Jump to content


Photo

New Australian Sub

Japan Germany France Collins-class

  • Please log in to reply
154 replies to this topic

#61 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,764 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 26 April 2016 - 0354 AM

I couldn't open the link of JasonJ so: http://www.reuters.c...s-idUSKCN0XM2F5 

Japan's Minister of Defense Gen Nakatani described the decision as "deeply regrettable"."We will ask Australia to explain why they didn't pick our design," he added.

 :lol:

It had this same thing in it.
  • 0

#62 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,354 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 26 April 2016 - 0710 AM

neither japanese nor german nor swedish:

australia goes for frog eating:

FUTURE SUBMARINE PROGRAM

26 April 2016
Prime Minister
Minister for Defence

The Turnbull Government today announces that the next generation of submarines for Australia will be constructed at the Adelaide shipyard, securing thousands of jobs and ensuring the project will play a key part in the transition of our economy.
DCNS of France has been selected as our preferred international partner for the design of the 12 Future Submarines, subject to further discussions on commercial matters.
Along with our recent naval shipbuilding announcements, the commitment to an Australian build will create a sustainable Australian naval shipbuilding industry and provide the certainty that industry requires to invest in innovation and technology and grow its workforce.
The Future Submarine project is the largest and most complex defence acquisition Australia has ever undertaken. It will be a vital part of our Defence capability well into the middle of this century.
This $50 billion investment will directly sustain around 1,100 Australian jobs and a further 1,700 Australian jobs through the supply chain.
Todays announcement follows the comprehensive Competitive Evaluation Process (CEP) involving DCNS, TKMS of Germany and the Government of Japan. Each bidder submitted very high quality proposals and the Australian Government takes this opportunity to thank both TKMS and the Government of Japan for their ongoing commitment to Australia and their participation in the process.
The CEP has provided the Government with the detailed information required to select DCNS as the most suitable international partner to develop a regionally-superior future submarine to meet our unique national security requirements, as detailed in the Defence White Paper.


http://www.pm.gov.au...bmarine-program
  • 0

#63 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,354 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 26 April 2016 - 0727 AM

oops jasonj was faster. that's what I get for posting through the search function.

 

I couldn't open the link of JasonJ so:
 
http://www.reuters.c...s-idUSKCN0XM2F5
 


Japan's Minister of Defense Gen Nakatani described the decision as "deeply regrettable".
"We will ask Australia to explain why they didn't pick our design," he added.

 
:lol:

buying japanese would have caused frictions with a certain asian billion people state. rumour has it that TKMS did not sell its design well. leaves france as neutral supplier. Also diversification of suppliers, TKMS seems to be the front runner for the new frigate programme.

And well maybe the french boat was the one best fitting the requirements.

Cg9q9YlWUAEXba9.jpg

too bad the french boat is missing in the table

Edited by Panzermann, 26 April 2016 - 0734 AM.

  • 0

#64 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,764 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 26 April 2016 - 0839 AM

Its fine Panzermann, my link directs to a subscription request. But that still leaves Corinthian being faster than you :P

 

France has some level of security relation with Australia as well actually. Australia and France have a history of working together in disaster relief. There are French territories in the Asia Pacific, most notably, New Caledonia, so France does have a little interest in the region as well.

 

Many Japanese netizens have expressed concerns about leaks to China, so many are actually quite relieved about the news. Some saying France was best anyway, etc. Darwin port being leased to China is an example of the basis of fears of leaks. Looking at Australian news, job creation for the submarine construction sector played a big role. Leaves me to think that is was even more important than actual capabilities of the sub. Although that is not to say that their new sub with France won't be good.

 

And yes, China would have been angry about it. Goes to show how important it has become to not upset the feelings of the Chinese people™ these days. Between additional stress from China, stress in ensuring smooth work conditions for Australian workers and within budget, and anxiety about leaks to China from the Japanese side, the selection of the Japanese sub would have put unwelcome strain on the forming Japan-Australia security relationship. If it was military equipment that was less sensitive, like tanks, I think Japan would be feeling more disappointed, but the subs require special security protection. And at already 50 billion, it might be hard to ensure top level security throughout, in and out.

 

About the graph, the Japanese proposal to Australia was an Australian version of the Soryu MK II which would have a hull longer by a few meters to include additional space for extending range. Other features like Tomahawks might have been included.

