Page 7 of 23 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141517 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 345

Thread: Australia’s Submarine Options

  1. #91
    Senior Member xav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    13,025

    Default Royal Australian Navy rules out French and Spanish submarine designs

    [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=2]Australian Defence officials have revealed that at least two possible contenders for the navy's new submarine fleet, the Spanish S-80 and French Scorpene class boat, have been ruled out of the future submarine project.

    Answering questions on notice from Opposition spokesman David Johnston, Defence said both vessels did not meet "Australia's broad needs as outlined in the Defence White Paper".

    They are smaller than the Collins and the White Paper calls for 12 larger submarines to cost up to $36 billion. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    http://www.navyrecognition.com/index...d=65&Itemid=93

    Off course they are smaller so it is no very surprising. But look at all modern subs designs available for export (with AIP)... none of them displaces more than 3,000 tons

  2. #92
    Senior Member xav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    13,025

    Default Australia seeks European designs on $36 bln submarine fleet

    Australia has asked three European companies to submit designs to replace its submarine fleet at a cost of up to A$36 billion ($36 billion) in a defence buildup aimed at protecting resource exports and countering an accelerating arms race in Asia.

    French naval builder DCNS, part owned by Thales, Germany's Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH and Spanish state shipbuilder Navantia had been asked for information on conventional submarine designs, Australia's Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare said on Tuesday.
    http://www.*******.com/article/2011/...7ND1W020111213

  3. #93
    Senior Member shuredgefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Teegeeack-awaiting the triumphal return of Mighty Xenu
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Corrected link por favor.

  4. #94
    Senior Member tluassa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Germany, Nrw
    Posts
    5,852

    Default

    Re*ters + u

    this forum somehow hates that newsservice

  5. #95
    Senior Member shuredgefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Teegeeack-awaiting the triumphal return of Mighty Xenu
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tluassa View Post
    Re*ters + u

    this forum somehow hates that newsservice
    Thanks, maybe Revters means "*****" in serbo-croat.

  6. #96
    Reported.....For not reporting T3ngu sooner Alfacentori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Resident Misanthrope
    Posts
    4,367

    Default

    Be interesting what types of designs they come up with, the required capabilities are bigger than anything Europe is used to building.

    Alfa

  7. #97
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Enjoying old women and young wine
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Just wondering now the Australian labour Government is changing its nuclear policies if a future nuke fleet is a potential. Australia bought Abrams tanks to be able to work with the US. 2RAR are to be mini-marines. What is the navy doing about inter-operability?

  8. #98
    Banned user
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,948

    Default

    If the budget is $3 billion per sub, then go off the shelf nuclear. No need to come up with a design from scratch.

  9. #99
    Reported.....For not reporting T3ngu sooner Alfacentori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Resident Misanthrope
    Posts
    4,367

    Default

    As stated in previous threads, nuclear will NEVER happen, end of story. There is no political willpower or public support for it. Instead we will build the largest and most capable conventional boats in the world, and pay the requires $$$. In short we want a non-nuclear boat that can do most of what an SSN can do, and that's a tall, but necessary, order. They will also be built in Australia, no exceptions. We need the onshore skills/facilities to build, maintain, refit, and modify our own boats. Off-the-shelf will not do.


    Alfa

  10. #100
    Member lords's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hindustan
    Age
    26
    Posts
    563

    Default

    $36 billion is a lot of money.. you can build a small navy with it..

  11. #101
    Daddy's little boy RSone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Age
    25
    Posts
    13,826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alfacentori View Post
    Be interesting what types of designs they come up with, the required capabilities are bigger than anything Europe is used to building.

    Alfa
    It's a shame Dutch sub building expertise went under. The Walrus class are built around the idea of long range patrol, and I believe the design( that or something derived from the Moray designs) was considered in the process that culminated in the Collins class.

  12. #102
    Senior Member Flamming_Python's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Spying on the Eurowoosies
    Posts
    13,235

    Default

    Don't see what the damn big deal is about a nuclear-powered sub.

  13. #103
    Reported.....For not reporting T3ngu sooner Alfacentori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Resident Misanthrope
    Posts
    4,367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Flamming_Python View Post
    Don't see what the damn big deal is about a nuclear-powered sub.
    Politics....doesn't have to make sense, just is

    An Aussie built Astute would have been perfect.

    Alfa

  14. #104
    Banned user
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Enjoying old women and young wine
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alfacentori View Post
    As stated in previous threads, nuclear will NEVER happen, end of story. There is no political willpower or public support for it. Instead we will build the largest and most capable conventional boats in the world, and pay the requires $$$. In short we want a non-nuclear boat that can do most of what an SSN can do, and that's a tall, but necessary, order. They will also be built in Australia, no exceptions. We need the onshore skills/facilities to build, maintain, refit, and modify our own boats. Off-the-shelf will not do.
    Alfa
    Very Kim Beazley. But he has moved on and so has the Australian Government. As to off the shelf won't do, when did that change? The original replacement for the Oberon class was to be a proven design. Proven means built and operational. If you mean built under licence , ok.

  15. #105
    Reported.....For not reporting T3ngu sooner Alfacentori's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Resident Misanthrope
    Posts
    4,367

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chanan View Post
    Very Kim Beazley. But he has moved on and so has the Australian Government. As to off the shelf won't do, when did that change? The original replacement for the Oberon class was to be a proven design. Proven means built and operational. If you mean built under licence , ok.
    Not sure what Kim has to do with it, but ok.

    The point about domestic construction holds, as with all major warships submarines are maintenance intensive and for various reasons (economic, political, security of supply lines, wartime repair etc) the skills have to be located domestically, as stated in the current White Paper. This does not mean it has to be an Australian designed boat, or built self sufficiently (i.e. ever component designed and built in Australia from Australian materials), that's altogether different. Foreign design expertise is vital, as is cooperation with key component systems makers, electronic suite, weapons, engines etc. But the simple fact is that no off-the-shelf existing design for an SSK meets the RANs requirements. This can be seen in that even the stretched design of the Collins has been judged as to limited for RAN operations. That means a bespoke design for Australian requirements. Hence it is time for experienced sub builders to pony up and put some design proposals on the table, but all will have to take into account the boats being contructed in Australia.

    Alfa

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •