November 13, 2018

Just 8 Australian Future Submarines, not 12.

On January 12, 2018 I made a comment in a Forum that:

"The 12 Future Subs number has always been a ["furphy" ie. misleading annoucement]. The industry and [Australian] Navy are hoping for a 8 subs compromise."

This 8 sub expectation now seems accurate as the Australian Navy's thinking is revealed in an excellent article of October 28, 2018 by Andrew Tillett in the Australian Financial Review.

In the article Tillett interviews the Australian Navy's Head of the Future Submarine Program, Rear Admiral Greg SammutTillett reports, in part:

“While the [Australian] Rudd government's 2009 defence white paper identified the need for 12 new submarines – doubling the size of the existing Collins class fleet – Admiral Sammut revealed Naval Group and the German and Japanese contenders had only been required to bid on the basis of providing eight conventionally powered submarines.

"So it is in that context that we are putting in place the [delayed Strategic Partnering Agreement] SPA with that understanding the offer was built around eight boats and necessarily the terms and conditions we have should contemplate that, noting that the size of the fleet beyond eight boats will be a matter for government," he said.

"That doesn't mean we must buy eight boats hell or high water, the contract enables us to contemplate what would occur if it was less than that and what would have to apply in those circumstances.”

SEE THE COMPLETE AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW ARTICLE


PETE COMMENT

There seems a conflict or at least ambiguity on whether Australia wants only 8 Future Submarines  and is Naval Group insisting on 12?

Just eight new submarines would have many strategic, operational and financial implications.

Following the rule of thirds only 2 or 3 submarines may be short term available for operations or on patrol instead of 4 available if Australia had 12 subs. Australia has a very long coastline, hence vast distances for only 2 or 3 slow SSKs.

If Australia is effectively paying half the development cost for the Shortfin/Future Submarine/Collins Replacement as well as paying the unit prices for 8 subs the purchase price has increased by at least a third.

So the widely advertised upfront figure of US$50 Billion, now covers only 8 Shortfins. This makes them as expensive as the world's most expensive (4 times larger, nuclear powered) US future Columbia class submarines.

Is it too late to buy off-the-shelf stretched Naval Group Scorpenes? Probably acceptable to Naval Group and a purchase that would not bankrupt Australia?

On Thursday November 15 I'll return to the major delay in Naval Group's Barracuda SSN program, including why Naval Group curiously discarded the confidence building term "Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A." Its taken longer than expected to assemble my arguments.

Pete

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

So maybe with a little help from Saab, Australia can get 12 subs by do a mid-life upgrade of 4 of the Collins class subs :)

Extending the life and punch of Collins

/Kjell

Pete said...

Hi /Kjell

Thanks for the link https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/3133-extending-the-life-and-punch-of-collins .

Yes due to the difficulties of the Australian Future Submarine Progaram Australia will need 4 to 6 Collins into the 2030s.

So yes a midlife upgrade of 4 to 6 Collins in the early-mid 2020s is needed. Saab's experience upgrading Gotlands will come in handy.

Australia is probably too far contractually with Naval Group's Shortfins or at least Scorpenes to pull out of the Naval Group deal for Future Submarine.

Even Australia's Opposition Labor Party say it will stick with Naval Group for Future Submarine.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete,

I found a Swedish document about Swedish Submarine Design Development from A11 to A26 unfortunately it is in Swedish but maybe something is of interest anyhow.

It is a download link so the document will be downloaded:
https://www.koms.se/content/uploads/2017/11/TiS-3-f%C3%B6r-hemsida.pdf

/Kjell

Pete said...

Thanks /Kjell [at 17/11/18 9:05 AM]

Readers need to be aware that

https://www.koms.se/content/uploads/2017/11/TiS-3-f%C3%B6r-hemsida.pdf

is 15 MB long, in Swedish language and seems largely historical.

Pete