 

Soryu_Cutaway_Variants%2BPNG.png

 

http://gentleseas.bl...lution.html?m=1


  • 0

#65 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,394 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted 26 April 2016 - 0855 AM

A French design that's never hit the water built by Austrailians with a US fire control. What could go wrong. :)

I'd hate to be the system integrator on that project.


  • 0

#66 BansheeOne

BansheeOne

    Bullshit filter overload, venting into civility charger

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,142 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Berlin

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1214 PM

There's a surprise. I thought the race was going to be between the German and Japanese design. Hearing different suggestions why the French won; best price, Australia thought the need to scale up the others' existing designs was higher risk and AIP wasn't their priority, or that the Japanese offer was in fact favored but withdrawn by the bidders - which would be at odds with the pissed reaction of the Japanese government, not showing a good grasp of how selling your goods on the international arms market works, and how to make friends there ...

 

Anyway, a non-nuclear Barracuda will be interesting.


  • 0

#67 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,334 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1220 PM

The RAN will no doubt be busy visiting their RMN counterparts in Teluk Sepanggar for the low down on driving a French submarine. The RMN has had crews trained on Froggy boats since the early 80s prior to procuring the two Scorpene AIPs.


  • 0

#68 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,354 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1713 PM

There's a surprise. I thought the race was going to be between the German and Japanese design. Hearing different suggestions why the French won; best price, Australia thought the need to scale up the others' existing designs was higher risk and AIP wasn't their priority, or that the Japanese offer was in fact favored but withdrawn by the bidders - which would be at odds with the pissed reaction of the Japanese government, not showing a good grasp of how selling your goods on the international arms market works, and how to make friends there ...


Yes very unjapanese to be so bluntly showing they are pissed. Normally you either sue in military procurement or you just leave quietly. If they had shut up they could have haggled a deal for, dunno, lorries and land cruisers or some such. Something not as high profile as a submarine.

 
Anyway, a non-nuclear Barracuda will be interesting.


Apart from the hull there won't be much similarities I think. Different electronics, different engine. Probably different weapons.

With the evovling battery technologies the Ozzies are maybe hedging a bet on replacing the batteries with higher capacity ones in the future. fuel cells are quite inefficient.


here for example: http://www.theinquir...last-a-lifetime

far from a ready product, but smaller more durable electrodes should help making tighter packaging.
  • 0

#69 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1917 PM

 

Cg9q9YlWUAEXba9.jpg

too bad the french boat is missing in the table

 

 

18,000nm at 10 knots! Damn. That's impressive. Sure it's bigger than the Soryu but still....


  • 0

#70 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,334 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1946 PM

The Froggy sub offered the gretatest payoff against some risk. The Japanese sub was just too risky, mainly due to the need to build in ASC.


  • 0

#71 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,783 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 April 2016 - 1949 PM

Surprised and bitterly disappointed at this news. I had not even realized the French were mounting a strong bid for the contract.

 

The personal stake Abe placed on winning this deal for Japan, what this deal meant to the Japanese defense industry, Japan's willingness to expose and share the technology of the world’s best large conventional submarine with Australia in the deal, just so disappointed right now.


  • 0

#72 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0051 AM

Look at it this way: Japan will hopefully learn from this and do better in the future.
  • 0

#73 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,334 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0112 AM

Ze French have had a major presence in the Oz defence sector for a while. The Japonais are kindergarten grade and utterly unaware of the challenges needed to transfer tech and service the ADF.
It was an all GtG affair and that is very difficult for ASC. Failure of Japonais bid was very likely.
  • 0

#74 Corinthian

Corinthian

    Stone Age Bitter Delusional Retard

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peek-a-boo, I'm behind you.
  • Interests:Wholesome stuff.

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0325 AM

https://youtu.be/XHZUJe3N99c
  • 0

#75 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,877 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Westphalia, Germany

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0341 AM

What's the more challenging job? Making the existing Barracuda non nuclear and a bit smaller or increasing a Type 212 by a factor of two?
  • 0

#76 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,764 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0439 AM

 

There's a surprise. I thought the race was going to be between the German and Japanese design. Hearing different suggestions why the French won; best price, Australia thought the need to scale up the others' existing designs was higher risk and AIP wasn't their priority, or that the Japanese offer was in fact favored but withdrawn by the bidders - which would be at odds with the pissed reaction of the Japanese government, not showing a good grasp of how selling your goods on the international arms market works, and how to make friends there ...


Yes very unjapanese to be so bluntly showing they are pissed. Normally you either sue in military procurement or you just leave quietly. If they had shut up they could have haggled a deal for, dunno, lorries and land cruisers or some such. Something not as high profile as a submarine.

