Over the last several years there has been an ongoing debate over the
replacement of Australia's conventional powered Collins-class
submarines. Some defense analysts have argued that a nuclear submarine
purchase or leased from the United States, the UK, or France would make
the most sense as opposed to the limitations a conventional diesel
submarine.
It seems, at least for now, the debate has been settled, with homegrown diesel subs winning the day.
On Friday, Australia released its Defense White Paper 2013. The document
lays out the future agenda and goals for Australia's military. The
document seems to have crushed the idea of nuclear propelled Australian
submarines:
"Due to the strategic value and importance of Australia’s
submarine capability, the Government remains committed to replacing the
existing Collins Class fleet with an expanded fleet of 12 conventional
submarines that will meet Australia’s future strategic requirements. The
future submarines will be assembled in South Australia. The Government
has ruled out consideration of a nuclear powered submarine capability to
replace the Collins Class fleet."
The report also seemingly commits to an indigenously built vessel:
"The Government has directed further work on a new Submarine
Propulsion Energy Support and Integration Facility in Australia. This
land-based facility will substantially reduce risk in the Future
Submarine Program by providing the capability to research, integrate,
assemble and test the propulsion, energy and drive train systems in all
stages of the Future Submarine’s design, build and through-life sustainment."
"The Government has also taken the important decision to suspend
further investigation of the two Future Submarine options based on
military-off-the-shelf designs in favor of focusing resources on progressing an ‘evolved Collins’ and new design options that are likely to best meet Australia’s future strategic and capability requirements."
There are some compelling arguments for sure when it comes to the
direction of Australia's future submarine force. Homegrown conventional
diesel submarines obviously would power Australia's defense industry for
decades to come, creating or retaining jobs while developing greater
domestic submarine building capabilities and technical knowhow. Modern
diesel electric submarines, powered by air-independent propulsion, are
near silent and tough to track by any modern navy. Armed with modern
anti-ship missiles, they are certainly a force to be reckoned with on
the high-seas.
Despite the benefits to Australia's defense industry and military
capabilities of a domestic conventional submarine, one must look back to
Canberra's last submarine project, the Collins-class — certainly not a
smooth experience. In an interview The Diplomat conducted last year with Australian defense expert Ross Babbage, he explained some of the challenges of the last domestically built submarine:
"Overall, the Collins Class program demonstrated that Australia
does have the industrial and other skills to design, build and then
operate a very advanced diesel-electric submarine, provided that it
receives extensive assistance from a range of friendly countries. When
fully operational, these boats have periodically performed extremely
well on exercises.
However, there were many problems with the Collins program
including flaws in the contract and contract management, inadequate
contingency allowances, design weaknesses, skill shortages and some
major production and support difficulties. The result was that the boats
arrived late, they were over-budget, they have experienced continuing
reliability problems and these factors have compounded the challenges of
building experienced submarine crews and a strong cohort of support
personnel for the force.
Hence, while the Collins program hasn’t been the unmitigated disaster that’s so frequently described in the press,
it isn’t the sort of experience that should be repeated given the
rather more demanding requirements that Australia now has for its
next-generation submarines."
Considering the cost and needs of Australia's military for the next
several decades, leasing an American, British or French nuclear
submarine would surely have been a better option.
In particular, American nuclear powered Virginia-class subs are some
of the most state of the art and well praised in defense circles and
would be an excellent choice for Australia. As Babbage noted last May,
"(The Virginia class boats), in particular, are well sorted and
reliable, they have low risk, they have known costs, they never need to
be refueled and they could be acquired with associated training
programs and system upgrade pathways."
In the end, domestic considerations like job creation and economic
matters may have ruled the day when it comes to Australia's future
submarine choice. With Julia Gillard trailing in the polls, it certainly
would have been an unpopular choice to hand billions in defense
contracts to any foreign supplier at a time when the government is
running a budget deficit. However tough the challenge would have been
for Gillard, let's hope Australia also weighed the ultimate
consideration: getting the most capable submarine to defend the nation
for the best cost.
No comments:
Post a Comment