- Joined
- Sep 22, 2012
- Messages
- 3,327
- Likes
- 5,408
AUSTRALIA's "submarine greybeards'' have torpedoed a plan to build the nation's stealth submarine fleet in Japan, warning Defence Minister David Johnston that "a submarine is not a car''.
Retired Rear Admiral Peter Briggs and retired Commodore Terence Roach have sounded the alarm in a strongly worded letter obtained by The Sunday Mail.
It warns the "time delays, high cost and risk'' associated with outsourcing the sensitive project to Japan, a move that could also anger China.
Australia has made no formal announcement that the next generation of submarines will be built in Japan but the Defence Minister has hailed the Japanese submarines as on "the cutting edge'' of technology worldwide.
Speculation has surrounded Australia buying up to 12 Japanese Soryu submarines, the world's biggest non-nuclear submarines.
At around $500 million each, they would be cheaper than Aussie built subs. But the deal would risk thousands of jobs in South Australia.
The retired senior naval commanders warn that "however desirable closer Defence ties with Japan may be, little consideration seems to have been given to the suitability of Japanese designed submarines to meet the Australian requirements.''
"Submarines are not cars — you cannot simply switch to another like
disposing of a Holden to buy a Mitsubishi,'' the letter states.
"They are designed for a specific purpose and unfortunately big compromises would have to be accepted if Australia is to buy Japanese without serious design modifications, incurring
further time delays, high cost and risk.
"The prospects for difficulties arising from cultural differences with Japan are all too apparent and very real. To expect to access all relevant technologies during the course of an
overseas build of such a complex vessel as a submarine for the initial
collaboration with a country, which has no experience in such matters, is
extraordinarily ambitious and inherently risky.
"The practicalities of establishing a transparent dialogue with Japan, a country
that has no established protocols with Australia for the exchange of classified,
sensitive technical data and which must develop regimes to regulate this
dialogue seem to have been ignored. It is certain that this will be a very
protracted process.''
In response a spokesman for Senator Johnston said he would not be drawn into a discussion of the merits of Japan's submarines.
"We don't discuss the military capability of Australia or other nations,'' he said.
A senior government source confirmed the subs were regarded as among the best currently available but that no final decision had been made on strategic partners with Sweden, France and German partners sill in the mix.
"We don't make decisions that are not in the national interest,'' he said.
A major concern, however, is the long ranges Australian submarines need to travel and the unique requirements involved.
"It is apparent therefore that SORYU will need to be modified to meet the
Australian requirements — long ocean transits and patrols. This would carry
considerable cost and risk,'' the letter states.
"The Japanese submarines are reportedly retired at a much earlier age (about
16 or so years) than normally expected in the Western world, which will
require Australia to invest heavily in special maintenance and upgrade
programs unless we do the same.''
Originally published as Experts: Replacing subs is not like cars
No Cookies | Herald Sun
Retired Rear Admiral Peter Briggs and retired Commodore Terence Roach have sounded the alarm in a strongly worded letter obtained by The Sunday Mail.
It warns the "time delays, high cost and risk'' associated with outsourcing the sensitive project to Japan, a move that could also anger China.
Australia has made no formal announcement that the next generation of submarines will be built in Japan but the Defence Minister has hailed the Japanese submarines as on "the cutting edge'' of technology worldwide.
Speculation has surrounded Australia buying up to 12 Japanese Soryu submarines, the world's biggest non-nuclear submarines.
At around $500 million each, they would be cheaper than Aussie built subs. But the deal would risk thousands of jobs in South Australia.
The retired senior naval commanders warn that "however desirable closer Defence ties with Japan may be, little consideration seems to have been given to the suitability of Japanese designed submarines to meet the Australian requirements.''
"Submarines are not cars — you cannot simply switch to another like
disposing of a Holden to buy a Mitsubishi,'' the letter states.
"They are designed for a specific purpose and unfortunately big compromises would have to be accepted if Australia is to buy Japanese without serious design modifications, incurring
further time delays, high cost and risk.
"The prospects for difficulties arising from cultural differences with Japan are all too apparent and very real. To expect to access all relevant technologies during the course of an
overseas build of such a complex vessel as a submarine for the initial
collaboration with a country, which has no experience in such matters, is
extraordinarily ambitious and inherently risky.
"The practicalities of establishing a transparent dialogue with Japan, a country
that has no established protocols with Australia for the exchange of classified,
sensitive technical data and which must develop regimes to regulate this
dialogue seem to have been ignored. It is certain that this will be a very
protracted process.''
In response a spokesman for Senator Johnston said he would not be drawn into a discussion of the merits of Japan's submarines.
"We don't discuss the military capability of Australia or other nations,'' he said.
A senior government source confirmed the subs were regarded as among the best currently available but that no final decision had been made on strategic partners with Sweden, France and German partners sill in the mix.
"We don't make decisions that are not in the national interest,'' he said.
A major concern, however, is the long ranges Australian submarines need to travel and the unique requirements involved.
"It is apparent therefore that SORYU will need to be modified to meet the
Australian requirements — long ocean transits and patrols. This would carry
considerable cost and risk,'' the letter states.
"The Japanese submarines are reportedly retired at a much earlier age (about
16 or so years) than normally expected in the Western world, which will
require Australia to invest heavily in special maintenance and upgrade
programs unless we do the same.''
Originally published as Experts: Replacing subs is not like cars
No Cookies | Herald Sun