Japanese submarine experts visit Adelaide, sparking fears for shipbuilding future

The South Australian Government wants an explanation from Canberra about the visit of Japanese submarine experts to Adelaide.

 

The group toured shipbuilding company ASC's base in Osborne yesterday, heightening fears the Federal Government may build the next generation of submarines overseas.

 

South Australian Defence Industries Minister Martin Hamilton-Smith said he knew nothing of the trip.

 

Mr Hamilton-Smith said he wanted answers about the reason behind the Japanese visit and whether it signalled a backdown from the Coalition's election promise to build the submarines in Adelaide.

 

"I think the Coalition could explain why this visit's been held in such secrecy," Mr Hamilton-Smith said.

 

"Who's in the party, is it senior military officials from Japan or defence department officials, is it at the political level?"

 

The Government has been looking at its policy for replacing its ageing fleet of Collins Class submarines including using Japanese technology, which has created uncertainty over how much work will be carried out in Australia.

 

The Coalition is due to reveal its policy for replacing the submarines next year with speculation Defence Minister David Johnston will reveal a significant downgrade in plans to build the 12 submarines in Adelaide.

 

Mr Hamilton-Smith said he was urgently seeking an explanation from Canberra.

 

"There's been speculation in the press about a submarine being built overseas, there's been quite a lot of criticism of the Australian shipbuilding industry, some of it unfounded," he said.

 

"I think the South Australian and Australian people involved in the defence industry deserve some answers."

Federal Government says it is business as usual

The Federal Government this morning confirmed 16 Japanese defence experts had toured ASC to look at naval and submarine technology.

 

Senator Johnston said the Government was considering a range of options but would not say what Japanese involvement there could be in the new submarine project.

 

He said Australia recently signed a defence science and technology agreement with Japan and the tour of ASC was linked to that.

 

"They're down here looking at defence science and technology and we are discussing ways whereby we may both collaborate in that space to the mutual advantage of both of our countries," he said.

Senator Johnston defended not alerting the South Australian Government to the visit.

 

"We don't routinely advise state governments of every hourly, weekly visit by defence, science personnel from around Australia or from overseas," he said.

 

"Defence is a Federal Government responsibility. As soon as we have a viable, feasible submarine plan we will announce that much, but having 16 Japanese technicians in South Australia is neither here nor there and quite frankly, is just simply business as usual."

 

The Minister said there would be an announcement either later this year or early next year as to the options the Federal Government would pursue to replace the Collins Class submarines.

 

But SA Premier Jay Weatherill accused the Federal Government of snubbing the SA community.

 

He said Federal Liberal MPs from SA should be working harder to ensure submarines were built in Adelaide, just as Liberal members serving with former prime minister John Howard had done for the successful Air Warfare Destroyer project.

 

"The reason we won that contract is because we had powerful voices in the federal Cabinet, like Nick Minchin, Robert Hill, Amanda Vanstone and Alexander Downer, who stood up and advocated for SA," Mr Weatherill said.

Shipbuilders head to Canberra

John Camillo from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union said there were real fears for the future of shipbuilding in Adelaide.

 

"Not long ago the Federal Minister Johnston in Adelaide indicated that 12 new submarines will be built at the ASC," Mr Camillo said.

 

"And all of a sudden now the tone has been changed from the Government.

 

"It's a major concern for our members and their families."

 

The AMWU said a delegation of shipbuilders from around Australia will meet in Canberra today to call on the Government to commit to its election promise.

 

National secretary Paul Bastian said thousands of jobs would be lost if Australia imported submarines from Japan.

 

"As well as destroying jobs and industry, the Government is risking our national security with this reckless move," Mr Bastian said.

Australia extends Collins-class submarines maintenance contract with ASC

ASC has been awarded a contract extension to provide maintenance on the Royal Australian Navy's (RAN) Collins-class submarine fleet.

 

The company will continue to perform all maintenance work at its headquarters in Osborne, Adelaide, South Australia, and Henderson, Western Australia.

 

ASC interim chief executive officer Stuart Whiley said: "This new contract recognises the significant improvement in performance and availability of the submarine fleet.

 

"ASC already performs significant submarine maintenance work and inventory management at its facilities at Henderson in Western Australia, to complement its maintenance, engineering and logistics capabilities in South Australia.

 

"ASC plans to build on its capability in Western Australia to perform all mid-cycle and intermediate maintenance work, enabling the focus in South Australia to be on the new two-year full cycle docking (FCD)."

 

The new phase of the in-service support contract (ISSC) represents ASC's significant work undertaken to improve availability and reliability of the fleet, and its submarine enterprise partners, including the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) and RAN.