 

Maybe one thing that upsets the Japanese government is that the previous Australian PM, Tony Abbott, practically ensured that the Japanese were going to get the deal through 2014 and up until the the fall of 2015 when he got replaced. Putting aside his antics, he was more pro-Japan/America. His replacement voted in last year in the fall, PM Turnbull, still voices opposition to China's activities in the South China Sea but is seen as a little more middle ground between the US/Japan on the one hand and China on the other. So it may not be to difficult to see it as government to government anger rather than defense company to defense company.

 

But yes, it is still quite unjapanese. But other things have changed. They now can export weapons and make security relations, and more easily can go to war now like everyone else. Japan is changing. Japan is no longer the biggest economy in Asia. Not even half the size of the biggest one. And the biggest one is very unpeaceful. All this when Japan's population is aging and on shrinking. Really bad timing. Of course Japan will change. Or maybe China was counting on Japan remaining the cute, polite,  pervert, weakling, so that China would have an easy time dominating the region. Well now I'm rambling on again.. With all that said, the Japanese government being unprofessional is still a fair comment, but just that there's more to it than a typical defense contract IMO.


  • 0

#77 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,334 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0505 AM

The latter.


  • 0

#78 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,334 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0508 AM

How stupid. ASC was never interested in working with the Japanese. The pitfalls for them were awful.


  • 0

#79 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10,764 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:doko yarou
  • Interests:sleeping

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0521 AM

In any case, even though Australia didn't pick the Japanese bid, China still warns Australia for building new submarines and for being a US ally. Should wipe clean any negative feelings towards the Japanese government's whining.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull on Tuesday awarded an A$50 billion ($40 billion) contract to build a new fleet of submarines for Australia to a French enterprise. Japan, which had been a frontrunner in the contest, lost the bid. Japan's Soryu-class submarines are some of the most advanced diesel-electric submarines in the world. Some attributed Japan's failed bid to its lack of experience in military weapons exports and Australia's considerations of avoiding offending China.

However, some Chinese scholars hold that Japan lost the deal because Australia still has concerns over its submarine-building compatibilities. Technological factors weigh more in such a mega project than political factors.

The worst-case scenario seems to have been avoided since Australia snubbed Japan's submarines.

However, as Australia is an ally of the US, these 12 new submarines will beef up the US' strategic strength in the West Pacific, negatively affecting China's strategic security.

Canberra has attached great importance to its economic links with Beijing, its biggest trading partner. But meanwhile, it has offered more support to US military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region that targets China. Nonetheless, Australia is different from Japan. The former is more willing to show its effort of balance between China and the US, while the latter boasts of its partiality to the US.

Canberra needs to know that its submarine plan, be it independent or not, is part of the geopolitical game in the Asia-Pacific and will be used as a bargaining chip for the regional strategic wrestling. Should it add to military pressure against China, it will be compelled to develop stronger counteroffensive capabilities, which in the end runs counter to the national interests of Australia.


Australia after all is located far away from China's continental sea. The simmering tensions between China and the US in the South China Sea are harmful to Australian national security. Therefore, Australia can only secure its best interests by detaching from the South China Sea disputes and not fanning the disputes from outside.

That China will reconstruct the order of the South China Sea, stifle freedom of navigation and block the trade routes of Australia is an illusion. China was accused of changing the status quo of the South China Sea through island building. But it's the US that is a real status quo changer by increasing troop numbers in Darwin, deploying a P-8 Poseidon spy plane to Singapore and reopening five military bases in the Philippines.

If Australia pursues long-term national development and security, it should use its own advantages to help alleviate strategic tensions between China and the US. It should find the correct balance for the sake of peace in the Asia-Pacific.


http://www.globaltim...nt/980304.shtml

Edited by JasonJ, 27 April 2016 - 0522 AM.

  • 0

#80 swerve

swerve

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,779 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Reading, Berkshire
  • Interests:Too many to list all, but include military, economic &technological history. And cycling.

Posted 27 April 2016 - 0643 AM

 

Yes very unjapanese to be so bluntly showing they are pissed. Normally you either sue in military procurement or you just leave quietly. If they had shut up they could have haggled a deal for, dunno, lorries and land cruisers or some such. Something not as high profile as a submarine.

The Australian army has been buying Land Cruisers for decades.


  • 0





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Japan, Germany, France, Collins-class

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users