#Official Defence Thread

[Pistol]

My prediction is that future subs and frigates will be built here very much akin to the AWD Program with blocks being constructed at other sites (Vic and NSW) with WA (read Austal) receiving the OPV contract.

[Goodsy]

My prediction is that future subs and frigates will be built here very much akin to the AWD Program with blocks being constructed at other sites (Vic and NSW) with WA (read Austal) receiving the OPV contract.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's a clause included the use of Whyalla steel

[skyliner]

Anyone heard anything from the new white paper re defense spending in SA. (billions extra to be spent) - as to locations I've heard nothing to date.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

[monotonehell]

Anyone heard anything from the new white paper re defense spending in SA. (billions extra to be spent) - as to locations I've heard nothing to date.

Pyne was crowing about SA getting the manufacturing. But everything else that has come out says otherwise.

[zippySA]

If I was a betting man (and I'm not - but happy to launch the odd opinion) - I would say the announcement of 12 submarines makes it inevitable that these will be built in Australia, and that it will be certain to be "centred" around Adelaide - the timeframes, complexities and fact that 12 subs generates a non-stop regenerative cycle seems to me to make it a no-brainer that whatever side of the fence you sit one - Adelaide has punched out completion of the Collins Class subs, and hence has the latent knowledge and lessons (regardless of what you think of ASC performance) to be logical spot to do it.
I read somewhere as well Turnbull quoted as saying the increase spend on Defence also needs to find it's home in Australia - not purchase pre-built defence materials off-shore wherever possible.
I'll also go so far as to say it will be Japan building them here in Oz - makes the most strategic sense given what the white paper says about our future areas of concern - we use American systems (already inside Japanese subs I believe) and a Japanese built option provides the US with a guaranteed homogenous fleet to support it's operations - which is why I tend to agree with a piece from the Australian the other week - it really is the US behind the scenes who asked Abbot to purchase Japanese, he just made the mistake of blabbing about the predetermined outcome!! Turnbull seems to be rolling well with the sham tender process right now....may be serendipitous that Mitsubishi returns to Adelaide - just a bloody bigger car really!

[phenom]

If I was a betting man (and I'm not - but happy to launch the odd opinion) - I would say the announcement of 12 submarines makes it inevitable that these will be built in Australia, and that it will be certain to be "centred" around Adelaide - the timeframes, complexities and fact that 12 subs generates a non-stop regenerative cycle seems to me to make it a no-brainer that whatever side of the fence you sit one - Adelaide has punched out completion of the Collins Class subs, and hence has the latent knowledge and lessons (regardless of what you think of ASC performance) to be logical spot to do it.
I read somewhere as well Turnbull quoted as saying the increase spend on Defence also needs to find it's home in Australia - not purchase pre-built defence materials off-shore wherever possible.
I'll also go so far as to say it will be Japan building them here in Oz - makes the most strategic sense given what the white paper says about our future areas of concern - we use American systems (already inside Japanese subs I believe) and a Japanese built option provides the US with a guaranteed homogenous fleet to support it's operations - which is why I tend to agree with a piece from the Australian the other week - it really is the US behind the scenes who asked Abbot to purchase Japanese, he just made the mistake of blabbing about the predetermined outcome!! Turnbull seems to be rolling well with the sham tender process right now....may be serendipitous that Mitsubishi returns to Adelaide - just a bloody bigger car really!

I don't entirely share your optimism but think you are mostly going to proven right.

It's looking to me that SA gets the 9 new frigates to build (according to the Defense Minister who seemed to confirm that today) and WA will get the 12 enhanced patrol boats. Obviously Martin Hamilton-Smith seems to think we need both of those plus the submarines which I do think is a little bit optimistic particularly in light of the submarine issue.

In regards to the submarines - while it does seem silly to buy enough submarines to get a continuous build and then build overseas, I'm not sure if that is the true driving force here - remembering that the maintenance of the submarines is worth as much or more than the build itself. With 12 I could even see the maintenance being split between SA and WA, solving a 'political' problem that has emerged with political support in WA in the face of the mining investment implosion there.

I think you are right about Japan and the US connection, although I thought the Australian submarines were supposedly to be slightly different - perhaps a better range or something. I haven't investigated. Of course 'build' could refer to all sorts of things... I suspect even an 'Adelaide build' (or an Australia build, for that matter) will not involve quite as much 'local build' as the Collins class involved. Pure speculation on my part obviously. Just seems to the fit the politics around this issue.

The extra P8 Poseidons could be a small benefit, given the P3 Orions are based in Adelaide - but could be with more they base some of them elsewhere.

[Vee]

Martin Hamilton-Smith asked this Question of the Federal Defence Minister Marisa Payne and her answer does not fill me with optimism. As reported by ABC News, Q. by SA Defence Industries Minister Martin Hamilton-Smith related to the potential for shipbuilding projects to begin in Perth, WA, and take work away from SA.

MH-S Question:

If after the election the offshore patrol vessels are built in Perth, the workforce at Osborne [South Australia] will run down from 1,400 to 100 while the WA workforce builds up. And he asks won't Western Australia then bid for the frigates and sub work? It's possible that after the election we find subs go overseas and offshore patrol vessels go to Perth putting at risk SA's role in the frigates. Can you answer those concerns?

Payne response:

"I think it is profoundly disappointing the day after an announcement of this nature, which actually confirms in black and white ... a $30 billion future frigate build in your state.

"It confirms that the submarines development contract, or the acquisition of 12 is worth $50 billion in this country.

"It is a very big country and there are a lot of players in the game but SA is key amongst those."

ABC News:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-26/m ... ts/7201786

ASC has been bleeding jobs and the so-called 'Valley of Death' could mean a loss of skilled jobs from SA (to WA?) ...
Delaying the decision until after the election means SA voters, in particular, are voting blind.

InDaily reported some local concerns with the White Paper, especially the Qs over the Australian build and inevitable competition with WA.

But there are some very worrying signals in the paper for SA… they’ve not dealt with the issue of where the subs will be built, whether overseas, in Australia or a hybrid build.”
He says a decision “later in 2016” is code for “after the [federal] election”.

“The way I reads that is an overseas build and a hybrid build remain on the table still, which is extremely worrying,” he said. “It’s a very big flaw in the paper.”

He was also critical of ongoing doubt about where the frigates and Offshore Patrol Vessels would be constructed, with Western Australia lobbying hard for the work.

“If the OPVs go to Perth there will be a corresponding increase in the workforce in Perth, and in three years’ time we’ll see a bid for frigates and lot of the subs work out of Perth on the back of that,” he said.

“Our Valley of Death could well turn into someone else’s Mountain of Opportunity.”
He said the White Paper fails to take “an opportunity to rule out this equivocation”.

“The industry was hoping they’d have some certainty – the only thing that’s certain is the workforce at Osborne will decline until they know what’s happening with the OPVs,” he said.

Chris Burns from SA’s Defence Teaming Centre told InDaily there was “a lot of positive rhetoric” in the white paper, “but still not a lot of commitment to actually building ships and subs in SA”.

InDaily:
http://indaily.com.au/news/2016/02/25/r ... blueprint/

WA already has an assured giant share of the ongoing sustainment/maintenance work for shipbuilding.

Some background:
Offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) key to retaining SA workforce
(Likely to go to WA, raising concern of $, skilled jobs moving west?)

Former PM Tony Abbott last year promised that both the frigates and the OPVs would be built at Adelaide's ASC shipbuilders site to retain its workforce as the Air Warfare Destroyer project winds down.

Federal Defence Minister Marise Payne earlier this month backed away from that pledge, saying a competitive evaluation process for the OPVs did not require them to be built in Adelaide.

If, as is increasingly the concern, the offshore patrol vessels are put to Perth after the election, then there'll be 800 jobs and $5 billion worth of work split away to Perth, who already by the way have two thirds of the $250 billion to be spent on naval ships over the next 30 years through sustainment," Mr Hamilton-Smith said.

ABC News:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-25/a ... de/7199504

Early election on the cards. Uncertainty abounds.
The fate of the Whyalla steelworks is adding to the gloom.

[ghs]

When the Australian government decided to build the Collins Class the initial plan was to have 3 subs
based in Sydney and 3 based in Perth (when they are operational). Accordingly, Adelaide was the
logical place to build them.

These days the 6 Collins class subs are all based in Perth. If the initial plan was to have them all based in
Perth then they probably would have built them in W.A..

W.A. is not a serious competitor to South Australia when it comes to shipbuilding. All the serious
work, the DSTO, the people, the skills and infrastructure are here in Adelaide.

[Vee]

SA Defence Industry in the news.
PM Turnbull made a quick visit to SA this week but can't say whether submarines will be built in Adelaide ("competitive evaluation process").
The Coalition won't announce whether it will be a local, hybrid or overseas build until after the Federal election.
Meanwhile ASC are bleeding jobs with the "valley of death" approaching.

(The Offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) build were promised to SA under Abbott, but now Pyne is saying no promises were made.)

PM Turnbull's big announcement was a proposed Centre for Defence Industry - to be based in Adelaide - with promises of "about 3 dozen jobs".
Radio ads are currently promoting this new centre and jobs, jobs, jobs - but about 36 jobs are a far cry from the thousands at risk at the ASC.

Senator Xenopohon, who is pushing for SA shipbuilding jobs, says it is a smokescreen - while no contracts have been written.

Independent Senator, Nick Xenophon feared the proposed defence hub would be nothing more than a consolation prize for South Australia.

"Of course this news is welcomed, but it will still be a pale imitation of a consolation prize unless the Federal Government signs iron-clad contracts for naval ships and the submarines to actually be built here in South Australia," Mr Xenophon said.

ABC News:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-08/a ... ty/7227872

And today, local and interstate media report that Spain is celebrating 3,000 jobs building Aussie ships (Australian shipyards excluded from tendering for this).

Herald Sun:
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaki ... 662673c138

[Vee]

Pressure builds after recent revelations re Spanish build for Aussie support vessels.

Pre-election promise on shipbuilding sought by Labor, Xenophon, unions after Spain wins naval deal

Labor, unions and independent SA senator Nick Xenophon are piling pressure on the Federal Government to make commitments to Adelaide's shipbuilding workers before the election, after a Spanish firm was all but handed a lucrative defence contract.

The Government has picked Navantia as its preferred bidder to construct two logistic support vessels to replace HMAS Success and HMAS Sirius.

Senator Xenophon said only a fraction of the benefits of the supply ship deal would flow to local shipbuilders.
"Five per cent of a $2 billion contract for Australian content is absolutely outrageous. It is an insult ...."

... "When they got into office, [the Government] were given a proposal by the ASC to build three supply ships for the price of two, with a very significant majority Australian content," Senator Xenophon said.

"The jobs would've been kept here in Australia, rather than losing hundreds more jobs over the coming few months here at the ASC alone."

Is it too late?

ASC worker ..... (Daniels) said..
"We've got 42 job losses coming up on April the 13th here at the submarines, and another 66 jobs next door at the south shipyard," he said.

Mr Daniels said ASC could have played a significant role in supply-ship construction, but said the facility would need $50 million to boost the capacity of its ship lift.

"We can still build modules here. We could actually make the modules here and ship them, similar to what they [did] with the helicopter landing ships," he said.

"They actually made the hull and then shipped it across and BAE finished it off. We could actually do the outfitting of the ships when they come back."

A contract with Navantia is yet to be signed, and Senator Xenophon said a clause in the Australian Standard for Defence Contracting document gives the Government the power to change its mind without warning.

He said the Government should activate the clause and guarantee Australian industry involvement in the supply ship build is "maximised" before signing off on the project.

Doubts raised.
SA "voting blind"with no pre-election commitment to local/SA builds.

