Defensieforum.nl

Overigen => Defensie Nieuws & Media (Internationaal) => Topic gestart door: Zeewier op 09/02/2016 | 22:04 uur

Titel: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 09/02/2016 | 22:04 uur
French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Leo Lewis in Tokyo

Taking on water: US fears of 'technology leakage' have hurt France's bid to supply Barracuda submarines to Australia
Paris's bid to build a $35bn submarine fleet for Australia has lost significant ground over fears the French state shipbuilder will not be able to protect highly sensitive US military secrets.

The US military is concerned that submarine maker DCNS may be more prone to technology "leakage" than contractors in competing bids, according to several people close to the situation.
"France is in Nato, the politics are delicate and it is true that US weapons have been integrated on to French vessels before," said one person involved in Pentagon procurement issues. "But with technology this advanced there is real discomfort within the US military about putting it on a French boat."

The strength of US influence on Australia raises the likelihood that Japan's 4,000-tonne diesel-electric Soryu vessel could emerge triumphant from a three-way tender process it is contesting fiercely with France and Germany. The Japanese bid is the first of its kind and follows a historic policy change in 2014 that lifted a longstanding ban on Japan exporting arms.
Japan weapons export drive

A Japanese national flag flies on a ferry in front of buildings in Tokyo, Japan
Japan seeks submarine sale to Australia in first big weapons export in 70 years
However, Sean Costello, chief executive of DCNS Australia, dismissed the suggestion the French offer would be affected by security concerns. "DCNS is France's sovereign provider of naval technology and has proven systems and procedures in place that protect the sensitive information already provided by Australia," he said.

Although all three bids have strengths and weaknesses, the offer from Germany's ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems is also thought to be lagging slightly behind the Japanese offer on technical grounds. The German proposal involves doubling the size of its Type 214 Class vessel, while the Japanese would be selling a model that already exists at the desired size and is in active service.
The concerns over the French bid, according to people closely involved in the tender process, centre on the US-built weapon and sensor technology that will lie at the heart of the new submarines.

Australia is preparing to choose between two weapons systems that will form the backbone of the submarine fleet. Only after that decision is made — probably by early April — can the submarine contractor be selected.
Whichever weapons system is chosen — one is being offered by Lockheed Martin, the other by Raytheon — the technology will be American.

French submarine

Chuck Jones, chief executive of Lockheed Martin in Asia, played down the idea that a US combat system would limit Australia's choices and said that a prerequisite of his company's ability to bid on the weapons tender was that Lockheed would be prepared to work with any of the three submarine makers.

But diplomats say that, on the sidelines of the tender process, Washington has made it increasingly clear over the course of the past six months that it favours the Japanese bid. A Japan-Australia partnership on a high profile military project, say military analysts, would underpin US plans to create a counterbalance to China's rise in the Pacific.
French submarine

The bidding process has highlighted Japan's inexperience in the global arms market, after a failure to submit a detailed budget plan for the project or identify a project leader to take overall responsibility, according to people close to the situation. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has twice intervened to tell the bid team to sharpen up its efforts, according to political insiders in Tokyo.
Meanwhile, the bid has exposed the fact that its largest contractors, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries, have evolved their defence businesses around a single customer — the Japanese Ministry of Defence. Australia has, over the past two months, been laying increasing pressure on Japan to tighten the commercial terms of the bid, lay out a detailed budget and make it clear which company is leading the project.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d27f1502-cbf2-11e5-a8ef-ea66e967dd44.html#axzz3zho2lD4V
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 09/02/2016 | 22:16 uur
Beter laat dan nooit: een apart topic over het SEA 1000-project. De Amerikaanse overheid drijgt om gevoelige technologische gegevenslekkage dit Australische project te vetoëen. En daarmee de Australische overheid min of meer te chanteren om voor de Soryu te kiezen. Het gebeurd zelden in de scheepsbouw maar DCNS zou sterk staan in een aanspannen rechtzaak.

En een les voor de Nederland toekomst he. Daarom plaats ik het.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 09/02/2016 | 22:52 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 09/02/2016 | 22:16 uur
En een les voor de Nederland toekomst he. Daarom plaats ik het.

Daarom ook een nieuwe SSK, zoveel mogelijk uit eigen huis.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Elzenga op 10/02/2016 | 16:24 uur
Citaat van: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 09/02/2016 | 22:52 uur
Daarom ook een nieuwe SSK, zoveel mogelijk uit eigen huis.
Uit Europees huis zou ik zeggen...1 vd redenen waarom ik ook grotere EUropese militair technologische onafhankelijkheid van de VS bepleit. Want dit is gewoon een interessant project bij een andere democratische rechtstaat en wat mij betreft dus niet omstreden. En het is niet de eerste keer dat de VS dit zo frustreert.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 10/02/2016 | 16:35 uur
Citaat van: Elzenga op 10/02/2016 | 16:24 uur
Uit Europees huis zou ik zeggen...1 vd redenen waarom ik ook grotere EUropese militair technologische onafhankelijkheid van de VS bepleit. Want dit is gewoon een interessant project bij een andere democratische rechtstaat en wat mij betreft dus niet omstreden. En het is niet de eerste keer dat de VS dit zo frustreert.

De scheepsbouw en ontwikkeling zie ik toch het liefst zoveel als mogelijk in Nederlands plaatsvinden, dan rendeert elke geïnvesteerd euro maximaal.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: dudge op 10/02/2016 | 16:55 uur
Citaat van: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 10/02/2016 | 16:35 uur
De scheepsbouw en ontwikkeling zie ik toch het liefst zoveel als mogelijk in Nederlands plaatsvinden, dan rendeert elke geïnvesteerd euro maximaal.

Je zult uiteindelijk toch veel uit het buitenland moeten halen, omdat veel gewoonweg niet in Nederland wordt gemaakt. En dat geld voor elke sector. Daarbij zul je tot een bepaalde hoogte ook de kwaliteit van het product mee moeten wegen, evt dmv licentie productie. Ook kun je je afvragen in Hoeverre producten uit eigen huis wel echt uit eigen huis zijn, want wat betekend dat vandaag de dag nog? Is Thales Nederlands? Of is dat eigenlijk gewoon Frans, en zo ja, is Airbus dan eigenlijk niet gewoon een Nederlands bedrijf? etc etc. Ben het met je eens hoor, ben ook van mening dat de Nederlandse economie waar mogelijk moet profiteren. Maar uiteindelijk wordt het toch een internationaal product, of Europees, wat afdoende zou zijn.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 10/02/2016 | 17:25 uur
Citaat van: Thomasen op 10/02/2016 | 16:55 uur
Je zult uiteindelijk toch veel uit het buitenland moeten halen, omdat veel gewoonweg niet in Nederland wordt gemaakt. En dat geld voor elke sector. Daarbij zul je tot een bepaalde hoogte ook de kwaliteit van het product mee moeten wegen, evt dmv licentie productie. Ook kun je je afvragen in Hoeverre producten uit eigen huis wel echt uit eigen huis zijn, want wat betekend dat vandaag de dag nog? Is Thales Nederlands? Of is dat eigenlijk gewoon Frans, en zo ja, is Airbus dan eigenlijk niet gewoon een Nederlands bedrijf? etc etc. Ben het met je eens hoor, ben ook van mening dat de Nederlandse economie waar mogelijk moet profiteren. Maar uiteindelijk wordt het toch een internationaal product, of Europees, wat afdoende zou zijn.

Vandaar ook: zo veel als mogelijk.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 12/02/2016 | 16:01 uur
Citaat van: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 09/02/2016 | 22:52 uur
Daarom ook een nieuwe SSK, zoveel mogelijk uit eigen huis.
Mee eens, kijk eerst naar wat in eigen keuken realiseerbaar is. Echter er zijn zat partners te vinden die ons op verschillende terreinen technologisch uit de brand willen helpen. De problemen treden pas op wanneer we exemplaren gaan bouwen voor andere marines. Dan komen we in dezelfde fuik te zitten als waar Kockums in zat. Je partner wordt je grootste exportconcurrent. Zuid-Korea mag Type 214 afgeleiden bouwen voor Indonesië. Moet nog zien wat daar van komt. Kan me amper voorstellen dat DSME er door de licensiebouw nog winst uit perst.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 12/02/2016 | 16:10 uur
Liberal pollsters to help in German submarine bid
Date
February 10, 2016

Liberal Party pollsters Crosby Textor are poised to become involved in the submarine race with German shipbuilder ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems planning to hire the firm to help with its bid for the $50 billion contract.

Meanwhile, Fairfax Media can reveal that the Turnbull government's national security committee of Cabinet has signed off on the plan to commit to building a full fleet of 12 submarines to replace the ageing Collins Class.

Also on Wednesday, Defence officials dismissed suggestions that the Japanese bid was getting favourable treatment by being allowed to patch up holes in its proposal to build the new fleet.

Advertisement

Germany, Japan and France are in a three-way race to build the new boats starting in the late 2020s. Each has submitted a proposal that the Defence Department is now examining under the so-called "competitive evaluation process".

Fairfax Media has learnt that TKMS Australia is seeking the services of Crosby Textor, the political polling firm with a long history of working as pollsters and strategists for the Liberal Party. The firm is expected to survey Australian attitudes towards the submarine project.

TKMS Australia chairman John White declined to comment.

The Financial Times newspaper reported this week that Japan had failed to submit a detailed budget plan or identify which of the two major Japanese firms involved was actually in charge of the project.

Australian officials had laid increasing pressure on Japan to fix these gaps in its proposal after bids had closed at the end of November, the paper reported.

Independent South Australian Senator Nick Xenophon asked Defence officials during a Senate hearing whether any of the bidders had been asked to provide further information.

The Navy's head of the submarine program, Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, said that information had been "requested of all participants".

It had been asked in a different form of one bidder with whom there was a "government-to-government arrangement as opposed to a commercial arrangement", he said.

This indicated Japan, whose bid is being effectively run by the Japanese government in contrast to the German bid by TKMS Australia and the French partially government-owned firm DCNS.

"But the information requested of each participant is the same," Rear Admiral Sammut said.

He said this was consistent with the bidders' contracts with Defence.

Senator Xenophon, asked later whether he was concerned that the Japanese were being coached through their bid, said: "I can't say that, but that is the obvious question that will arise if there has been a contract variation ... That could well mean that there has been an opening up of the process.

"I just want it to be a fair process and I want taxpayers to get value for money."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberal-pollsters-to-help-in-german-submarine-bid-20160210-gmqod1.html#ixzz3zxrVfO5R
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 12/02/2016 | 16:19 uur
Mitsubishi boss promotes sales pitch for Australia's $50 billion submarine contract
Date
February 12, 2016 - 2:46PM

Jared Lynch
Business reporter

The boss of the Japanese company hoping to build Australia's new $50 billion submarine fleet has denied reports that the Turnbull government is pressuring to reveal a detail cost breakdown of his bid.