 

The new support initiatives that have been included are the introduction of a circumferential hull, cut for easy access to the submarine, and efficient removal of the diesel engines.

 

Also included are the construction of a new maintenance support tower at ASC's South Australian facility, house key resources forfacilities around the boat, remediation of the supply chain, and the establishment of a rotable pool of spare parts.

 

The navy currently operates a fleet of six 78m-long Australian Submarine Corporation-built Collins-class submarines, which are designed to carry up to 22 missiles and torpedoes, as well as six 533mm forward-torpedo tubes with air-turbine pump discharge.

An evolved Collins Class submarine is the leading option for Australia's next generation of submarines, Defence Minister David Johnston has revealed, renewing hopes that the final decision on the project will deliver jobs and investment in South Australia. 

              

Senator Johnston said in Adelaide yesterday that he believed an evolved Collins Class was a better choice than completely redesigning and building a new submarine.

 

Twelve next-generation submarines will be built under the SEA 1000 project, which has an estimated cost of up to $40 billion.

 

"Our experience is that to go down that path is quite problematic," said Senator Johnston, who was attending a Submarine Institute of Australia conference.

 

"The evolved Collins is the leading option … capitalising on our evolving corporate knowledge, so we will see what the department has done and what the plan is within the next month."

 

SA Defence Teaming Centre chief executive officer Chris Burns saying if this option was backed it would mean jobs and investment for the state.

 

"The centre for excellence of knowledge and capability about Collins is here in South Australia, so it further cements that the future submarines will be made here in SA," Mr Burns said.

 

"And an evolution of Collins means work will be able to commence sooner rather than later in terms of design."

 

The new Abbott government had said it would make a decision about the Future Submarine project within 18 months of taking office, along with creating a new defence white paper.

 

Senator Johnston said he intended pushing forward with "not a briefing but a seminar" over the future subs next month after returning from NATO meetings, to discuss what he described as the Federal Government's "number one priority at the moment".

 

Previously, the former Labor government had narrowed the Future Submarine decision to two main options for the new submarines - the evolved Collins boat or an entirely new Australian-designed and built option.

 

Both parties have committed to the submarines being assembled in South Australia.

 

Senator Johnston also said yesterday that he was confident there would be no gap in capability between the ageing Collins submarines being replaced.

 

"These subs are so important that time is of the essence," he said.

 

"The plan is coming together and you will hopefully shortly see exactly what we are doing with Collins, you will see the path that we are going to choose will be a middle path for SEA 1000 (future submarines)."

 

He said it was "the most important capability we've got at the moment".

 

But he also said that of equal priority was focusing on the sustainment and remediation of the existing six Collins class subs because "the life extension program is vital to the haste with which we must pursue the new boat".

 

"The submarine life extension program will allow an orderly transition to the new submarine without a capability gap but that's not to say we are slowing down SEA 1000 in any shape of form it just means there's a little more time," he said.

 

New subs to be much bigger than Collins

Australia's next submarine will be much bigger than the existing Collins boats but the likely cost won't be known for years, a senior defence official says. 

 

David Gould, general manager for submarines in the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO), said he couldn't estimate the cost of a vessel not yet designed and could not endorse estimates of $36-40 billion in some studies.

Under the 2009 and 2013 Defence White Papers, Australia is looking to replace the six Collins submarines with 12 new vessels of greater range, longer endurance and expanded capabilities.

This is set to be Australia's largest ever defence procurement.

Mr Gould said the new boats would have to be larger than the 3500-tonnes Collins.

"It will be in my opinion larger, much larger. That's the work we are doing at the moment," he told an Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) national security lunch.

The 2013 White Paper reduced the acquisition options from four to two, ruling out the cheapest options of an existing overseas design or an existing model with some Australia-specific systems.

That leaves either an evolution of the Collins or an all-new design.

Mr Gould said Australia had reached agreement with the government of Sweden on intellectual property rights to allow a start on concept designs for an evolved Collins.

That work would be undertaken by German shipbuilder TKMS, now the parent of Swedish firm Kockums, the original Collins designer.

Mr Gould said TKMS would have to correct known defects with Collins and propose improvements.

"But we will not allow them to increase the diameter of the pressure hull - to do so would clearly cross the threshold of a new design," he said.

Mr Gould said two concept designs should have been completed in two years and a decision made on the propulsion system for the first two or three boats.

There would be a much better handle on costs of design and construction.

"But we will not have contract quality costs for a build by any stretch of the imagination at that point," he said.

Collins submarines have reached their performance targets

The recent article in The Australian "Two subs out of action for six years" (24/6) suggests that ASC has missed deadlines for the maintenance of HMAS Collins and the Collins sustainment program in general. This is incorrect. 

