On February 6, 2019 I wrote: “France's Barracuda SSN Submarine Launching
in 2019 – Maybe at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2019/02/barracuda-ssn-submarine-launching-in.html
with the text:
“The
launching of France's delayed (laid
down 2007) first of class Barracuda-Suffren class SSN will free up a good part
of Naval Group's design and construction labour force.
...Once freed up the Naval Group design and construction labour force
can begin to fully address Australia's huge Shortfin
Barracuda (Attack class) SSK Program."
Six days later, Australia’s
ABC “France maintains it will deliver Australia's $50
billion 'Barracuda' submarines on time” of February 12, 2019 at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-12/barracuda-delay-and-impact-on-australian-program/10800794 includes:
"France's visiting Defence Minister Florence Parly has assured
Australia the future submarine program will run on time, despite a similar
build project [of the Barracuda SSN] running three years late in her country.
Despite Naval
Group's three-year delay with its project in France, Ms Parly says there will
be no flow on effects for Australia's program.
"It's
very much related to the nuclear part of our submarines and related to new
norms and controls that did not exist before," she said."
PETE COMMENT
France's current attack submarine delay is much more than a "three-year delay". The US and UK have built nuclear attack submarines in less time. Why can't France? Is France having trouble funding or prioritising its whole submarine program?
Comparing the latest Japanese, US, UK and French attack submarine builds on a time, efficiency basis:
Comparing the latest Japanese, US, UK and French attack submarine builds on a time, efficiency basis:
- the Japanese laid down first of class Soryu in 2005 and launched in 2007 = just over 2 and 2/3
and even that UK period to launch was considered excessive and embarrassing
with “cost
Compare the above to France’s first Barracuda Suffren laid down December 2007 and not yet launched as at March
2019 = 11 and 1/4 years (so far).
So compared to the most efficient Japanese and the efficient (4 years) US we enter the less efficient, zone of the UK (7 and 1/2 years) with the French being the least efficient at "11 and 1/4 years (so far)".
This French inefficiency does not bode well for France’s next attack
submarine build, which just happens to be Australia's future submarine. France's next domestic submarine project is to build a new ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) class.
Australia's future submarine will need to compete for limited French resources with that future French SSBN.
Australia's future submarine will need to compete for limited French resources with that future French SSBN.
Pete
6 comments:
@Pete:
Is there any amount of delays and problems that could realistically make Australia back out of the deal at this point?
Cheers,
Josh
Hi Josh
Australia and France have been steadily signing contracts (treated as tangible program milestones) over the last few months.
With each contract it has become more difficult for Australia to back out without paying $millions? or mabye $billions? in compensation to Naval Group.
A large impediment to Australia taking a proactive decision is Australia's Federal Election probably to be held on 18 May 2019. More specifically the Federal Government which selected Naval Group has some critical electoral seats/districts in Adelaide that it does not want to lose.
A secure submarine contract is essential in winning votes in Adelaide.
Regards
Pete
Barring a real submarine, one can always make a movie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzu0eOwFre0
KQN
Thanks KQN
I'll turn that submarine movie link into a article on Monday.
Regards
Pete
Since De Gaulle and the 5th Republic, France is inclined to go it alone on major weapons systems. The problem now for France is we are no longer talking about cheap simple systems like the Mirage III. All new weapons systems are very expensive to develop and to manufacture. Although France does invest into Defense much more than most other European nations, still the Defense budget does take a back seat to other social programs in the government annual budget. The inefficiencies we see with the latest SSN are the results of budgetary crunch. True when the nation's GDP is relatively stagnant.
Compounding the budget issues, the commercial nuclear power industry is not really doing well across the globe, outside of China, India and a few other places. This means you no longer can finance new military reactors from the profits gained on commercial sales. On top, you face a brain drain: experienced engineers were forced into early retirement, while new hire talent is getting scarce (if you are getting into engineering, you will no doubt think about AI and not about nuclear engineering unless there is a biomedical term next to it).
KQN
Hi KQN [at 24/3/19 7:09 PM]
Also once/if the UK Brexits this may negatively effect the French economy.
The UK has received much money saving American assistance/joint projects for its SSKs, SSBNs and especially advanced reactors. In contrast France has to pay $billions more for a wholey indigenous nuclear submarine + reactor sector.
Yes maintaining an expert French submarine reactor labourforce is difficult when new generation reactors emerge only about every 30 years.
Unfortuantely this may impact Australia's Shortfin Barracuda program. Buying a new Aussie sub from SSK only building Japan and Germany would have had some program advantages.
But then again, if France can share some late Barracuda + reactor development costs with Australia from about 2033 (on the way to an Australian Barracuda SSN) then Australia's French gamble may payoff...
Regards
Pete
Post a Comment