Shunichi Miyanaga, the president and chief executive of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, said his company's bid is progressing smoothly and expected the government would announce the successful firm sometime this year.

Mr Miyanaga is in Australia and has visited the ministers from defence, trade and industry ministers or their representatives, as well has shipyards in Adelaide and Perth and academics for the country's biggest universities.

He dismissed a report published in the Financial Times this week that the Australian government had in the past two months been laying increasing pressure on Japan to tighten the commercial terms of the bid and outline a detailed budget so it can gauge which company is leading the submarine project.

When asked if that report was true, Mr Miyanaga said: "I don't think so".

"As the leading company of this project... I have come here and I think the bidding process ... is [making] very smooth progress. We have been exchanging the questions and answers so I don't have any such kind of concerns and problems."

Mr Miyanaga's comments came after he told reporters in Adelaide this week that Mitsubishi could build Australia's new submarine fleet in Australia if it won the contract, which could be worth up to $50 billion.

He didn't rule out investing in the government-owned Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC) to improve the chances of Mitsubishi's bid.

"I have expressed our willingness to do the business in Australia. In many countries we have been operating very smoothly and well in the form of joint ventures, sometimes in the form of 100 per cent investment, sometimes acquisitions, sometimes new investment.

"But I would like to discuss further [the prospect of investing in ASC]. We have been very successful in this kind of gigantic project to form such collaboration schemes, sometimes in a joint venture in the early stages, which can be taken over, step by step, by the customer country's companies."

Mitsubishi has been operating in Australia since the 1950s and generates revenue of about $35 billion a year. Its operations include rocket launches and the manufacture of jets, gas turbines, high speed rail and forklifts as well as submarines.

It is It is competing against French bidder DCNS and German bidder TKMS, part of the ThyssenKrupp multinational group for the submarine contract.

All three of the competing bidders lodged their proposals late in 2015 under the timetable set by the federal government, with a decision expected by mid-2016.

Mr Miyanga said he was confident Australia's shipbuilding industry could build the country's new fleet of submarines, although he didn't specify a percentage of how much the build would be local if Mitsubishi won the contract.

"My visit this time is very assuring visit. I have found very strong confidence in expertise in shipbuilding. We'd like to work together with the Australian people and send our people [here] and have some people come to Japan.

"We'd like to make as possible as we can in Australia and I have found the Australian industries are very fortified and have very high skills and expertise."

One aspect of the project he was looking forward to, if Mitsubishi was successful, was the development of a design centre which would draw on the expertise of Australian industry leaders and university researchers.

"It would both in Japan and Australia. At the very beginning... the Japanese design centre would be a little bigger. Then, step by step, the Japanese design centre would become smaller and the Australian design centre would become larger.

"We'd establish a very specific design centre but we'll add a lot of related engineering collaboration organisations. For example I have met several professors in Perth and Adelaide and here, this morning, I was at the Monash University to discuss the further collaboration possibilities.

"I am excited to explore information technologies and other technologies. We'd like to connect such collaboration centres in Australia with this design centre for submarines."

http://www.smh.com.au/business/mitsubishi-boss-up-sales-pitch-for-australias-50-million-submarine-contract-20160212-gmsihs.html#ixzz3zy1SIqVv
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 12/02/2016 | 16:33 uur
SEA 1000: A Franco–Australian solution
10 Feb 2016|Sean Costello

Where Australia selects France, it selects enduring geopolitical alignment and surety of supply, a program of technical transfer to deliver sovereignty, a regionally superior capability and interoperability with our allies.

I can make those statements with respect to France because France is a complete submarine power and has national polices to remain so. A complete submarine power is one that can safely design, build, operate and sustain any class of submarine on an enduring basis.

Objective evidence of being a complete submarine power is the ability to re-apply technology from multiple designs, both nuclear and conventional, to optimize for any one design. In a strategic framework this is critical. Whatever the future holds, cooperation with a complete power provides Australia with the greatest latitude in developing a solution.

Planned in detail to beyond the year 2080, France's mature galaxy of submarine capabilities stems from France's own commitment to, and maintenance of, a strategic nuclear deterrent. Stemming from this national undertaking France autonomously designs, builds and sustains large ocean going nuclear powered submarines, conventional submarines and of course has proven and established methods for technology transfer.

Consider what's behind this statement—enduring and leading edge capabilities for Australia in stealth, sonar and other sensor technology derived from nuclear missile and nuclear attack submarines, the return on experience from long-range patrols, nuclear safety standards, technology development pathways, a complete array of research and development and test facilities... I could go on.

The relevance of those capabilities are brought to bear when one considers the Australian Future Submarine requirement, which self-evidently calls for a new submarine and not one that's in existence today. Although it may seem obvious, it's worth pointing out that when DCNS received Australia's requirement we immediately recognised that the French Barracuda was the most suitable reference design and not our existing conventional design.

As a complete submarine power, we understand conventional propulsion, which is why we also understand that propulsion is but one part of the submarine puzzle. In designing to the Australian requirement, it should come as no surprise then that the conventionally powered Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A is only 5% lighter than its nuclear cousin.

The Future Submarine Program isn't a competition for an existing submarine but a global design development and technology transfer program to deliver an integrated capability and not a product. That should be obvious, and where statements are made that existing designs will be lengthened and widened to the requirement, it only proves my point. 

For submarine matters, France offers a strategic partnership that directly interfaces with and complements that offered by the US in submarine weapons and electronic systems. Together with the United Kingdom, the strategic future for Australia in terms of sovereignty, enduring regional superiority and interoperability is in joining this club of complete submarine powers.

There's no better example of what I'm talking about than the offer from France to transfer to Australia sovereign control and use of pump-jet propulsion technology for the Shortfin Barracuda—technology resident only in France, the UK and the USA. Technology borne from the French SSBN program a generation ago. The stealth and hydrodynamic performances of pump jet propulsion are of course classified and in Australia known only to DCNS and the Australian Government.

For Australia, our industrial plan is built for the unique circumstances facing Australia's submarine enterprise as well as from the return on experience from decades of international technology transfer.

DCNS will transfer know-how from France to Australia, purposefully apply this knowledge to create specific benefits in our programs and develop an innovation environment around our scientific, education and industrial community to provide an enduring and continuously improving service for our customer.

As part of our Australian Industry Plan, DCNS has already consulted hundreds of Australian companies and has identified more than 50 projects to develop new capabilities within our sovereign bounds.

From the early days of the future submarine program DCNS proposes to develop centres of excellence organised around four competitiveness clusters.

The first will be based on advanced manufacturing, with technological issues to address such things as hull materials and welding, composite materials, corrosion and hydrodynamics.

The second will focus on engineering methods and tools in an effort to ensure DCNS stays at the edge of best practice. It would deal with such issues as program management, configuration and data management, 3D and virtual reality, simulation, test and training.

The third will focus on emerging or evolving technologies, such as optoelectronics, stealth and signature management, energy storage and optimization, permanent magnet electrical propulsion, lithium ion batteries and cyber security.

The last cluster will focus on emerging technologies in support and sustainment, which today include such things as predictive testing, vibration analysis and availability management.

From a nation of only 66 million people, and with the same western demographic and cultural challenges as Australia, the French submarine enterprise:

Maintains a continuous strategic nuclear deterrent at sea,
Designs several classes of the most advanced types of submarines,
Has had a submarine at sea every single day since 1972,
Publicly contracts for 240 days at sea each year for their SSNs,
Has multiple crewing concepts in place for all its submarines,
Routinely patrols as far afield as the south western Indian ocean,
Has a complete end-to-end scientific, educational and research and development program planned to beyond the year 2080.
In other words, France has a mature submarine enterprise and there is no reason why Australia cannot have one, too.

Whatever the outcome of the CEP, my hope is that Australia can seize this once in a generation opportunity to form a submarine enterprise that's fit for its needs and become sovereign, enduring, autonomous, regionally superior and interoperable.

AUTHOR
Sean Costello is the CEO of DCNS Australia. This is an edited extract of a speech delivered to the ADM2016 conference in Canberra yesterday.

http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/sea-1000-a-franco-australian-solution/
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: walter leever op 12/02/2016 | 18:23 uur
Ik snap eigenlijk niet dat er altijd over 12 stuks gesproken wordt(zullen er toch echt minder worden,waarom?),ze krijgen de 6 Collins al niet eens bemand. :crazy:
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: mandaje op 12/02/2016 | 18:54 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 09/02/2016 | 22:16 uur
Beter laat dan nooit: een apart topic over het SEA 1000-project. De Amerikaanse overheid drijgt om gevoelige technologische gegevenslekkage dit Australische project te vetoëen. En daarmee de Australische overheid min of meer te chanteren om voor de Soryu te kiezen. Het gebeurd zelden in de scheepsbouw maar DCNS zou sterk staan in een aanspannen rechtzaak.

En een les voor de Nederland toekomst he. Daarom plaats ik het.

Het is naar wat ik kan begrijpen puur een actie gericht tegen de Fransen omdat ze een niet al te beste reputatie hebben als het gaat om bescherming van intellectueel eigendom. De Duitsers en Jappanners kunnen nog gewoon meedoen.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 03/03/2016 | 00:21 uur
Zullen een wedje met de Aussies leggen dat wij 'ze' eerder in het water hebben liggen? Zo zetten we er een beetje vaart achter!

Despite being flabbergasted, ex-PM Tony Abbott knew first future submarines won't be ready till 2031
March 2, 2016 8:19am
Exclusive — Tory ShepherdPolitical EditorThe Advertiser

The first submarine to replace the Collins Class fleet won't be ready till 2031.

A REVELATION about the timing of the Future Submarines program which left former Prime Minister Tony Abbott "flabbergasted" was actually passed on to his administration three years ago.

The Abbott Government was told in 2013 that the first Future Submarine would be ready in 2031, and that the Collins Class submarines would need to have their lives extended by up to five years.

In reports on Wednesday, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott said he was "flabbergasted" that the 12 new submarines would not enter service until the early 2030s.

However, ministerial advice delivered to his Defence Minister at the time, David Johnston, shows the Government was briefed on the precise schedule more than two years ago.

It is understood Senator Johnston passed the information on to Mr Abbott.

Documents obtained under Freedom of Information and released last year show Defence's then submarine boss David Gould wrote that the Collins submarines would need to be kept going for four or five years to cover the gap until the first Future Submarine is ready to go in 2031.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull confirmed on Wednesday there had been "no delay" on the program and said the Australian Federal Police would investigate the leaking of a draft Defence White Paper to The Australian, which showed that under Mr Abbott the submarines would be delivered sooner.

Mr Turnbull said the Government had known for years "that it was highly unlikely the first of the Future Submarines could be delivered by 2026, and an extension of life for the Collins Class submarines was feasible and practical".

Defence Minister Marise Payne said extending the Collins was the only practical option to ensure Australia was not left without enough submarines in the water.

The upgrade work to extend the life of the Collins fleet will continue at Adelaide-based shipbuilder ASC, which sacked another 110 people on Wednesday.

ASC has entered the 'Valley of Death', during which jobs drop off as work on the Air Warfare Destroyers decline. The Government is under pressure to award other shipbuilding contracts to ASC to retain a core of skills for use on the Future Frigates and Future Submarines.

The draft White Paper predicted the submarines would enter service in the late 2020s, while the final White Paper released last week says 2030s.

Mr Abbott told The Australian the Collins was "a fragile capability" and that national security was at risk if there was a delay.

France, Germany and Japan are competing to be Australia's partner on the $50 billion project, and the Government is still considering their bids.

It is understood that European contenders are able to deliver in the 2020s, while it is not clear if the Japanese can.

Mr Abbott is understood to have pushed for the Japanese option, but if he were in power and determined to stick to a 2020s deadline, that could rule them out.

Defence Force Chief Air Marshal Mark Binskin went through the submarine plan in detail this week.

He said the Collins had been set to retire in 2026, but that once it became clear the new submarines would hit the water between 2030 and 2033, it became clear two Collins would have to have proper upgrades to maintain their capability for longer.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/despite-being-flabbergasted-expm-tony-abbott-knew-first-future-submarines-wont-be-ready-till-2031/news-story/29977649eaee6b8709e2564b13c5cebb
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 03/03/2016 | 00:50 uur
Australia increasingly likely to pick Japan for huge submarine order, experts say
BY JESSE JOHNSON

With Australia's release of its defense white paper last week, the race to build the country's next generation of submarines enters the home stretch — and some experts say the Japanese bid appears to hold an insurmountable lead.

"The DWP (Defense White Paper) strongly stresses the importance of further strengthening U.S.-Japanese defense relations and is also quite vocal about China's challenge to the rules-based order in maritime Asia," Ben Schreer, a professor at Macquarie University in Sydney, said.

"In my view, it's highly likely that the Turnbull government will choose the Japanese design for strategic and technological reasons, and the DWP has added weight to this," he said, referring to Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

The white paper says the country's submarine force will be increased from six to 12 "regionally superior submarines with a high degree of interoperability with the United States."

Requirements include the submarines having "a range and endurance similar" to the Collins class of vessels that the Royal Australian Navy currently operates, as well as "sensor performance and stealth characteristics superior" to its current subs.

Experts note that Japan's diesel and electric-powered Soryu subs either meet or could be specially designed to meet most of these requirements. A decision is expected sometime this year.

"First and foremost, we've made a big strategic commitment to Japan based on this view of where the region is heading," said Nick Bisley, a professor at La Trobe University in Melbourne, Australia. "There is bipartisan support ... both sides think this is a really good idea. ... That plus the operational side — the Japanese submarine is most similar to ours — will tilt the balance very heavily in their favor.

"And the Japanese are also saying they are now open to the construction process in Australia, so that the government will be able to present a package that says 'we've got jobs, we've got something we want, and we've got this friend in Japan.' Together, I think that makes it overwhelmingly the choice that will be made."

Japan has said it is willing to build at least some of the submarines in Australia, a key economic factor that until recently Tokyo had been apparently unwilling to commit to. Tokyo has also reassured Canberra that if it wins the sub bid Japan will also share with Australia its naval crown jewels — its most secret stealth technology.

While France and Germany are also participating in the so-called Competitive Evaluation Process to build the subs, Japan has long been thought of as the front-runner. Prior to the implementation of a more transparent bidding process, the Japanese bid was widely expected to be a lock under the administration of Tony Abbott, the former Australian leader who had close ties to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

But more than the technical aspects, Canberra's strategic goals could prove key as Japan seeks to outflank the French and German bids for Australia's largest-ever defense procurement offer, worth an estimated 50 billion Australian dollars ($36 billion).

Australia's new defense paper lauds Japan as "a major power in North Asia" and "an important contributor to regional and global security." It goes on to say that Canberra "welcomes the prospect of Japan playing a larger role in international security and will continue to deepen and broaden" its growing security cooperation with Tokyo.

During a visit to Tokyo last month, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said her country's relationship with Japan is at an "all-time high," and acknowledged that the Japanese side has "emphasized the strategic importance" of the submarine bid.

The push to cement closer defense ties began in 2007, during Abe's first administration, with the signing of the Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation. This was upgraded in 2014, under Abe's current administration, to a "special strategic" partnership. That same year, Abe's Cabinet approved new rules on the export of arms, ending a nearly five-decade-long self-imposed ban.

Now, much of the strategic debate in Australia is focused on China and how such a deal will build on Canberra's "quasi-alliance" with Tokyo. A winning bid by Japan will likely see the two nations working hand in hand over at least the next 30 years, as the subs are built and maintained.

Sam Bateman, a former Australian naval commodore and adviser at Singapore's S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, said a deal with Japan "would not be well received in China."

"It would be seen in Beijing as Australian participation in the U.S.-Japan effort to contain China," Bateman said, adding that such "cooperation is actively promoted by both Tokyo and Washington as part of balancing an ascendent China."

But with any Japan sub deal, China would likely be less worried about the submarines themselves and more concerned about the precedent set by such an agreement.

"China, ultimately, doesn't really care about the submarines — their number and function is of little concern," said Bisley. "What it doesn't like is the political connection between Japan and Australia and of course the U.S., which they perceive to be intended to constrain China."

A European deal, on the other hand, would be a transaction less encumbered by geopolitical considerations, as well as one that offers Canberra more strategic independence, analysts say.

"Although the European options would provide longer-term strategic flexibility, it seems likely that the final decision will go the way of the Japanese," Bateman said, adding that Australia will face difficulties sustaining the subs if not acting in concert with Japan.

"It is a matter of grand strategy to determine whether that is acceptable," Bateman added.

Macquarie University's Schreer said that picking Japan for the deal would signal that Australia has an interest in East Asian stability and that it would be more likely to side with Tokyo in the event of a conflict.

"And it would signal that Australia is an independent nation which makes choices on its vital defense technologies based on its national interests and not based on Chinese interference," he added.

The Competitive Evaluation Process itself is unlikely to factor in strategic aspects in its recommendation. It is instead expected to focus on technical merits and value.

"If the strategic relationship angle is to play a role, that will most likely happen at the government level, when they weigh the results communicated by the Defense Ministry," said Andrew Davies, director of research at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute in the capital, Canberra.

"There is a precedent for that — the government of (former Prime Minister John) Howard chose to override the department's recommendation for the Collins combat system in order to select an American one, on the basis of greater alliance value."

Critics of the Japanese bid say picking the Soryu class could see Australia pulled into an unwanted fight, most likely in the disputed waters of the East or South China Seas.

The East China Sea is home to the uninhabited, Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands, which are also claimed by China. Australia, the U.S. and Japan have all condemned China's November 2013 declaration of an air defense identification zone over those waters, and for now the conflict there has somewhat died down.

The South China Sea, where several nations — Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan and Malaysia among others — have overlapping territorial claims, is a different case altogether.

In those waters, most of which are claimed by Beijing, there has been a marked ramping up of tensions in the wake of China's massive dredging program to create artificial islands. Some of those man-made islands are now home to military-grade airfields as well as powerful weapons and radar systems.

These moves, too, have been roundly condemned by Canberra, Tokyo and Washington, which has conducted what it calls freedom of navigation operations near the disputed islands. Fears of an accidental clash between China and other claimants in the South China Sea have proliferated as tensions have grown fraught.

Bisley, however, said the argument that by picking a Japanese sub, Canberra could be dragged into a battle it may not want to fight, is a nonstarter. He said Australia's strategy in the region has long been to maintain the status quo, which has seen the United States as the dominant military power.

"Those who argue that the J-option will tie Australia into a quasi-alliance with Japan are wrong" Bisley said. "In this case, the technological link will follow a strategic choice that has long been made.

"The submarine decision will flow from Australia having committed itself to an extremely close long-term strategic relationship with Japan — not the other way around."

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/03/01/national/australia-increasingly-likely-pick-japan-huge-submarine-order-experts-say/#.Vtd6rajvLML
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: dudge op 03/03/2016 | 10:24 uur
Japan lijkt me technisch ook de meest veilige keuze. Politiek en strategie kun je altijd over discussieren, en het beste antwoord bestaat daar niet. Maar denk inderdaad dat meegesleept worden in een conflict niet direct afhankelijk is van die subs, maar neutraliteit zal niet werken, immmuniseren kan een internationaal land als Australië niet. Een sterk bondgenootschap met de VS en Japan is dan ook de best bet om China buiten de deur te houden.

Het zou volgens mij niet tot 2031 hoeven duren, en daarbij betekend het ook dat de groei van de vloot pas later komt. Er vanuit gaande dat de subs redelijk gestaag geleverd gaan worden. De eerste Collins zou je er toch pas uit willen gooien als de 7de sub geleverd word.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 18/03/2016 | 21:29 uur
French fire barbs to sink Japanese submarine bid
THE AUSTRALIANMARCH 18, 2016 7:53PM

Brendan Nicholson
Defence Editor
Canberra

The French contender for the navy's submarine contract has ­attacked its Japanese rival, warning that crucial battery technology might prove too dangerous to use and could leave Australia without a submarine force.

As competition intensifies for the $50 billion-plus inter­national contract for the navy's new submarines, the French have made a "gloves off" attack on Japan's bid, saying it could have disastrous consequences for Australia.

Senior executives from French company DCNS told The Australian that battery technology developed to extend the range of Japan's Soryu submarine was being rushed.

The French have been ­angered by a Japanese assertion that the French plan to build a diesel electric version of their ­nuclear-powered Barracuda ­attack submarine, to be called the Shortfin Barracuda, would be ­extremely difficult and by claims the US was strongly backing Japan.

DCNS president Herve Guillou and deputy chief executive Marie-Pierre de Bailliencourt said if Australia did opt for a Japanese design, it could end up with a strategic relationship with Tokyo but no submarine.

The strategic partnership with Japan was held up as a key factor in the choice of submarine but it could turn into a trap, Mr Guillou said. By going with Japan, Australia would risk antagonising China, which could perceive that as part of a containment strategy, Ms de Bailliencourt said.