The South Australian Government said the deal with Navantia raised doubts about other naval projects including frigates and air warfare destroyers.
There is no guarantee the Government will reveal its plans before the election, with an announcement on submarines expected mid-year at the earliest.

ABC News:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-11/l ... ng/7239772

[rev]

The Prime Minister has just announced that 12 OPV patrol vessels will be built here at ASC in 2018, the 21 other pacific patrol boats will be built in WA. Although the graphic on ABC24 says both sets of patrol vessels will be built in SA. PM said the 21 will be in WA...
The 9 frigates will be built here as well from 2020.

Nothing on the submarines yet.
The submarines contract is the one we really need in Australia. It's a $50 billion dollar contract. Sending that sort of money overseas is insanity.


And just now with the media questions, at least the first patrol vessel will be built here in Adelaide possibly the second but the patrol boats/vessels will be switched to WA because the frigate build will start in 2018 and Osborne doesn't have the capability to build both simultaneously.

And they've just clarified the Pacific patrol boats will be built in WA and the OPV build will start here before shifting to WA.

Cairns will be getting new facilities for the new patrol vessels.

A few questions about the submarines but the PM and Defence minister are rejecting them.

[SRW]

What's the reason we can't upgrade capacity at Osbourne to build different vessels simultaneously in SA?

Is it because it might be uneconomic for that extra capacity to lay dormant when multiple projects aren't being built at once (presumably most of the time?) when (I imagine) such facilities are required in Perth anyway for ongoing sustainment activities there (being home to Fleet Base West)?

Or is it because there's a lack of money/will to definitively make Adelaide the nation's shipbuilding capital?

[rev]

What's the reason we can't upgrade capacity at Osbourne to build different vessels simultaneously in SA?

Is it because it might be uneconomic for that extra capacity to lay dormant when multiple projects aren't being built at once (presumably most of the time?) when (I imagine) such facilities are required in Perth anyway for ongoing sustainment activities there (being home to Fleet Base West)?

Or is it because there's a lack of money/will to definitively make Adelaide the nation's shipbuilding capital?

If they made Adelaide officially the ship building base, whoever is in government at the time can kiss their ass good bye. Especially in an election year.
Austal isn't in dire need of these naval ship building contracts like ASC is, because Austal also builds civilian vessels like yachts, fast ferries, etc.

Although I do believe that they can build submarines and ships simultaneously at Osborne. The expansion for the destroyers as I said in the other thread was a whole new area next to the existing facility where they built the Collins and bring them in for maintenance. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that while they've been building the destroyers they've also had a Collins sub in there undergoing maintenance.

Fleet base west is on Garden Island off the coast of Western Australia just south of Perth, Henderson is just to the east on the mainland. AUSTAL and BAE have facilities there.
Strategically as well as building as much as possible at home, it's also strategically smart to have more then one place where you can build large surface and subsurface vessels.
Look how many years it's taken to build 3 destroyers at ASC.
If we had the budget for more, imagine building say 6 destroyers at Osborne and Henderson simultaneously.
Or imagine building submarines and destroyers and frigates and patrol vessels simultaneously.
They could have also given the contract for the support/supply ships to an east coast yard.

It's all a matter of political will and what advice they are being given.

[Goodsy]

What's the reason we can't upgrade capacity at Osbourne to build different vessels simultaneously in SA?

Is it because it might be uneconomic for that extra capacity to lay dormant when multiple projects aren't being built at once (presumably most of the time?) when (I imagine) such facilities are required in Perth anyway for ongoing sustainment activities there (being home to Fleet Base West)?

Or is it because there's a lack of money/will to definitively make Adelaide the nation's shipbuilding capital?

We don't have a large enough Navy to justify that sort of thing, unless we start exporting our own ship designs.

[SRW]

I'm not sure what sort of thing you mean to justify? We're not discussing anything other than what we're building for our own navy in the places we already build them; the question was simply whether that industry should be consolidated in the one place or dispersed as at present amongst 2-3 locations.