SEA 1000: French bid to make Australia submarines fades on US security fears

Gestart door Zeewier, 09/02/2016 | 22:04 uur

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

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?

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

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.

Huzaar1

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion" US secmindef - Jed Babbin"

Ace1

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.

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)


Sparkplug

The Submarine Problem - Deeper Than Meets the Eye (excerpt)

Australian Defence Magazine | April 7, 2016


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 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
A fighter without a gun . . . is like an airplane without a wing.

-- Brigadier General Robin Olds, USAF.

Sparkplug

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
A fighter without a gun . . . is like an airplane without a wing.

-- Brigadier General Robin Olds, USAF.

Zeewier

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.

Zeewier

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

dudge

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.

walter leever

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.

Zeewier

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.

walter leever

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

Zeewier

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

dudge

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.