Page 95 of 96 FirstFirst ... 4570858687888990919293949596 LastLast
Results 1,881 to 1,900 of 1904

Thread: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

  1. #1881
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,215

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Well we see if France is really mad or not if they nix this

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...against-boeing

    Now clearly I'm sure most of any such plane is built in the USA but I betting Airbus gets some jobs out of this and all kinds of license fees etc.

    -----


    [QUOTE]That said the strategic sense in it is strong. As Van and Ant say, thus gives Australia a way top pay for a place in the front line and back up our number 1 ally. The spin in the news is it was necessary but the divorce with France was fumbled.{/QUOTE]

    But also a basically good pick. The Weird ideal to try get long range DE boat at the size of SSN was always suspect. And if that the Sōryū a proven class purpose built form its inception was really the better choice than a DE Frankenstein made out of SSN hull.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  2. #1882
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,616

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    Nice projection you got going there mate. I'm not French for one, and secondly even if I were I would not waste every thought on "how can I twist reality so it's what I want it to be". But most importnatly I have talked about the deal a fair bit and I have not heard an actual argument against any of the points I have brought up.
    I've posted an entire article that talks about how bad the deal really was. You've done nothing except talk about how the US have betrayed the French. I'll post the article again for you.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/why-...ench-sub-deal/

    You've not touched on one single point in this article. And you don't actually seem to know much about the deal. If you did you wouldn't have missed this.

    In 2017, the Australian government revealed the terms of one of its contracts with Naval Group, under which either Canberra or the French firm could terminate unilaterally "where a Party’s ability to implement the Agreement is ‘fundamentally impacted by exceptional events, circumstances or matters.’"
    I await your response.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post

    Anyway, let's disregard for one that your claim that France lost the competition is 100% false and that as pointed out by me in #1868 the American deal was obtained completely differently. Let's disregard that the whole discussion about pros and cons regarding diesel vs nuclear is completely moot because, even though you seem to be completely unawares of it, the French sub is originally nuclear propulsed (as ALL French subs are), and that the desire to have it diesel driven was entirely Australian and was done after much deliberation (read on the Australian arguments pro and con here - but who am I kidding, you won't).
    French subs can be converted to nuclear, not the same as an actual purpose built nuclear sub. Shortfin Barracuda subs the French are offering in their competition were not nuclear. They'd have to be converted and they would not be the same as an actual French Barracuda nuclear sub. So even mentioning this is moot as the French never offered Australia real nuclear subs.

    Not only that but you fail to mention that in the US deal the Australians get access to sensitive American sub technology. The French didn't offer that.
    All this pushed aside, my point is astoundlingly simple: It's an exceptionally bad idea to piss on someone's leg you're trying to be friends with.
    France is practically irrelevant. Australia does not need France. It's other way around.
    Last edited by Vanoi; September 19, 2021 at 11:48 AM.

  3. #1883
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,258

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    I've posted an entire article that talks about how bad the deal really was. You've done nothing except talk about how the US have betrayed the French. I'll post the article again for you.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/why-...ench-sub-deal/

    You've not touched on one single point in this article. And you don't actually seem to know much about the deal. If you did you wouldn't have missed this.

    I await your response.
    I never claimed or implied that the Australians broke the contract. Nice strawman though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    French subs can be converted to nuclear, not the same as an actual purpose built nuclear sub.
    Wow, I'm impressed. I'm not even being sarcastic here. Managing to get it 100% wrong after it has been laid out to you repeatedly is quite the feat. What is it about the concept of a nuclear driven sub redesigned for diesel propulsion that is so hard to grasp?

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Shortfin Barracuda subs the French are offering in their competition were not nuclear. They'd have to be converted and they would not be the same as an actual French Barracuda nuclear sub. So even mentioning this is moot as the French never offered Australia real nuclear subs.
    Now if you would have clicked any of the links I showed to you, you would have known that it was the Australian side specifically that rejected nuclear propulsion and specifically asked for diesel driven subs. Way to repeatedly assert what has been proven to be false.

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Not only that but you fail to mention that in the US deal the Australians get access to sensitive American sub technology. The French didn't offer that.
    Let's ignore that I cannot fail to mention an assertion that is not relevant to the point and just talk about your claim itself: How were the French and Australians, according to you, planning to build the subs in Australia at Australian government-owned shipyards?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  4. #1884
    Tribunus
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    7,244

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    I'd note Australian business is trying to develop business in markets other than China, so annoying France is a clumsy move, even allowing for them being less influential in the EU than say Germany.

    As for Australia building any subs, we lack the tech and expertise. Its an exaggeration to say the the sub yards in South Australia exist to put a coat of paint on foreign bought objects so local pork barrellers can claim a cut, but its not much of an exaggeration.