"You start wars through perceptions," she said.

Mr Guillou asked if Japan and China went to war while the submarines were half-built, what would Australia do?

The claims are strongly rej­ected by Japan, which insists that it is developing a form of the ­energy-efficient lithium-ion battery that can be safely used in its submarines without the risk of fires that have erupted in such batteries used in hobby equipment, cars and aircraft and which would be disastrous in a submarine..

Japan is offering Australia an evolved version of its stealthy and deep-diving Soryu, or Blue ­Dragon, submarine with its length extended by 6m to 8m so that it can carry additional batteries and fuel required to significantly extend its range to meet Australia's needs.

A key to this plan is the ­replacement of traditional lead acid batteries with lithium ion batteries, which are about four times more efficient.

Japanese Defence officials and engineers from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which would take the lead role in building the submarines if Japan wins the contract, have told The Australian they are confident their technology will be safe and ready in time.

Long before lithium ion batteries are fitted to Australian submarines they would be built into the latest versions of the Japanese Navy's own Soryus.

That would only be done when Japan was satisfied that the batteries were completely safe, they said. That would involve the new batteries being part of a whole system of safeguards to prevent overcharging and heat build-up.

Ms de Bailliencourt said no one had yet come close to mastering lithium-ion battery technology for submarines and she felt Japan was rushing it to give its submarine the range Australia needed.

"If our friends, the Japanese, are offering you a submarine with lithium-ion batteries, ask yourself why.

"It's a very, very risky move."

This view was backed by scientific and mathematical analysis, Ms de Bailliencourt said.

"We know that the lithium-ion technology is the same as that used in cars, and in cars they explode," she said.

"The Australians have asked us for proven and safe technology. It must be safe for the submariners, for the project and cost wise."

Opting for the Japanese submarine would be a recipe for disaster, Ms Bailliencourt said. "And the Americans are aware of that."

Mr Guillou said DCNS was working hard to develop lithium-ion technology for its own submarines but a safe solution would be years away.

"They will make it, and we will make it but nobody is yet there."

Ms Bailliencourt said her company had been assured by the Americans that they were not backing the Japanese ahead of the others.

"All this noise about the USS supporting Japan comes from lobbyists," she said.

The Americans wanted Australia to have the best possible submarine.

Ms de Bailliencourt said Japan would be a strategic partner to Australia whether it won the submarine contract or not.

"Why don't you give yourself Europe on top of it."

Mr Guillou said the chief of the Royal Australian Navy, Admiral Tim Barrett, and the officer in charge of the submarine program, Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, were true professionals who were running a very rigorous selection process.

Ms de Bailliencourt said she was heartened that the Australians asked for very specific assurances about the submarine's performance, de-risking the project, safety, sovereignty, the industrial base and the transfer of technology.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/french-fire-barbs-to-sink-japanese-submarine-bid/news-story/6bda3a0a5a58836ce0cc07adcfc3ef3e
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: walter leever op 18/03/2016 | 21:55 uur
De Fransen hebben volgens de experts op Defence Talk geen schijn van kans.Temeer omdat ze 't volgens de Australiers niet zo nauw nemen met de desbetreffende IP's en dus alleen gaan om zoveel mogelijk te verkopen.
Ook zou 't zo zijn(volgens de experts)dat mocht Australie een Frans ontwerp kiezen,de US  ze dus niet meer bij staat bij 't integreren van 't Amerikaanse wapensysteem(zou alleen gelden voor de Japanners)

Tenminste dat is wat ik mee krijg.

walter
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 19/03/2016 | 00:54 uur
Citaat van: walter leever op 18/03/2016 | 21:55 uur
De Fransen hebben volgens de experts op Defence Talk geen schijn van kans.Temeer omdat ze 't volgens de Australiers niet zo nauw nemen met de desbetreffende IP's en dus alleen gaan om zoveel mogelijk te verkopen.
Ook zou 't zo zijn(volgens de experts)dat mocht Australie een Frans ontwerp kiezen,de US  ze dus niet meer bij staat bij 't integreren van 't Amerikaanse wapensysteem(zou alleen gelden voor de Japanners)

Tenminste dat is wat ik mee krijg.

walter
Dat Amerikaanse CMS wapensysteem is een vereiste vanuit de Australische DoD. De VS moet dat hoe dan ook leveren, ook al wordt de boot Frans. Niet alleen DCNS, de Franse overheid heeft ook een geopolitiek zeer groot belang om deze megaorder binnen te halen. Frankrijk heeft ten oosten overzeese gebieden in Polynesië. Een van de redenen dat ze evenzo een vliegkampschip bezitten. Zo'n schip bezit je niet om het thuisland te beschermen. Een diepgaand samenwerkingsverband, dus ook aangaande havens en scheepswerven op Australisch grondgebied is het voor hun een enorme kans. Het land van de buurman kan je maar 1 keer kopen. Frankrijk durft diep te gaan voor het succes, vermoed ik.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: walter leever op 19/03/2016 | 01:31 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 19/03/2016 | 00:54 uur
Dat Amerikaanse CMS wapensysteem is een vereiste vanuit de Australische DoD. De VS moet dat hoe dan ook leveren, ook al wordt de boot Frans. Niet alleen DCNS, de Franse overheid heeft ook een geopolitiek zeer groot belang om deze megaorder binnen te halen. Frankrijk heeft ten oosten overzeese gebieden in Polynesië. Een van de redenen dat ze evenzo een vliegkampschip bezitten. Zo'n schip bezit je niet om het thuisland te beschermen. Een diepgaand samenwerkingsverband, dus ook aangaande havens en scheepswerven op Australisch grondgebied is het voor hun een enorme kans. Het land van de buurman kan je maar 1 keer kopen. Frankrijk durft diep te gaan voor het succes, vermoed ik.

Klopt helemaal wat je zegt,maar vanuit Australies oogpunt dus niet(go figure))
En zoals al gezgd(door mij oa ze "geilen" dus op Japanse boten)dus ik geef alle anderen in deze(Frankrijk en Duitsland weinig kans als 't van de experts afligt)regering kan dus nog "roet" in 't eten gooien.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: dudge op 19/03/2016 | 09:18 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 19/03/2016 | 00:54 uur
Dat Amerikaanse CMS wapensysteem is een vereiste vanuit de Australische DoD. De VS moet dat hoe dan ook leveren, ook al wordt de boot Frans. Niet alleen DCNS, de Franse overheid heeft ook een geopolitiek zeer groot belang om deze megaorder binnen te halen. Frankrijk heeft ten oosten overzeese gebieden in Polynesië. Een van de redenen dat ze evenzo een vliegkampschip bezitten. Zo'n schip bezit je niet om het thuisland te beschermen. Een diepgaand samenwerkingsverband, dus ook aangaande havens en scheepswerven op Australisch grondgebied is het voor hun een enorme kans. Het land van de buurman kan je maar 1 keer kopen. Frankrijk durft diep te gaan voor het succes, vermoed ik.

Denk ook niet dat Frankrijk zich snel gewonnen geeft. Al weten ze ook wanneer het geen nut heeft, geef de Japanners een flinke kans, maar de race is m.i. nog niet gelopen.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 27/03/2016 | 18:45 uur
French, German and Japanese submarine makers vie to impress Australia in underwater arms race

Australia's new submarine program will bring significant technological and economic benefits says Malcolm Turnbull.
After more than 30 years roaming quietly beneath the world's oceans, French nuclear attack submarine the Rubis is about a year away from a well-earned retirement.

Her missions are classified. But based on the type of operations these workhorses of the French navy have been doing in recent years, she might have patrolled the Caribbean Sea to stop drug smugglers, or if a merchant ship or oil rig were captured by pirates off Africa, French naval commandos might parachute into the sea from a plane to be picked up by the Rubis.

The submarine could then glide silently up to the hostage vessel and send the commandos swimming out through the torpedo tubes to board the vessel and overpower the pirates.

She might have captured vital intelligence on Muammar Gaddafi's regime from just off the Libyan coast. Or she might have provided protective muscle to the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier which has just returned from the Persian Gulf supporting air strikes against the Islamic State group.

Or she might have scouted the seas to clear the way for the ultra-secret French ballistic missile submarines, her bigger cousins who provide a nuclear deterrence year round and whose precise whereabouts even the French President doesn't know at any given moment.

"It's what we call in French a 'couteau Suisse' – a Swiss army knife," said Admiral Louis-Michel Guillaume, France's submarine forces commander, after Fairfax Media was given a tour of the Rubis as it goes through maintenance at Toulon on the Mediterranean coast earlier this month.

"Every time there is a crisis in the world which is close to the sea, I have my phone ringing up and the operational vice-chief of the defence staff saying, 'Can I have a submarine to go there?'"

France is one of three bidders – the others being Germany and Japan – in what has turned into a Herculean contest to build Australia's new submarine fleet at a cost of at least $50 billion.

As feats of engineering, submarines are rivalled only by spacecraft. And despite the best efforts of anti-submarine technology, the silent killers retain a fundamental stealth edge by being underwater, invisible to radar.

With global maritime trade increasing, control of the seas is more important than ever – one reason China's maritime assertiveness is causing such anxiety.

In response, the global defence market has spoken: emerging nations are spending their newfound wealth building up submarine forces, meaning half the world's submarines will be in the Indo-Pacific region within 20 years.

Each of the Collins replacement bidders is fiercely spruiking their assets. Japan is running partly on its strategic advantages, in that a partnership would tighten the brotherhood of democracies against the unsettling rise of China. Germany is running as a safe pair of hands, having delivered 161 submarines to 20 navies before.

France is pushing its technical prowess and in particular its status as a complete submarine power, making large ballistic missile submarines, smaller nuclear attack submarines and conventional, diesel-electric boats – the type Australia wants to buy.

A tour of French shipbuilder DCNS's shipyard at Cherbourg on France's channel coast shows the mammoth effort involved in designing and building a submarine.

The incomplete first boat of the new Barracuda class, named the Suffren – which will replace the Rubis next year – sits in a massive factory, naked-looking and covered in wiring, pipes and holes over which the outer pressure hull will be welded.

It is 100 metres long, has about 1 million components and will take 8 million man hours to construct. A car has about 3000 components and takes 23 man hours to make.

"The submarine is the most difficult thing in the world to make," explains Olivier Theret, who heads a team of 70 engineers doing testing and quality control. "The final objective is the safety of the person on board; they're the ones who sign up to go out there."

Theret tests everything that will go into the Barracudas. He has plates of steel sitting in salt water for up to 20 years to test for corrosion. He tests the welding work up to leak tolerances of three microns – narrower than the width of a human red blood cell.

