Australian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Aus-PAT-01.jpg

Naval Technology said:
The Australian Government has signed a $305m contract with Austal to support the Royal Australian Navy's pacific patrol boats replacement (PPBR) project.

Under the contract, Austal will construct 19 steel-hulled patrol boats. The contract also includes an option for two additional vessels.

The company was selected as a preferred tenderer last month by the country for the PPBR programme.

Design work by Austal is expected to begin immediately, with construction starting next year, and the first delivery scheduled in 2018. Work under the project will run up to 2023.

The ships will be constructed at Austal's shipyard in Henderson and the contract is anticipated to generate 120 direct jobs, along with business opportunities for local and Australian subcontractors.

Additionally, support work will be performed at Austal's existing contracted facility in Cairns, Queensland, which will engage local subcontractors in the region to deliver support services.

Austal CEO David Singleton said: "Given our extensive facilities at Henderson we will need to make only minor investments in training and equipment to support construction of steel vessels of this size.

"Importantly, by expanding into steel we will further enhance the shipyard as we position Austal to bid and win additional domestic defence shipbuilding contracts.

"The contract also opens up new opportunities to further develop our successful export programmes, which have accounted for up to 80% of our production in the past, making Austal Australia's most successful shipbuilder."

The 39.5m-long PPBR will be based on Austal's patrol boat design platform and can accommodate a crew of 23. It can achieve a speed of 20k and has range of 3000nm at 12k.
These will replace the 22 existing Pacific Patrol Boats that Australia built from 1985 to 1997 and gave to allied island nations in the Pacific.

They looked like this:

Aus-PAT-02.jpg

Austal is growing significantly and getting many orders from around the world. These new boats add to that. They build the Independence class LCS, as well as the Spearhead Class Fast transports for the US Navy too.
 
Apr 26, 2016
French company wins $50b submarine contract

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!



The French won. Congrats.
details emerging now (for example four million man-hours in France an so on and so forth):
Hervé Guillou (DCNS) : "Les industriels sont galvanisés, car Le Drian s'engage personnellement"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

(I quickly went through the Russian translation available at
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
which I'll read again)
 

Brumby

Major
Australia Takes a Step Closer to Hypersonic Flight
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

2016-05-19 “An Australian-United States team has successfully completed an experimental hypersonic flight at the Woomera Test Range. The experimental rocket reached an apogee of 278 km, achieving the targeted speed of Mach 7.5 (seven and a half times the speed of sound).

The experimental flight was undertaken as part of a joint research program, HIFiRE (Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation Program) being conducted by the Defence Science and Technology Group and the US Air Force Research Laboratory with Boeing and the University of Queensland providing expert technical design and analysis.

The HIFiRE team has already achieved some significant milestones such as the design, assembly and pre-flight testing of the hypersonic vehicles and the design of complex avionics and flight systems.

More test flights are scheduled in the next two years.”
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
RAAF’s first P-8A conducts maiden flight

The first Boeing P-8A Poseidon Maritime Patrol Aircraft due for the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) has completed its maiden sortie.

The aircraft, which is based on the 737 commercial airliner, flew from Boeing’s Renton production facility to nearby Boeing Field, says the RAAF in a statement.

As with P-8As operated by the US Navy and P-8I Neptunes operated by the Indian navy, the aircraft’s mission system will be installed at Boeing Field. It will fly to Australia in late 2016.
Canberra ordered eight P-8As under the AIR 7000 programme. It has options for four additional examples.

The type will replace the RAAF’s fleet of Lockheed Martin P-3 aircraft. Flightglobal’s Fleets Analyzer shows that the RAAF operates 15 P-3Cs, the average age of which is 33.5 years.
Canberra also intends to obtain the Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton unmanned air vehicle to complement the new type

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Australian Air Force 1st P-8A.jpg
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
The cost mentioned includes through life support. The rule of thumb with acquisitions such as this is that 1/3 goes to actual acquisition and the rest being through life support cost.


You are probably right that it will eventually cost more and takes longer but politics will always thump economics. No Australian government will survive a political decision to build it off shore no matter how sound the economics.

Mr. Brumby!, enough philosophizing!, get this boat ready to dive, come about to a heading of 280 degrees, make turns for 22 knots and get this boat to 245 meters, NOW! MR BRUMBY, we are going to run us down a slow, noisy nuke boat, and stow that bilge water SON!
 

Air Force Brat

Brigadier
Super Moderator
Yesssss!!! Haha :lol: What an upset... (remember just one year ago all these Reuters articles who said it was a done deal for Japan, most of them didn't even mention DCNS)

France's DCNS Clinches SEA1000 Future Submarine Program Contract for Royal Australian Navy
ylcm9XI.jpg


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Stow that NavyReco!, and help Mr. Brumby get this boat down, and make turns for 22 knots, we've got an SSBN to catch, move it gentlemen, we don't have time to Chat!
 

