| Submit your comments on this article |
| Europe |
| French shipbuilding town in shock over lost Australian submarine order |
| 2021-09-25 |
[PUBLISH.TWITTER]
|
| Posted by:Fred |
| #15 If we can't have a win-win scenario No, we can't. Most of the time, life is zero-sum. We need to look out for our own. Enough of the idiotic "global citizen," life-is-always-win-win bullshit |
| Posted by: Blutto 2021-09-25 20:04 |
| #14 Sorry I didn't include range data on the AIP stuff. What it amounted to was 21 days at 15 knots, which from Australia amounted to drive to Taiwan and come back, without much in the way of loiter time. If you go to Skidmark's wiki page, and open footnote 10 at the bottom, you can look at the French page on their MESMA AIP units. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2021-09-25 19:07 |
| #13 Had one of those baking soda subs. We found out ground up Efferdent worked even better. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-09-25 18:12 |
| #12 So I guess baking soda is out? Air-independent propulsion |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2021-09-25 18:11 |
| #11 It's also a fact that the gummint of Australia could at any time cancel because "nukes evil" or "we will bargain to be eaten last" by the chinese dragon. And don't think for a moment that the left in OZ won't beat those drums. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-09-25 16:25 |
| #10 It doesn't make sense from a cost or schedule standpoint to build the subs in Australia. If the Aussies choose the Virgina subs, then it more sense to build the subs in the US and then have the Aussies build the FREMM class or even the Hunter class frigates for the US Navy. Do what each does best and maximize savings and schedule. |
| Posted by: Spereng Crins7805 2021-09-25 16:13 |
| #9 Excuse me if my sympathy is minimal. This deal will be good for the US, UK, and Australians, bad for the French and Chinese... whose side is everybody on, exactly? If we can't have a win-win scenario, then have a scenario where we win, at least. |
| Posted by: Vernal Hatrick 2021-09-25 14:47 |
| #8 ^ Bien dit, Edouard. Qui a poignardé qui? |
| Posted by: Grenouille Australienne 2021-09-25 13:22 |
| #7 Mike, the Aussie Boats the French were going for weren't nuke boats; they were French Barracuda (Suffren) boats without reactors, and AIP installed instead. The test stand drive unit that had been built for demo couldn't deliver the power promised for time. So they were going to add a diesel for surface charge. In which case, why AIP? Meanwhile, project cost had doubled, with more in sight. At same time, as China secured more of the South China Sea, the utility of a littoral sub decreased. And AIP boats are littoral service, they don't have the legs for sustained blue water use. The power curve works against them. So, because of the distances involved, the Aussies arrives at needing nuke powered boats. And for TSM's question, the answer is 1 half constructed, zero delivered. Delivery had been pushed back to 2028 or longer. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2021-09-25 12:03 |
| #6 Well, the yards in Cherbourg could get to work on developing the next generation of Israeli missile boats. Again. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2021-09-25 11:45 |
| #5 I think the Swedes and Germans have the export sub market pretty well sewn up, which would explain why the French are livid. They were about to become playahs... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-09-25 11:22 |
| #4 ....Interestingly, this is the second major shipbuilding contract the French have lost recently. They were bidding for what became the Constellation class FFG, but the Italian variant of the French design was cheaper and more aligned with what we needed, not to mention the Italians already had a yard here in the states with a terrific work record and could get underway immediately. What I'm hearing from a few friends as far as the Aussie sub contract goes is that there were a lot of problems, and the French really didn't seem too interested in fixing them. There were in turn two big issues at the front: 1) The cost of these beasts kept going up, and though the Aussies expected that to a certain extent, the French attitude was to smile, shrug their shoulders, and keep adding up the charges. 2) French SSNs need refueling every seven to ten years - and the French weren't discussing any options other than to bring them back to France for 36 months at a minimum (more if the French Navy's own boats were in line first) and then pay even more charges. Although the Australians could certainly build the infrastructure to do it themselves, that's still more expense and the only reason their native Greens Etc. are letting them get away with SSNs in the first place is because China's not smart enough to shut the hell up and leave them alone. Otherwise the protests would be loud and never-ending. Current US and UK boats though have life-of-the-boat reactors - they are good for 25 to 30 years with no refueling and only need minor mechanical and software upgrades. The Aussies didn't take well to being told that their only option was to keep paying more and more and more...and the French couldn't figure out when to put a clamp on the prices. The only people for the French to be angry at are the ones in the mirror. Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2021-09-25 11:13 |
| #3 How many submarines were delivered and/or under construction at the present time? |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2021-09-25 10:59 |
| #2 Company town life is never exactly cushy and when it's bad, it's awful. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2021-09-25 08:21 |
| #1 As always, it's the little people -- the normies, those who "work hard and play by the rules" -- who are bitchslapped, cheated, and devastated by elite incompetence and stupidity |
| Posted by: Mersault Camus 2021-09-25 00:41 |