In a neighbouring factory, steel sheets up to 20 centimetres thick are cut using super-high-pressure water jets containing gritty particles, which unlike a blowtorch don't damage the metal. The steel is then shaped into hull sections using massive presses that exert 12,000 tonnes of pressure.

Submariners themselves have already helped fine-tune the interior of the Suffren using virtual reality that allows them to walk around and get a feel for it. They've made thousands of suggestions to the design team.

All of this would have to be replicated in Australia if – as is virtually certain unless the government has lost its political marbles – the bulk of the construction work is done at the ASC shipyards in Adelaide. DCNS says a largely Australian construction would create 2900 direct jobs in Australia.

Australia's submarine needs are very particular, requiring a long range to reach places like the South China Sea but without the endurance of nuclear power. Without a local nuclear industry, Australia is stuck with buying conventional diesel-electric boats, which are slower over long distances and cannot stay underwater indefinitely.

France is proposing a conventional version of the Barracuda class, which sounds rather like asking a horse to pull a Ferrari, though DCNS chairman Herve Guillou said last week the conversion was "very easy" and has been done before.

The other bidders face technical challenges as well. The Japanese Soryu submarine doesn't go far enough for Australia's needs. Its endurance must be improved.

DCNS's top executives caused ripples last week when they suggested the Japanese are rushing ahead with high-tech lithium ion batteries – despite being unproven and therefore possibly dangerous – because otherwise the Japanese boat won't go far enough.

The Germans meanwhile have never built a submarine as big as the one Australia needs.

On top of all this, Jacques Cousquer, Asia-Pacific director for the procurement branch of France's Defence Ministry, said that margins have to be built into new submarines so they can be updated and evolved over the next 30 to 40 years. This will include everything from improved sonars to better hull stealth coating to the ability to launch swarms of underwater robots.

"This is important because the threat is moving ... and if you wake up and discover a new threat that you haven't thought about yesterday, it'd be a pity," Cousquer said.

Somehow all this knowledge and expertise must in turn be transferred to Australians so that we have some sovereignty over the technology and in particular the ability to maintain the boats.

Australia isn't just buying a submarine, it's entering a technological marriage with another country for decades to come. The increasingly fractious public battle between the bidders – evidenced last week by DCNS's swipe at the Japanese over lithium ion batteries – suggests that marriage might be as complex as the futuristic submarines themselves.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/french-german-and-japanese-submarine-makers-vie-to-impress-australia-in-underwater-arms-race-20160324-gnqjwv.html
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 27/03/2016 | 18:59 uur
Voor wie een handout nodig heeft met al die Australische defensieprogramma's en Dollar prijspeilen.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/massive-150b-submarine-program-the-centrepiece-of-turnbull-government-defence-plan-20160225-gn3tgx.html

Het is zó overambitieus. Dat ze zelf niet inzien hoe financieel kwetsbaar dit GIGA-plan is voor een arride land met 24 miljoen inwoners. En economisch behoorlijk afhankelijk is van het Aziatisch vasteland. Wat in Canada niet van de grond komt, dat zou plots in Australië allemaal wel kunnen? Een reality-check vanuit hun Rekenkamer zou ze goed doen. Het is wel een mooi verhaal om te lezen zo op de zondagmiddag.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Sparkplug op 06/04/2016 | 15:45 uur
Decision Close On Australian Submarine Contract

Forecast International | April 5, 2016

MELBOURNE, Australia --- Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has indicated that a decision is close on the winner for the $36 billion contract to build Australia's new submarine class. Tenders have been submitted by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. ThyssenKrupp AG and DCNS for the contract to build 12 new submarines.

Expectations are that the winning bidder would be announced before the next election, even if an early poll was called for July. Much depends upon the passage of two unrelated items of legislation through the Australian Government. One of these is a tax reform bill that, if rejected again would trigger a "double dissolution" election in which both houses of the Australian government would be subject to re-election.

If this takes place, the selected site for the construction of the submarines may well prove to be a decisive issue.

The Australian submarine contest is the first time since before the Second World War that Japan has offered its submarine designs for export. Mitsubishi is offering a modified version of the Soryu class diesel-electric submarine that is equipped with an air-independent propulsion system.

Until recently, this was considered to be the leading contestant in the bidding contest but it is unclear how the threat of an impending election would affect this situation.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/172779/australia-close-to-decision-on-new-submarine-contract.html
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Sparkplug op 07/04/2016 | 16:54 uur
The Submarine Problem - Deeper Than Meets the Eye (excerpt)

Australian Defence Magazine | April 7, 2016

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.defense-aerospace.com%2Fbase%2Futil%2F172811_1F.jpg&hash=a28e84a90c3d9067f2f861b2f7ff275e5df6fda4)
Long considered the leading candidate for Australia's plan to buy 12 new diesel-electric submarines, the Japanese Soryu design (SS-503 Hakuryu seen here) has now come under fire as unsuited for Australia and undeserving of its reputation. (USN photo)

It's been said so often but never actually examined in great detail - the Future Submarine Program is strategic for Japan and Australia. In speaking to the submarine community, past and present, what comes through is that cooperation with Japan results in a Future Submarine that can approach the performances of Collins but only with a completely new design and one that will definitely not be regionally superior post 2030. This is alarming and requires pause for thought.

The root-cause of this problem is that Japan does not have any technology that is, well, regionally superior. Indeed, it is the reverse situation - Japan's relative submarine capability is improved by the Future Submarine Program but not Australia's.

The Future Submarine is strategic for Japan, but not for Australia.

The Australian Government tells us that the next generation of RAN submarines will be regionally superior because they will have higher performances in stealth, sensors, range and endurance, and of course the US-origin combat system and weapons. With superior performances in these areas, the Future Submarine can outmatch any other submarine the RAN might conceivably fight, including the nearly silent nuclear attack submarines emerging from Russia and in the future, China. In the decades to come these submarines will hunt, and be hunted by, Australian submarines and it's important to note that the RAN may not get to choose who to fight or when – they might choose us.

But what if the international partner for Australia has no better technology than we already have access to? The undeniable logic is the Future Submarine will offer performances no better than the Collins Class Submarine it replaces. An 'Australianised' Soryu will not be regionally superior beyond 2030. This is the critical issue.

To say it in plain English, if the Collins were to fight the Soryu today Collins would kill it every time. And there is no technology offered by Japan to suggest any evolution of the Soryu can change this situation in the future.

None.

In lobbying Australia to accept their submarine, Japan has disclosed enough about its own capabilities in open literature to prove this. The Soryu Class, Japan's most modern submarine, offers no improvement over Collins in any capability area – not stealth, not sonar, not range nor endurance and not combat system or weapon. Moreover, there is no objective evidence that Japan can overcome these problems with a new design. Let's examine the case for the Soryu point by point. (end of excerpt)

Click here (http://www.australiandefence.com.au/news/the-submarine-problem-deeper-than-meets-the-eye) for the full story, on the ADM website.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/172811/is-japan%E2%80%99s-soryu-submarine-not-good-enough-for-australia%3F.html
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 07:24 uur
France beats Japan, Germany to win $40 billion Australian submarine contract

Tue Apr 26, 2016

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-submarines-idUSKCN0XM2F5
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Ace1 op 26/04/2016 | 09:37 uur
Citaat van: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 07:24 uur
France beats Japan, Germany to win $40 billion Australian submarine contract

Tue Apr 26, 2016

Verrassende keus die ik zelf niet heb aanzien komen, de Japanse Soryu Klasse was favoriet.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Huzaar1 op 26/04/2016 | 09:50 uur
Het machtige Australië gezwicht voor China.Tjonge...
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 10:13 uur
Citaat van: Ace1 op 26/04/2016 | 09:37 uur
Verrassende keus die ik zelf niet heb aanzien komen, de Japanse Soryu Klasse was favoriet.

De Japanner lag om diverse technische redenen al enige tijd uit de gratie.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 10:16 uur
Citaat van: Huzaar1 op 26/04/2016 | 09:50 uur
Het machtige Australië gezwicht voor China.Tjonge...

Is een gedachte, politiek lag de Japanner lang ver voor, technisch waren er toch veel aandachtpunten... de vraag is dus, heeft men politiek gekozen of voor de boot met de beste mogelijkheden?
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Harald op 26/04/2016 | 10:29 uur
Citaat van: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 10:13 uur
De Japanner lag om diverse technische redenen al enige tijd uit de gratie.
Dat klopt, maar dan had ik verwacht dat de Duitsers het zouden winnen van de Fransen.
Maar aan de andere kant, de Fransen hebben hun Scorpion boten wel verkocht aan India, Maleisië.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 10:34 uur
Citaat van: Harald op 26/04/2016 | 10:29 uur
Dat klopt, maar dan had ik verwacht dat de Duitsers het zouden winnen van de Fransen.
Maar aan de andere kant, de Fransen hebben hun Scorpion boten wel verkocht aan India, Maleisië.

:cute-smile: Ik ging ook uit van een Duitse overwinning... foutje.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 10:39 uur
Franse scheepswerf wint megacontract Australische onderzeeboten

Bericht geplaatst: 26-04-2016 | Laatst aangepast: 26-04-2016

Vanochtend is na jaren van competitie bekend gemaakt dat de Franse scheepswerf DCNS de nieuwe Australische onderzeeboten mag gaan bouwen. De opdracht heeft een waarde van 34 miljard euro.

http://marineschepen.nl/nieuws/Franse-werf-DCNS-wint-megacontract-Australische-onderzeeboten-260416.html#.Vx8myr8LRtQ.twitter
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Mourning op 26/04/2016 | 11:11 uur
Ja... lol.. sorry ik gun het de Fransozen natuurlijk van harte, want onderdeel van de EU (en dus de defensieindustrie in de EU), maar ik wordt altijd een beetje zenuwachtig als m.n. een Franse kandidaat pardoes, bijna uit het niets (ik gaf de Japanners en Duitsers veruit de meeste kansen), een materiaal competitie ergens wint. Het land heeft nogal een geschiedenis op dat vlak (evenals een aantal andere grotere producenten, eerlijk is eerlijk)  ;D
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Harald op 26/04/2016 | 11:13 uur
Wel een voortstrevend ontwerp met geen schroef maar waterjet.
Ben benieuwd..... vooral bij de contractvorming !
Hopelijk voor Australië wordt het geen proces zoal bij de Rafaledeal in India.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Sparkplug op 26/04/2016 | 12:05 uur
Het is wel en niet verrassend dat Australië een Frans product kiest. Al sinds de Mirage III heeft elk van de Australische krijgsmachtdelen weleens iets van Franse afkomst gebruikt.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 12:20 uur
Citaat van: Thomasen op 26/04/2016 | 11:11 uur
Toch zonde dat de ausies geen SSN's willen.

Was wellicht een beter alternatief geweest.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 26/04/2016 | 12:51 uur
Voor Sea 1000 is een apart topic. Opgezet om het Walrus-topic schoon te houden.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 26/04/2016 | 13:09 uur
Ik denk dat de Fransen gewonnen hebben puur omdat ze de meeste kennis van scheepsbouw willen delen met het Australische ASC. En daarmee dus feitelijk de meeste Australische werkgelegenheid bieden naast de technologie en technische assistentie. Waarbij DCNS de technologie levert die ze zelf niet homemade kunnen maken. Een zelfde situatie als Damen en Saab, maar dan op een veel grotere industriële schaal.

Vanuit defensie-industriële machtsbalans ben ik tevreden dan TKMS juist niet de totale commerciële onderzeebootbouw in handen heeft gekregen. Dat de innovatie in technologie te zeer naar één partij trekt (zie Lockheed-Martin in de VS). Voor het Japanse conglomeraat Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is het wel zuur, had hun ook wel een overzees succes gegund.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 26/04/2016 | 13:30 uur
Citaat van: Thomasen op 26/04/2016 | 12:55 uur
Uiteindelijk is natuurlijk de missie wat bepaald welke voortstuwing nodig is. De Soryu, Kilo en Yuan klasse zijn natuurlijk ook niet nucleair, maar vraag me toch af of bij schepen van dit formaat er daadwerkelijk voldoende vermogen is. Nog los van de noodzaak om te snuiveren, of een complexe AIP bij te vullen.

De Fransen hadden in hun Rubis klasse, die ongeveer even groot is als de Walrus, ook gewoon een reactor.
De Franse onderzeeboten zijn er op gemaakt escorte aan de oppervlaktevloot te leveren. Dat vergt hogere snelheden en pumpjet voortstuwing. Onze onderzeeboten zijn wel oceangoing maar typeren zich meer als lone wolves, echt SSK hunter-killer optreden.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Oorlogsvis op 26/04/2016 | 14:31 uur
Het totale programma gaat tussen de 35 en 50 miljard dollar kosten voor 12 subs ?...en wij willen er voor 2.5 miljard 4 Walrus vervangers.
Het lijkt of de bedragen veel te hoog zijn het zou betekenen dat iedere subs die de Australiers gaan kopen minimaal 3 miljard dollar gaat kosten dit is toch veel te duur ??

zelfs bij een koers van eur/aussiedollar van 1.46 praat je nog over minimaal 2.3 miljard per sub
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 26/04/2016 | 14:42 uur
Citaat van: Oorlogsvis op 26/04/2016 | 14:31 uur
Het totale programma gaat tussen de 35 en 50 miljard dollar kosten voor 12 subs ?...en wij willen er voor 2.5 miljard 4 Walrus vervangers.
Het lijkt of de bedragen veel te hoog zijn het zou betekenen dat iedere subs die de Australiers gaan kopen minimaal 3 miljard dollar gaat kosten dit is toch veel te duur ??

zelfs bij een koers van eur/aussiedollar van 1.46 praat je nog over minimaal 2.3 miljard per sub

Het genoemde getal van 34 mjd euro is m.i. het budget het over het gehele programma, een periode van meer dan 50 jaar. De aanschaf zal vermoedelijk ongeveer 1/3 van het totaal zijn.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Ace1 op 26/04/2016 | 15:28 uur
Citaat van: Oorlogsvis op 26/04/2016 | 14:31 uur
Het totale programma gaat tussen de 35 en 50 miljard dollar kosten voor 12 subs ?...en wij willen er voor 2.5 miljard 4 Walrus vervangers.
Het lijkt of de bedragen veel te hoog zijn het zou betekenen dat iedere subs die de Australiers gaan kopen minimaal 3 miljard dollar gaat kosten dit is toch veel te duur ??

zelfs bij een koers van eur/aussiedollar van 1.46 praat je nog over minimaal 2.3 miljard per sub

De kosten vallen in Australie hoger uit omdat men deze werkzaamheden door civiele scheepswerven laat doen en men geen DMO ontwerpafdeling heeft die de ontwerpen zelf maakt.
En een deel van de kosten men maakt bv in Frankrijk onderdelen maakt die naar Australie vervoerd moeten worden, als een land nu een ontwerp en de bouw van een onderzeeer zelf doet is men veel goedkooper uit.
De bouw van de Walrus klasse was ook een stuk goedkoper dan de bouw van de Collinsklasse, dat had er ook mee te maken dat er tijdens de bouw van de Collinsklasse dingen verkeerd zijn gegaan en die moesten hersteld worden.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Lex op 26/04/2016 | 16:34 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 26/04/2016 | 12:51 uur
Voor Sea 1000 is een apart topic. Opgezet om het Walrus-topic schoon te houden.
De berichten zijn overgeheveld naar dit topic.

Lex
Algehaal beheerder
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 26/04/2016 | 21:38 uur
Koude Oorlog verhalen ophalen, altijd mooi.

French Barracuda submarine: the most complex artefact in Australia

Brendan Nicholson
Defence Editor Canberra

By the end of last year the French were convinced they had made a breakthrough in the race to win Australia's $50 billion submarine contract.

Over a series of meetings in Paris, L'Orient, Cherbourg and Adelaide, engineers from the French naval shipbuilder DCNS shared with Australian naval officers secret data on their submarine's acoustic signature.

The French Barracuda submarine, with its pump jet propulsion system, matches other conventional submarines' noise emissions at very low cruising speeds under 5 knots.

But the data showed that when the Barracuda accelerated, as any submarine must do when pursuing an enemy or evading an attacker, the French design was significantly quieter than rivals.

The French declared that they were willing to share all of their cutting-edge technology and they felt then that they had surprised and impressed the Australians.

And so it proved. Led by veteran submariner Greg Sammut, considered one of the ADF's smartest and most diligent officers, the Royal Australian Navy's evaluation team was very conscious that in the hunter-killer deadly game of undersea warfare, a quiet submarine wins while a noisy submarine dies.

Yesterday the Australian government publicly announced what the French government had long hoped for: Paris-based industrial group DCNS, expert in naval defence, had won the unpredecentedly large contract to build the Navy's 12 new submarines. These 4500-tonne conventionally powered subs will be versions of DCNS's 4700-tonne nuclear-powered Barracuda submarine. The new subs will be named the Shortfin Barracuda, after a predatory fish found in Australian waters.

On completion, as DCNS puts it, the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A "will be the most technically complex artefact in Australia".

The French company won the $50bn project ahead of Japan and Germany. It follows comprehensive briefings on the options over the past 10 days to the National Security Committee of Malcolm Turnbull's cabinet by Rear Admiral Sammut.

NSC progressively evaluating the designs, production plans, schedule, cost and other factors. The NSC recommendation went to the full cabinet and Turnbull flew quickly to Adelaide to announce the result.

Japan's government, in partnership with a consortium headed by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, had offered an evolved version of its 4000-tonne Soryu-class sub, lengthened by 6m-8m to provide space for additional fuel and batteries to increase its range and for roomier crew accommodation.

German company TKMS offered a 4000-tonne submarine of a new design, using technology tested in its 2000-tonne boats. With that came a promise of something of an industrial revolution, a new digital manufacturing model for the nation introduced on the back of the submarine project.

The vast scale of the project, even by international standards, was reflected in the extent of the French delight after Malcolm Turnbull telephoned his French counterpart, Francois Hollande, to tell him the very good news.

A less pleasant task for the Prime Minister was to explain to our close ally, Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe the reasons for the decision. The Japanese believe they were blindsided because of their strong expectation, built up under former prime minister Tony Abbott's leadership, that they would be the chosen ones. But the then prime minister was forced to open the process to international competition after a rebellion by South Australian Coalition MPs who feared the prospect of submarines built in Japan would cost several of them their seats.

That group was likely to include high-profile frontbencher Christopher Pyne, who became Industry Minister under Malcolm Turnbull, and who will have a key role in what will be a construction program on a massive scale.

While South Australian politicians were smiling with success, the Japanese Prime Minister was not so lucky. Abe had a lot at stake, after investing considerable domestic personal political capital persuading Japan's parliament to change its interpretation of its pacifist constitution to allow the export of military hardware. That was done in large part to accommodate Australia.

Apart from the importance of the contract to its shipbuilding industry, the Abe government sees the submarine contract as a cornerstone of a much closer security relationship with Australia in the face of Japan's ongoing tensions with China in the South China Sea.

All of the submarines will be built in Adelaide, though the construction model favoured by DCNS was for the first of the submarines to be built at its yard in Cherbourg in France with half of the workforce to come from Australia. To significantly reduce risk, the Australians would learn on the job in France and then bring their skills home to train others in Adelaide. In the meantime a new construction plant would be built at the ASC facility in Adelaide in time for work to begin on submarine number two. During the selection process, the French said that would sped up delivery of the first submarine.

There are sound strategic reasons to build the submarines in Australia. One of the world's most experienced builders of both surface warships and submarines, Herve Guillou, global chairman and chief executive of DCNS, told The Australian the new submarines must be built in Australia to ensure they can be maintained and modernised here.

Guillou says the submarines were a vital strategic asset and the nation needed full sovereignty over them. "If Australia wants to maintain its sovereignty, at the end of the day we have to build in Australia. There was no way Australia should need to rely for 50 years on another nation to maintain its submarines," he says

"After 10 years, you have to upgrade things as technology improves to keep up your regional superiority. To upgrade a submarine you need not only a database and a supply chain, you also need engineering know-how and know-why."

So, given the massive expense of this project, does Australia really need to spend $50bn on a new submarine fleet?

France's shipbuilding industry provides a very good example of very close ties to that nation's global naval operations.

When French special forces were assigned to recapture a West African oil rig from pirates three years ago, they parachuted into the ocean and were picked up by one of France's small Rubis-Class nuclear-powered submarines. Through the submarine's periscope, the French soldiers watched their targets for days while assessing the best moment to strike. Then they emerged from the torpedo tubes and swam through darkness to climb aboard and launch their attacks with complete surprise.

The French navy will not say more about these operations, but the details it has released reveal some of the options the submarine force offers.

The Rubis submarines have monitored fighting in Syria and Libya, bringing home film of explosions and tracer lighting up the night in a fierce battle near the coast.

France is replacing its 2000-tonne Rubis boats with its new nuclear-powered Barracuda attack submarines. In recent months the French navy quietly stationed a submarine to protect its aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle, while it operated in the Persian Gulf two months ago launching air raids on Syria.

In the same way, the Royal Australian Navy will use its submarines to protect its giant new landing ships, which can each carry 1000 fully equipped troops, if they are sent to a war zone.

Little is being said publicly about where they fit into Australia's strategic picture, but a great deal is going on below the surface.

Australian submarines have travelled far up into East Asia to gather intelligence about military movements there.

The Navy's new boats will be able to fire cruise missiles through their torpedo tubes and they will have, by any conventional submarine standards, a colossal range that will take them far up into the disputed waters of the East and South China Seas.

Australia's submarine operations are cloaked in secrecy but some clues about the roles of the Navy's current and new submarines in an uncertain future can be gained from the extraordinary secret operations of the Oberon boats during the Cold War.

The Australian has revealed that in 1985, HMAS Orion entered Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam, the Soviet Union's largest naval base outside the USSR. Prime minister Bob Hawke was later shown brilliantly clear footage of a Soviet Charlie Class nuclear submarine Orion was tailing. Unseen but just metres behind the Soviet submarine, Orion's crew was able to get remarkable pictures of sonar and other fittings along its hull.

On another occasion and in response to an American request, HMAS Orion waited, submerged, outside Cam Ranh Bay and this time tailed a Soviet Kirov-Class nuclear powered cruiser, monitoring its communications.

A similar operation inside the Chinese port of Shanghai in late 1992 nearly went disastrously wrong. HMAS Orion became caught in fishing nets. After a fisherman used an axe to cut his boat free, the Australian submarine was able to escape into the open ocean.

Years later, more top secret patrols were carried out by Australian submarines to gather intelligence about Indonesia military operations around East Timor.

When our Shortfin Barracuda boats are launched, Australia will be more able to keep pace with other powers active in the region.

China is building a mixed fleet of up to 80 conventional and nuclear-powered submarines. They will include both conventional and nuclear attack submarines designed to destroy other submarines and surface ships, and nuclear submarines armed with ballistic missiles, probably with nuclear warheads and able to threaten targets far away.

The Russian Federation is revamping its still-formidable submarine capability. It has about 12 nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines, 25 nuclear attack submarines and about 20 conventional Kilo and Lada class boats. It is building new generations of each which are likely to be very capable.

The US is the most capable operator of submarines around the world and operates an all-nuclear fleet, including 14 nuclear ballistic missile submarines, four converted guided missile submarines and 55 attack submarines. About two thirds of these boats fall under Pacific Command.

Even the US cannot match these submarine numbers on its own but it wants allies such as Australia to operate strong undersea forces to complement its own force.

Japan has a formidable fleet of 17 large stealthy and sophisticated conventionally powered submarines and it is increasing that to 22.

South Korea has a very competent submarine force of nine Chang Bogo conventionally powered attack submarines derived from the German Type 209. It is building nine more modern German Type 214 and will have 18 modern boats before the end of the decade. It is planning to design and build additional boats of its own.

Singapore has a small but sophisticated conventionally powered submarine force with four very capable Swedish-made Sjoormen Class and two newer Archer class boats. Two German Type 218 submarines are due in 2020. Its crews are well trained and its undersea arm is considered very capable.

Taiwan has just two 1980s-vintage Dutch submarines but wants at least eight more modern boats.

Australia and Japan have both used submarines to help the US build up a pattern of Chinese submarine movements and a library of sound "signatures" to help identify the rapidly growing number of Chinese boats when they are encountered in future.

Australian, Japanese and US submarines could well find themselves monitoring Chinese naval activity off the submarine base on Hainan Island — or off a North Korean port.

North Korea's determination to build a hydrogen bomb small enough to fit it to a missile that can be carried by a submarine is adding to fears in Tokyo, Washington and Canberra. Though that is a long way from fruition, the prospect of a nuclear-armed North Korean submarine turning up far from its unpredictable homeland at some time in the future is a possibility that has to be planned for.

And the best way to destroy a submarine is with a better submarine.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/french-barracuda-submarine-the-most-complex-artefact-in-australia/news-story/6fcfe2d0e1c5f68b17e5df4b18501a7d
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 28/04/2016 | 12:52 uur
Wapenindustrie is Franse banenmachine
Frankrijk krijgt het 'contract van de eeuw': de bouw van twaalf onderzeeërs voor Australië. Met dank aan de socialistische regering.
Peter Vermaas
27 april 2016

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.nrc.nl%2FHORIg85eJ0qSAHDW3m9oXrCIo2U%3D%2F1920x%2Fs3%2Fstatic.nrc.nl%2Fimages%2F2016%2F04%2F27%2Fw1920%2F2704eco_submarine.jpg&hash=25b5426ff4dbe2549f5cfedffa77fd1da327de75)
De schroef van een duikboot.
Foto Reuters/Stephane Mahe

Het Duitse ThyssenKrupp was in de race, evenals het Japanse Mitsubishi. Maar Australië koos voor Frankrijk. Voor 34,3 miljard euro bouwt defensiebedrijf DCNS voor de Australische marine twaalf onderzeeërs. De boten worden weliswaar in Australië geassembleerd, maar ook in Frankrijk komen er ,,duizenden" banen bij, zei minister van Defensie Jean-Yves Le Drian dinsdag.

Met het ,,contract van de eeuw", zoals Franse media schrijven, bewees de rechterhand van president François Hollande opnieuw zijn kwaliteiten als lobbyist voor de Franse defensie-industrie. Sinds de socialisten in 2012 het landsbestuur overnamen, is het aantal wapenverkopen verdubbeld ten opzichte van de jaren onder Hollandes voorganger Nicolas Sarkozy.

Frankrijk was tussen 2011 en 2015 volgens het Stockholm Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) na de VS, Rusland en China al de vierde wapenexporteur in de wereld. Na bestellingen vorig jaar van 84 Rafale-straaljagers door Egypte, Qatar en India en nu de order uit Australië, verstevigt de Franse industrie zijn positie.

Uitgerekend grootindustrieel Serge Dassault, de man achter Rafale-producent Dassault Aviation, noemde Le Drian onlangs ,,de beste minister van Defensie ooit". Hij bedankte de socialisten omstandig voor hun hulp bij de straaljagerverkoop. Dassault is een vriend van Sarkozy en senator voor diens conservatieve Republikeinen. Maar: ,,We zijn altijd beter behandeld door linkse regeringen dan door die van rechts", liet Dassault-topman Charles Edelstenne zich in weekblad L'Obs ontvallen. Ook onder president Mitterrand in de jaren negentig deden Franse wapenbedrijven goede zaken.

Net als bijvoorbeeld de nucleaire sector draagt de wapenindustrie voor veel Fransen bij aan grandeur en soevereiniteit. Anders dan in Duitsland bestaat in Frankrijk, zelfs in linkse kringen, weinig aversie tegen militaire leveranties, ook niet aan landen met een discutabele democratische reputatie zoals Saoedi-Arabië, een van de belangrijkste Franse klanten.

Dat heeft vooral te maken met banen, zegt SIPRI-onderzoeker Pieter Wezeman aan de telefoon. In de Franse wapenindustrie werken zo'n 165.000 mensen en de recente orders leveren volgens het ministerie in drie jaar 60.000 nieuwe arbeidsplekken op. Door de overheidsbemoeienis (DCNS is voor 63 procent in staatshanden) is de wapenindustrie bovendien een van de weinige sectoren waar de staat via diplomatieke kanalen direct invloed op kan uitoefenen

http://www.nrc.nl/next/2016/04/27/wapenindustrie-is-franse-banenmachine-1615484
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Harald op 02/05/2016 | 13:51 uur
Kwam nog deze vergelijking tegen van de verschillende aanbiedingen in de vervangingsrace van de Collins klasse

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fresources0.news.com.au%2Fimages%2F2015%2F05%2F15%2F1227356%2F703500-345b9970-fad0-11e4-8bbc-a4e8f2601378.jpg&hash=c994873a442331c103c3a6461bbe1d254bb758bc)
http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2015/05/15/1227356/703500-345b9970-fad0-11e4-8bbc-a4e8f2601378.jpg

de uitslag is nu bekend, maar ..... is er in-side informatie door gespeeld ?? ..

Former senior defence adviser now heading French sub builder

A former senior government adviser who enjoyed privileged access to top-secret information about the navy's future submarine project has taken a high paid job with one of three foreign contenders for the $20 billion plus contract.

Sean Costello was chief-of-staff to former Defence Minister David Johnston and left his $250,000-a-year government job in January this year.

He began work in April — just four months later — as Chief Executive Officer with French Government shipbuilder DCNS Australia.

The firm is engaged in a "competitive evaluation process" for the Navy's future submarine contract alongside Germany's Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems (TKMS) and Japan's Soryu Class boat.

.....

voor het gehele artikel, zie onderstaande link
http://www.news.com.au/national/former-senior-defence-adviser-now-heading-french-sub-builder/news-story/9afdad459b857261f019743a7cd1165e
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Harald op 02/05/2016 | 15:38 uur
How France sank Japan's $40 billion Australian submarine dream

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-submarines-japan-defence-in-idUSKCN0XQ1FC

Crucially, in April 2015, DCNS hired Costello, who had earlier that year lost his job as chief of staff of Australia's Defence Ministry in the wake of Johnston's resignation.

A former navy submariner who had also been the general manager for strategy at state-run Australian submarine firm ASC, Costello was ideally placed to lead a bid.

Had the Japanese called first, Costello would have likely have accepted an offer to head their bid, according to a source who knows Costello. "They didn't pick up the phone," he said. Costello declined to speak publicly about the bid.

Costello's team drew up a list of a dozen tasks DCNS needed to complete to win the deal, including the critical job of winning over U.S. defense companies Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N) and Raytheon Co (RTN.N), one of which will eventually build the submarine's combat system.

In a final coordinated push, a huge delegation of French government and business leaders visited Australia a month ago, touting the economic benefits of their bid.

Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Mourning op 02/05/2016 | 15:57 uur
Moet zeggen dat dat plaatje met een aantal basiscapabilities van elke sub me beter doet begrijpen waarom de Soryu het uiteindelijk niet geworden is. Overigens nog steeds een zeer goede sub lijkt me en m.b.t. de akkoestiek staat eigenlijk niets vermeld in het overzichtje...
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Kaaskop2 op 02/05/2016 | 16:13 uur
Citaat van: Mourning op 02/05/2016 | 15:57 uur
Moet zeggen dat dat plaatje met een aantal basiscapabilities van elke sub me beter doet begrijpen waarom de Soryu het uiteindelijk niet geworden is. Overigens nog steeds een zeer goede sub lijkt me en m.b.t. de akkoestiek staat eigenlijk niets vermeld in het overzichtje...