    Just to restate my PoV, I think this deal is Australia switching from "defence spending as Pork Barrelling" to "defence spending as Pork Barrelling but the end product has to work". Given the US product is better and we are closer to the US suppliers (are the yards in California?) and the subs will be used to contain China in the SCS in close cooperation with the USN, it makes sense.
    Jatte lambastes Calico Rat

  5. #1885
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,761

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Just to restate my PoV, I think this deal is Australia switching from "defence spending as Pork Barrelling" to "defence spending as Pork Barrelling but the end product has to work". .
    To be fair though... Pork barrelling won the Cold War... I mean Iowa Class Battleships? come on... The increase in submarines means China has to spend more on submarines and counter technologies. People who vote in the west get jobs, people who don't vote in China get to be distracted by the nationalistic photoshops of Chinese warships sailing into Sydney Harbour.

    Although to be fair again... all military spending is pork barrelling. No country needs to go to war... but countries do need to buy their citizens support to exist.
    Last edited by antaeus; September 19, 2021 at 06:22 PM. Reason: reductionism
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  6. #1886
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,258

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    I'd note Australian business is trying to develop business in markets other than China, so annoying France is a clumsy move, even allowing for them being less influential in the EU than say Germany.
    See, here you're accidentally touching on the best argument that the pro-new-sub-deal side can offer. Thing is that Australia isn't going to do a free-trade deal with the EU for a number of reasons.
    Historically, they (and NZ) lost big when UK abandoned their free trade agreement in favour of joining the EU. Now that the UK is out again, the arrangement is such that the UK and AUS reunite.

    Here's where I recommend people to count 1+1 together. Both deals were done roughly in the same time, so it doesn't take much imagination to assume that they almost definitely were interlinked. Boris Johnson obviously sold the trade deal as such a great opportunity for British farmers (who got 'd by Brexit) to export elsewhere. Yet anyone who's aware of how Australian agrarian industry works knows it'll almost certainly go the other way, with the UK market being flooded with Australian produce.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    As for Australia building any subs, we lack the tech and expertise. Its an exaggeration to say the the sub yards in South Australia exist to put a coat of paint on foreign bought objects so local pork barrellers can claim a cut, but its not much of an exaggeration.
    Not really. Sure, Australia hasn't put any effort into having much of an own research and development branch, but the facilities do exist. Obviously it makes the subs much more expensive and does create a lot of difficulties which are a huge part of the reason why the French sub design had to deal with cost overruns, but on the other hand, much of that money will simply stay within the country and create Australian, rather than foreign jobs.

    The second factor you have to remember is autarchy, with the Australians by building the subs being able to themselves also maintain the equipment. Which btw. is one key reason (out of several significant ones) why they wanted diesel, not nuclear propulsion.
    With the nuclear subs they will likely not be able to maintain that autarchy, they will be entirely reliant on UK/US goodwill (given the total control which those countries likely still have over the Australian elite, there isn't much to worry here), which isn't exactly ideal. It's reductive to the point of being wrong to claim/imply, like Vanoi and others here have done, that diesel-electric submarines are necessarily inferior to nuclear propulsed submarines in every aspect; and especially when it comes to smaller powers like Australia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyclops View Post
    Just to restate my PoV, I think this deal is Australia switching from "defence spending as Pork Barrelling" to "defence spending as Pork Barrelling but the end product has to work". Given the US product is better and we are closer to the US suppliers (are the yards in California?) and the subs will be used to contain China in the SCS in close cooperation with the USN, it makes sense.
    It's not about the end product working better or worse than the former. But you're one hundred percent correct in that more than anything else it's all about a complete realignment of not just Australia but also the UK and the US.

    What remains completely unexplained, and I still wait for cope/vanoi to do so, is why the three felt the need to snub the French so completely. This "leaking" to the press is the equivalent of breaking up with your GF per SMS, when she's also your coworker and you'll have to see her every day 8 til 5. After telling her on a romantic dinner that you love her and make marriage plans, all the while you've already hooked up with another and are on your way out.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  7. #1887
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,616

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    I never claimed or implied that the Australians broke the contract. Nice strawman though.
    Funny I don't see anywhere in that quote where I claimed you did.

    Nice deflection though. Are you gonna touch on any parts of the article or just ignore it again?

    Wow, I'm impressed. I'm not even being sarcastic here. Managing to get it 100% wrong after it has been laid out to you repeatedly is quite the feat. What is it about the concept of a nuclear driven sub redesigned for diesel propulsion that is so hard to grasp?
    Wow you don't know anything about the Barracuda do you?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barr...arine_(France)

    As shown in the article at the bottom, the Shortfin Barracuda is a different variant of the regular Barracuda. The Shortfin doesn't displace as much time as the Barracuda, has a shorter length, has a different crew size, and different armament.

