Dear Pete,

    this is again the old discussion about what is compatible. The bouys are just dumb radio transmitters. With an US radio on board there would be no difference which bouy would send the signals.

    The problem for an US combat system on any submarine from DCNS, Saab-Kockums, TKMS or Mitsubishi/Kawasaki will be a huge price difference between inherent system and US system. Not to mention the delays for introduction into service due to modifications on both sides.

    The SeaFox is in use by Royal Navy, Thai Navy and US Navy just to name a few.
    http://www.marinelink.com/news/america-seafox-atlas347530.aspx

    The SeaFox is maybe to cheap for RAN and ASC.

    Regards,
    MHalblaub

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pete11/30/2014 5:49 PM

    Dear MHalblaub

    I've placed your second post and my reply as a separate article dated November 30, 2014.

    Regards

    Pete

    ReplyDelete

You can comment :)