FORBIN

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The price of silence: the submarine offered to Australians by TKMS was too Noisy

2 weeks ago, behind doors closed in a shipyard in the German port of Kiel, an Australian delegation explained the secret reasons behind the decision to enter into exclusive negotiations with DCNS for the award of the contract of 12 submarines, a $ 150 billion contract from $. It is a moment that left the Germans KO: for the first time, it was explained that they had lost the bidding because the submarine proposed to the Australia had a "level of radiated noise (...)". unacceptable ".

Summary

A submarine too noisy
Doubts about batteries
Cost projections (...)

In the world of submarines, the noise is equivalent to a possible detection and death. When the Germans have pressed issues Australian officials to have more detailed explanations, they stayed on their hunger: "this information is confidential," they were told the Australian.

A submarine too noisy

Exchanging a short and muscular, the truth emerged: DCNS had won the biggest contract in the history of the Australia because it had reached the "sound of silence". As a platform of espionage against China, and in the event of a conflict, proposed by the French submarine was regarded as more discreet than those proposed by the Germans and the Japanese.

But it is a decision with 150 billion of AUS$ in game - 50 billion for construction (32 billion €) and 100 additional billion for maintenance over the life of the submarines (64 billion €)-that the Germans dispute fiercely, at least in private. And this decision could undermine relations with Berlin, in the same way that the rejection of the Japanese proposal has affected relations between Canberra and Tokyo.

Confidential debriefing on the German proposal was held under bad auspices, on Friday, May 13, at the historic shipyards in Kiel.

Five Australian Defence officials, led by the Director general of the program "Future submarines", Commodore Mike Houghton, stood before 11 senior representatives of German manufacturer TKMS, and German ministries of defence, Economic Affairs and Foreign Affairs. The presence of government officials was the image of the investment of the Germany in the tender, to the involvement of Chancellor Angela Merkel.

The delegation of Australia, that a German observer described as 'shameful in their body language', handed a document marked "confidential - sensitive", summarizing the reasons for the decision.
At the same time, across the world, the head of the program "Future submarines", Rear Admiral Greg Sammut, headed the 12 and 13 may a delegation to explain to several ministries in Tokyo, including the Ministry of defence, to explain to the Japan why their proposal was refused.

The question of discretion also played a key role in the Japanese defeat.

If at Kiel, Australian officials hoped that the Germans would be a passive audience, they themselves are heavily wrong.

Led by the vice-president of TKMS, Dieter Rottsieper, the Germans have questioned tenaciously every assumption made by the Australians. They began 2 hours meeting in ensuring that the decision to reject their proposal was not influenced by politics, the press or other factors. The choice was based entirely on the need to choose a submarine than those of the neighbours in the region and which could be maintained throughout his life in Australia.

But, they explained, the truth was that, although the Germans have put forward an excellent project for the local industry for the maintenance of submarine, the submarine itself was not good enough.

The delegation explained that "the critical point" was that their submarine was too noisy.
In particular they were told with a deliberate lack of precision, their submarine would have been too noisy at a particular frequency, which is very important for the Royal Australian Navy - an apparent reference to the ability of submarines to gather intelligence near the coast without being detected.

The Germans responded by asking how often it was and why the tender process had not insisted on this point.

Australians have responded that this information was confidential and that they were not convinced that TKMS has understood the importance of this issue for the Australia. They explained that the problem of discretion implied that the German proposal could never give a submarine than those of the neighbours of the Australia.

The Germans insisted, asking this noise came, indoor facilities, the propeller of the hull? Once again, Australian officials have refused to answer.
A German Observer stated: "the power of the German military-industrial complex could easily have solve a technicality like this, if only the Australians had been clearer about the issue until we deposit our proposal."

Behind the scenes, DCNS has worked hard year last to instill doubt in the minds of Australian officials about the noise level of the submarine proposed by TKMS.

DCNS has modeled its estimate of the noise emitted by the submarine proposed by the Germans using the signature sound of his own submarine rockfish, smaller. She then compared this estimate with the signing of the new Barracuda submarine on which is based the submarine suggested the Australians.

The French have also loudly touted their revolutionary propulsion system: a pump-jet, which will replace the propeller on the Australian submarine, the "Shortfin Barracuda".

Paris has argued that this would give underwater sound higher than that of the German U - 216 and Evolved Soryu Japanese silent tactical speed. Australian officials have strongly impressed by the fact that, where the Barracuda accelerates, the french submarine is much quieter than the models proposed by the Germans or the Japanese.

If the German delegation was told that the noise was the key factor in the final decision, it was also informed of other perceived problems in the proposal which they had made.