 

ASC is working with our submarine enterprise partners, the navy, the Defence Material Organisation and the Finance Department to achieve international benchmarks for fleet availability and reliability as identified by British specialist John Coles. We are safely doing this by driving productivity initiatives in our production, engineering, planning and supply chain capability.

This year we have reached our performance targets. We have proven that high availability can be generated from the Collins class.

Mathematically, it is plain that availability for a class of six submarines will be maximised by moving to a 10-year operating and two-year deep maintenance cycle. HMAS Collins is a core part of that plan.

ASC welcomes scrutiny of the public and the media into our performance. We are proud to lead advanced manufacturing in the naval industry and the defence of our country.

Steve Ludlum, chief executive, ASC, Adelaide, SA

ROBERT Bond's letter (25/6) on our future submarines made interesting reading and reinforces the need for our politicians to consider all options available. It is pointless to expect them to consider nuclear power because for some reason the N-word is a step too far. But they should look at the German Type-212 submarine operating with the German and Italian navies. Unlike the Collins boats, the Type-212 can stay submerged for two weeks and cover 1500 nautical miles. Its long range is ideal for Australia.

To design and build a new super-Collins from scratch without considering this technology is pure folly and a guaranteed waste of our money.

Australian military, industry meet over problem projects

Senior Australian defense officials and heads of Australian defense companies have met over troubled defense projects.

Australian Minister for Defense Materiel Mike Kelly said progress made in remediation plans for each of six problem programs on the Projects of Concern list since a meeting was held in November were looked at.

"We are seeing tangible benefits in having government, (Department of) Defense and industry representatives discussing issues together and working towards remediation of these troubled projects," Kelly said. "Ultimately, results from these summits will deliver real benefits to the men and women of the Australian Defense Force."

The six projects involve Collins class submarines, a multi-role tanker aircraft, a multi-role helicopter, a redevelopment effort, direct fire support weapons and electronic support measures upgrade for maritime patrol planes.

The Australian Department of Defense said that since last November two projects were removed from the list but two others added.

All parties are said to be working together to achieve the main aim of the Projects of Concern process in putting the projects back on track and removed from the list.

The bi-annual face-to-face meetings have been held since 2011. A total of 21 projects have been put on the list with 15 removed -- 13 due to remediation and two due to cancellation.

Australia’s Submarine Folly

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.

THE federal government has eliminated the two cheapest options to deliver Australia's 12 new submarines, a project likely to be the biggest in Australia's history. 

 

An off-the-shelf (MOTS) model of submarine similar to those operating overseas can't meet requirements for long range and endurance, even if fitted with Australia-specific systems.

So the government's now pursuing the final options - an all-new design or an evolution of the existing Collins-class submarines, according to the 2013 Defence White Paper.

"We have before us the largest single capital works program or project the commonwealth has seen," Defence Minister Stephen Smith told reporters on Friday.

"We have learned some painful lessons from the maintenance and sustainment of the Collins."

Australia recently secured an agreement with Sweden to gain access to the intellectual property of the Collins boats, which were developed from a design by Swedish firm Kockums.

It also decided on a combat system for the new submarines based on an evolution of the US system now used on the existing six Collins boats.

No final cost for the 12 submarines is yet available but analysts put it as high as $40 billion for an all-new design, or as low as $10 billion for boats based on an existing European design.

While the 2009 white paper left open the possibility of building a fourth air warfare destroyer (AWD), the government has now concluded on defence advice there's no need for another.

To share the existing work around, the AWD Alliance of shipbuilders will reallocate the construction of four AWD hull blocks for the third vessel from Forgacs shipyard in Newcastle to BAE Systems' yard in Melbourne.

Mr Smith confirmed the government was committed to the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) under the current timetable, with the first of three squadrons to enter service from 2020.

He said the troubled JSF project had greatly improved.

"But there are still risks associated with that and we are not prepared to take the risk of a gap in our combat capability," Mr Smith said.

So the white paper proposes Australia acquire another 12 Super Hornets fitted with advanced Growler electronic warfare technology.

This will give the RAAF a mixed combat fleet of 36 Super Hornets and 71 older F/A-18 classic Hornets, until the fighters arrive.

Defence Company Lockheed Martin says the government is showing confidence in its F-35 aircraft program.

"Along with the first two Australian jets in production, which (we) will deliver in mid-2014, we will work closely with the government to support their purchase of their remaining 100 F-35 aircraft," it said in a statement.

"Additionally, we will work with Australian industry supporting their participation in the production of components and sub-assemblies for the more than 3000 F-35s to be built during the life of the program."

The company said the projected $5.5 billion of Australian industrial participation in the F-35 program would deliver economic benefits to Australia for decades.