Skip to comments.Half-price super subs tempt navy
Posted on 12/25/2011 3:48:56 PM PST by naturalman1975
AUSTRALIA can build a new fleet of 12 state-of-the-art submarines in Adelaide for $18 billion, less than half the cost of initial estimates, according to a major report to be released next month.
The report, by strategic think tank the Kokoda Foundation, will be embraced by the Gillard government, which has been under pressure from critics to opt for smaller, cheaper, ready-made submarines from Europe rather than pursue Navy's more expensive but preferred option of building a next generation of the Collins-class boats.
The report - Australia's Future Submarine, obtained by The Australian - estimates it would cost only $18bn to build a dozen homegrown 3800 tonne "son of Collins" submarines rather than the previously published cost estimate of up to $36bn predicted in 2009 by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
While this would still make it the most expensive military project in the nation's history, it makes it comparable with the second largest military project - the $16bn plan to purchase up to 100 Joint Strike Fighters - and as such it is more likely to receive the go-ahead.
At 3800 tonnes, the new submarines proposed by the Kokoda Foundation would be bigger and more sophisticated than the current 3000-tonne, Collins-class boats. They would also be capable of anti-ship and anti-submarine operations as well as strategic strike, mine warfare, intelligence collection and support for the special force operations.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
These will be conventional rather than nuke though? The aussies should have gone in with us and bought a couple of Astutes. More effective and if the Commonwealth (or at least the none mickey-mouse countries within it) did this there would be considerable savings due to economy of scale efficiency...
Five, five, five dalla foot loooong...
anyone every actually seen one of those things?
That thing is made of 200 pound test fibreboard! Good to 300 feet!
Nuclear propulsion is still too controversial here. I know that doesn’t make much sense from a scientific or engineering viewpoint, but it’s a political reality. We’re not going to get nuclear submarines in the short term, so we need to get the best conventional submarines we can.
Comes with nuclear missiles and torpedoes. The neighbor’s little shih-tzu won’t be crapping in my yard anymore.
“Taking another dump, eh Lady? Well here’s a nuclear torpedo to clean that mess up. Wonder what the blast radius is on a nuclear torpe...........”
$6.98 for a polaris nuclear sub? I’ll bet there’s no air conditioning.
There were no end of mistakes and cost overruns with the Collins class, but going on the cheap for this generation of subs is not the answer.
Nor is paying more than we need to. That’s always the balancing act.
How cheap you want to go with those sailors lives or your national defense?
I served over twenty years in the RAN. I don’t believe you ever compromise on safety or capability and especially not for reasons of money. But I also know there are unscrupulous contractors out there who will take advantage of that approach and we need to be aware of that.
Or $2 for a 6 inch (until the end of the month).
Whyever do you care?
Are corporations not supposed to advertise? Or employ salesmen to sell their wares?
Or employ lobbyists to protect their stockholders' interests, in the face of a government that can destroy them -- if it wishes?
Thank you for your service.
Note - I’m not just basing this on nothing either. I was involved on the edges in advising Canada on its purchase of the Victoria boats. I’ve seen the type of situation that can develop without proper oversight.
I’m not a submariner, because I couldn’t handle that. I see submariners as the best of the best and I want them to have the best. But I don’t want to be ripped off getting it, if we can avoid that.
I was eating those foot long meatball marinaras all month!
onion, green pepper, black olive, American cheese, red pepper flakes..
Yom $4 Yom!
I tried to emigrate to Adelaide in the 80’s to work on developing the Collins.
Yall wouldn’t have me.
I guess I was a ripoff contractor. *shrug*
The japanese are making extremely small nuclear plants..
Why cannot the nuclear boat people do that.. a couple of those could power these babies..
From the title I thought they were talking about sandwiches.
If you ever seen work done in a US shipyard, you would not be surprised that someone could do it for 50% less.
On subs, its mega expensive.
Every weld is x-rayed.
You don’t cut corners if youre pushing the envelope of physics.
Defense contractors are not exactly advertising to the general public like restaurants or auto repair firms.
If I'm not mistaken, Lockheed and Bell are sponsoring bowl games featuring military academy teams. From an advertising standpoint, they are advertising to their markets -- and accruing the not inconsequential PR benefit of supporting the academy teams.
Totally within the realm of good business practice.
Ridden the DC subway lately?
I am in marketing and private companies make stupid decisions, too. For example Castrol (owned by BP) is the “Official Motor Oil of the NFL.” If Castrol was the official motor oil of NASCAR or NHRA, it would make sense. But, whose purchasing decision for motor oil is going to be affected by an NFL sponsorship. Obviously some Castrol executives want to be wined and dined at Super Bowl.
“Ridden the DC subway lately?”
No, but that makes some sense as people making purchasing decisions are DC subway riders. 99.999% of a bowl game viewing audience has no say in making defense procurement decisions.
You realize, do you not, that you are questioning one of the einsteins who thinks Newt Gingrich earning a legal ethical living in the private sector is a crime which disqualifies him from the presidency. Soon he will explain why the executives of Lockheed and Bell should go to prison for being driven by the eeevil profit motive.
Castrol executives -- and their customers!
I was in the advertising business. And I would agree that a NASCAR sponsorship would have value. But so does an NFL sponsorship, for different reasons.
Advertisers aren't incapable of making bad decisions. But, more often than not, there are good reasons for making decisions that some individuals might not fully understand.
In the real world, the answer to that question is "greater than the sum of the longest run, and the run of the launch vessel running @ a flank bell on a reciprocal course." That would be why they haven't be deployed in a very long time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.