The Australians have explained to them that the model pre-concept proposed to the defence at the end of the month of November "was not balanced" and that the optimization of the concept "was not completed.

Doubts about lithium-ion batteries

They explained that they had reservations about the safety of the proposed batteries, lithium ion battery, which should be installed on both the German and Japanese proposals. 2 countries maintain that the lithium ion batteries, which are 4 times more efficient than batteries traditional lead acid are safe, despite small fires with these batteries on recreational equipment, cars and aircraft.
Last March, the France publicly warned about the dangers that lithium ion batteries could cause aboard a submarine. The Australian delegation clearly explained in Kiel that it shared those concerns.

The Australians have also expressed their skepticism about the ability of TKMS to increase size, both of Siemens engines and their current submarine hull, to build a submarine of over 4,000 t - almost double the submarines being constructed.
Optimistic cost projections

Moreover, Australians explained that the Germans cost projections were too optimistic, even when they claim that there is only a negligible extra cost by building all of the submarines in Australia.
The German proposal provided that the price of the construction of 8 submarines (without combat system) would be a little less than 12 billion from $, and 12 submarines (including the combat system) would cost 20 billion.

The delegation of Australia told the Germans that this cost estimate does not reflect the technical challenges and that it was well below "expectations.

TKMS explained that build 12 submarines in Australia will cost no more than build them in Germany. An internal estimate of the Australian Government still provides an additional cost of approximately 15%.

Australian officials explained to the Germans that he was not in their proposal analysis sufficiently substantiated to justify that extra cost is also limited as they claimed.

After a delicate, often tense, almost 2 hours, meeting the delegation of Australia and the representatives of the shipyard naval Germans have gone to lunch. It is has not been less tight, according to participants. The Germans who had participated, were far from being satisfied with the explanations given.

"This will have serious consequences for our bilateral relations," said one of them. "We do not believe that our proposal was evaluated fairly. We are very disappointed. »

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

navyreco

Senior Member
Australia to Equip its Hobart-class AWD Vessels with Raytheon SM-2 Block IIIB Missiles
The Australian Navy will equip its Hobart-class Air Warfare Destroyers with the Raytheon SM-2 Block IIIB missiles. According to the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency, the State Department has approved the Foreign Military Sale of the missiles with a cost of USD301 million.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Here is my response;



Some people are so quick to forget the following problem that plagues ASC.



Within the article a passage that is quite revealing;



Mitsubishi Heavy's concerns is not something imaginary or considered as them being special but a deep concern based on past and present situation.
how have you been, SamuraiBlue?
Future Submarines contract losers Japan, Germany, baffled by French company DCNS win
June 12, 2016 12:12pm

THEY are “scratching their heads” in Tokyo and “shaking their heads” in Berlin over why Japan and Germany lost to France on the $50 billion Future Submarines project, The Advertiser has been told.

Both nations have been briefed on why
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, and both are convinced they were given a bum steer.

Several insiders in both camps told The Advertiser they think DCNS won because they build nuclear-propelled boats and Australia will one day go down that route.

Defence Minister Marise Payne has ruled out that option, although the technology used for the submarines will be reviewed partway through construction.

The Japanese
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
from the competitive evaluation process.

Under former Prime Minister Tony Abbott, they believed they were on a winning ticket because Mr Abbott was
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
to buy a fleet of the Japanese Soryu submarines.

But towards the end of the CEP, they were knocked out of contention, leaving just the two European options. An insider said they were left “scratching their heads” about the decision.

It is understood Australia raised concerns about their propeller and said the proposed submarine was too loud. Japan had been led to believe that any highly technical issues could be ironed out during the full design process.

The Germans are understood to have been ahead or even with France on a range of factors at that point but then France pulled ahead because of their superior propulsion system and stealth technology.

They are “shaking their heads” about how the whole CEP was handled, according to a source, because they also believed that specific technologies would be fine-tuned after an international partner was selected.

Both countries believe the unspoken reason they were ruled out was because Australia wanted to keep open the option of a nuclear-powered submarine, which DCNS build.

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute, which is funded by and advises the Federal Government on defence matters, last week argued that a nuclear-powered submarine would be more capable.

Executive director Peter Jennings argued South Australia should start preparing the groundwork for a later switch to nuclear submarines.

“As Adelaide is being positioned to be the centre of continuous ship and submarine construction in Australia, the federal and state governments should jointly develop a plan to strengthen university-level instruction in physics, nuclear engineering and necessary supporting sciences based in South Australia,” he said.

DCNS chief executive Sean Costello said the French “did not offer nuclear propulsion” as an option during the CEP. However, he said the proposed French submarine was superior because it used the more advanced technology that they have developed for the French submarine.

“Our offer does not propose nuclear propulsion for Australia at any time but the performance of the submarine we offer does inherit the technology of nuclear submarines,” he said.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top