De Soryu-klasse is specifiek voor de Japanse wensen ontworpen, hetgeen resulteert in een relatief klein actieradius en niet "te offensieve" wapensystemen (conform Japanse grondwet). Overigens wordt men door dat overzichtje ten aanzien van een aantal aspecten op het verkeerde been gezet. Zo hadden de eerste versies van de Soryu-klasse hadden bijvoorbeeld ook een AIP, maar inmiddels zijn de Japanners overgestapt op Li-ion-batterijen (hetgeen het overzichtje impliceert als iets 'slechts', terwijl het de volgende stap is).
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Mourning op 02/05/2016 | 16:27 uur
Ja, heb je helemaal gelijk in. Ik gaf zelf ook al aan dat m.b.t. bijv. de akkoestiek eigenlijk niets in het overzicht is opgenomen. Misschien is de Soryu veel stiller.... geen idee hoor, maar ja.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter) op 02/05/2016 | 16:35 uur
Citaat van: Mourning op 02/05/2016 | 16:27 uur
Ja, heb je helemaal gelijk in. Ik gaf zelf ook al aan dat m.b.t. bijv. de akkoestiek eigenlijk niets in het overzicht is opgenomen. Misschien is de Soryu veel stiller.... geen idee hoor, maar ja.

Ik heb zo het vermoeden dat je een akoestisch overzicht tot het geclassificeerde domein behoort.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Mourning op 02/05/2016 | 16:51 uur
Dat weet ik wel zeker. Ik heb het overigens ook niet over een volledig akkoestisch profiel, maar meer van een aantal innovaties, materialen of noviteiten men gebruik (wil) gaan maken en dat is lang niet allemaal zwaar ''classified''.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 02/07/2017 | 23:35 uur
Weten we dat ook weer: Zweeds staal dus!

"In government, Abbott favoured partnering with the Japanese to adapt their Soryu sub for our purposes. For strategic reasons, this was the option the Pentagon and Washington generally favoured. It involved nearly as big an adjustment by Tokyo as by Canberra. Unfortunately, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was unable to motivate Mitsubishi to embrace the project in the way he wanted. The Japanese never offered us the full Soryu and their first offering actually ­involved metal that was inferior to the metal in the Collins-class subs."

Het gehele artikel is het lezen waard!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/idea-of-an-australian-nuclear-submarine-fleet-just-wont-float/news-story/dd5123c0be52dffb4ec161dd2789be3c
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: walter leever op 02/07/2017 | 23:54 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 02/07/2017 | 23:35 uur
Weten we dat ook weer: Zweeds staal dus!

"In government, Abbott favoured partnering with the Japanese to adapt their Soryu sub for our purposes. For strategic reasons, this was the option the Pentagon and Washington generally favoured. It involved nearly as big an adjustment by Tokyo as by Canberra. Unfortunately, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was unable to motivate Mitsubishi to embrace the project in the way he wanted. The Japanese never offered us the full Soryu and their first offering actually ­involved metal that was inferior to the metal in the Collins-class subs."

Het gehele artikel is het lezen waard!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/idea-of-an-australian-nuclear-submarine-fleet-just-wont-float/news-story/dd5123c0be52dffb4ec161dd2789be3c

Gaat niet,geen abonnement. :silent:
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Ace1 op 03/07/2017 | 17:30 uur
Citaat van: Zeewier op 02/07/2017 | 23:35 uur
Weten we dat ook weer: Zweeds staal dus!

"In government, Abbott favoured partnering with the Japanese to adapt their Soryu sub for our purposes. For strategic reasons, this was the option the Pentagon and Washington generally favoured. It involved nearly as big an adjustment by Tokyo as by Canberra. Unfortunately, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was unable to motivate Mitsubishi to embrace the project in the way he wanted. The Japanese never offered us the full Soryu and their first offering actually ­involved metal that was inferior to the metal in the Collins-class subs."

Het gehele artikel is het lezen waard!

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/inquirer/idea-of-an-australian-nuclear-submarine-fleet-just-wont-float/news-story/dd5123c0be52dffb4ec161dd2789be3c


Wat is er mis met Zweeds staal?

Citaat van: Harald op 02/05/2016 | 13:51 uur

(https://www.defensieforum.nl/Forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fresources0.news.com.au%2Fimages%2F2015%2F05%2F15%2F1227356%2F703500-345b9970-fad0-11e4-8bbc-a4e8f2601378.jpg&hash=c994873a442331c103c3a6461bbe1d254bb758bc)
http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2015/05/15/1227356/703500-345b9970-fad0-11e4-8bbc-a4e8f2601378.jpg
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 03/07/2017 | 19:37 uur
Citaat van: Ace1 op 03/07/2017 | 17:30 uur
Wat is er mis met Zweeds staal?
Japan blijkt kennelijk niet meer dan bereid dan suboptimaal staal te leveren om een 'dadjoke' te maken. En inderdaad; met het staal van SSAB is weinig mis.
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 03/10/2017 | 11:07 uur

A fall-back option for the future submarines?

3 Oct 2017
Andrew Davies (https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/author/andrew-davies/)

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/a-fall-back-option-for-the-future-submarines/
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 09/10/2017 | 00:44 uur
Niet verrast.  ;D

Australia's Government Under Attack Over Submarine Deal
In a new report, experts urge Australian government to drop plans to procure French-made nuclear attack submarines.

By Franz-Stefan Gady (http://thediplomat.com/authors/franz-stefan-gady/)
October 04, 2017

The debate over the Royal Australian Navy's (RAN) future submarine fleet is raging on with a new report urging the Australian government to reconsider its decision to procure redesigned diesel-electrics submarines and opt for modified off-the shelf boats instead, or risk a major capability gap in the near future.
Australia's submarine project, which aims to replace the RANs fleet of six aging Collins-class submarines designed by Swedish manufacturer Kockums in the 1990s, is "extravagantly expensive, highly risky and in an era of heightened tensions in the Asia Pacific compromises the future defense of Australia," a recently released Insight Economics report (http://www.submarinesforaustralia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Insight-Economics-Submarine-Report.pdf), commissioned by Gary Johnston (http://www.submarinesforaustralia.com.au/), a Sydney businessman, states.
Australia and France concluded an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) (https://thediplomat.com/2016/12/australia-france-sign-deal-to-build-12-submarines/) for the construction of 12 Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A  submarines, a diesel-electric derivative of French shipbuilder Direction des Constructions Navales Services' (DCNS) Barracuda-class nuclear attack submarine under the Royal Australian Navy's SEA 1000 Future Submarine Program (http://sea1000.gov.au/) (FSM) in December 2016. The 12 submarines — except for some specialized parts — are slated to be built in Adelaide, home to the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC).Enjoying this article? Click here to subscribe for full access. Just $5 a month. (https://thediplomat.com/subscriptions/)The report claims that Australia's new submarine fleet will cost far more than necessary. "We will pay far too much for a boat that will do far too little," Hugh White, author of the study, said on September 27, during a presentation of the report in Canberra. "Our calculation in the report is that, in 2016 dollars, these 12 boats will cost us $40bn, plus $6bn for the combat system – well over $3bn a boat. In every major project like this, the costs escalate."
However, according to the report, the bigger risk with sticking to the modified Barracuda-class is that "Australia will be left with a submarine capability that is either seriously inadequate or, in the worst case, non-existent for several years." The report states:<blockquote>Engineering experts consider the technical risks around the Shortfin Barracuda to be high. It will be a very large conventional submarine and the engineering challenges are formidable. Most surprisingly, the present concept design does not incorporate modern batteries or AIP, considered by most experts as essential in a future operational environment where submarine detection technologies will have improved significantly.</blockquote>According to Australia's 2016 Defense White Paper, the first Shortfin Barracuda will enter enter service in the 2030s, with construction of the sub fleet extending way into the 2030s and 2040s. "A rolling acquisition program will ensure that Australia is able to maintain a fleet of 12 regionally superior submarines as submarine and anti-submarine technologies develop over the coming decades," the white paper notes (http://www.defence.gov.au/whitepaper/Docs/2016-Defence-White-Paper.pdf).
Johnson, who also runs the website Submarines for Australia, instead argues that the government should move quickly to procure to six off-the-shelf submarines, either German Type 212 or French Scorpene-class boats. "[R]ather than extend Collins, take urgent steps to acquire six off-the-shelf submarines, modified to extend their range and built in Adelaide if cost-effective," he argues.
"And also, because of the long transits to the Navy's areas of operations, acquire a submarine tender – a mother ship – that could be forward based on Australian territory and provide a better amenity for the crews. Together this should cost under $10 billion," he adds in line with the report's findings.
"Second, bring forward the review of future submarine technologies flagged in the 2016 Defense White Paper. The review would consider whether we should either acquire more, much cheaper, modified off the shelf submarines; or build the Shortfin Barracuda; or set in motion the lengthy and costly process to acquire nuclear submarines. The criteria would be capability requirements and value for money."
Australia's Defense Minister, Marise Payne, has dismissed the report's recommendations. "The consistent advice from Defence and actual experts in the field is that there are no military-off-the-shelf submarine options that meet Australia's unique capability requirements," she said. "A 'modified off-the-shelf' submarine is an oxymoron."
The Insight Economics study is not the first report to criticize the Australian government's submarine acquisition strategy. In June 2016, former Defense Minister, Kim Beazley, said in a report (https://www.aspi.org.au/publications/agenda-for-change-2016-strategic-choices-for-the-next-government/Agenda-for-change-2016.pdf) prepared by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) that rapid advancements in underwater military technology could make the RANs future submarine fleet obsolete much sooner than Australia's defense ministry is anticipating.

https://thediplomat.com/2017/10/australias-government-under-attack-over-submarine-deal/
Titel: Re: SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears
Bericht door: Zeewier op 20/10/2017 | 22:41 uur
Questions surround Australia's new submarine fleet's ultra-stealth propulsion technology
The Navy's new stealth submarines might not be so stealthy after all.

Ultra-quiet pump-jet propulsion technology was a key selling point in the subs' design.
It was supposed to help make the subs "the world's most advanced conventionally powered submarine"
Executive director of Naval Group now says propeller technology might be used on the submarines
A top executive at the company building the subs has thrown doubt on whether cutting-edge pump-jet propulsion technology will be used as planned.

The ultra-quiet technology was a key selling point for the French design that won the Government's competitive evaluation process to build the new submarines at a cost of $50 billion.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-19/new-subs-fleets-promised-stealth-technology-questioned/9058858 (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-19/new-subs-fleets-promised-stealth-technology-questioned/9058858)[