    This is a different design. So when I said that the Shortfin Barracuda is not a purpose built nuclear sub I am correct. It's not. It's a different design.


    Now if you would have clicked any of the links I showed to you, you would have known that it was the Australian side specifically that rejected nuclear propulsion and specifically asked for diesel driven subs. Way to repeatedly assert what has been proven to be false.
    And if you would have bothered to read my article you'd see that deal involving those ideal subs went to . Budget overruns, domestic production issues, delays upon delays, the French not adhering to their own deal. These factors changed Australia's mind.

    91$ billion dollars for 12 diseal subs is . 55 billion dollar deal for American nuclear subs, with a technology swap and US help in building those subs which could end up including sub bases in Australia.

    And to top it all off, Australia is in talks with the US to lease American nuclear subs to Australia until those nuclear subs for Australia are built.its not hard to understand at all why the deal fell through.

    Let's ignore that I cannot fail to mention an assertion that is not relevant to the point and just talk about your claim itself: How were the French and Australians, according to you, planning to build the subs in Australia at Australian government-owned shipyards?
    Just because you don't want to talk about it doesn't it's irrelevant. This entire topic is the French sub deal. What the Americans offered to Australia to get them to abandon their deal is very relevant.

    Your last is question is irrelevant as my article above already answered. Read it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    What remains completely unexplained, and I still wait for cope/vanoi to do so, is why the three felt the need to snub the French so completely.
    That has been explained. You just didn't like the answer.
    Last edited by Vanoi; September 20, 2021 at 12:33 PM.

  8. #1888

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    France is practically irrelevant. Australia does not need France. It's other way around.
    France is functionally irrelevant in the Pacific but not in Europe. I suspect that the melodramatic reaction, much like Macron's criticism of NATO, is designed (in part) to sell the need for an EU military which would effectively put France at the head of any prospective EU foreign policy.



  9. #1889
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,761

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    France is functionally irrelevant in the Pacific but not in Europe. I suspect that the melodramatic reaction, much like Macron's criticism of NATO, is designed (in part) to sell the need for an EU military which would effectively put France at the head of any prospective EU foreign policy.
    And whether or not France is functionally irrelevant in the region, they certainly don't want to be seen as such.

    France has near 2 million citizens in the pacific, and it's Pacific territories hold seats in both the French Senate and National Assembly. It has a more significant military presence in the region than any other country other than the US and Australia. French Pacific territories are dealing directly with Chinese encroachment in the region both to it's fisheries and through economic leveraging on it's neighbours. France is a logical defence partner for both the US and Australia.

    Not to mention as you note: the EU is looking to take on greater military capacity - and they have signalled that they see the Indo-Pacific as vitally strategic.

    It is not a situation where France 'needs' Australia or visa versa. That is a false binary. It is just smart strategically for both to work together in a region where they have shared economic, cultural and defence interests. And not smart given that context, to insult or offend each other when both are confronting the same larger nation.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  10. #1890

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by antaeus View Post
    And whether or not France is functionally irrelevant in the region, they certainly don't want to be seen as such.

    France has near 2 million citizens in the pacific, and it's Pacific territories hold seats in both the French Senate and National Assembly. It has a more significant military presence in the region than any other country other than the US and Australia. French Pacific territories are dealing directly with Chinese encroachment in the region both to it's fisheries and through economic leveraging on it's neighbours. France is a logical defence partner for both the US and Australia.
    China, Russia, India, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are more militarily relevant in the Pacific than France. It's even arguable that the UK has more clout given that the Royal Navy has two modern carriers compared to the de Gaulle.



  11. #1891
    antaeus's Avatar Cool and normal
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,761

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    China, Russia, India, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan are more militarily relevant in the Pacific than France. It's even arguable that the UK has more clout given that the Royal Navy has two modern carriers compared to the de Gaulle.
    Except those countries have no effective military presence outside their interactions on the First Island chain. Whereas France and the EU are seeking greater influence both on this chain, and to maintain their influence in the vast open sea dotted with French colonies between the First Islands and the coast of South America.

    Although I'm not sure why you're debating the point? That France and the Eu have legitimate reasons to be significantly involved in the region? No?
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB MARENOSTRUM

  12. #1892
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,258

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    Wow you don't know anything about the Barracuda do you?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barr...arine_(France)

    As shown in the article at the bottom, the Shortfin Barracuda is a different variant of the regular Barracuda. The Shortfin doesn't displace as much time as the Barracuda, has a shorter length, has a different crew size, and different armament.

    This is a different design. So when I said that the Shortfin Barracuda is not a purpose built nuclear sub I am correct. It's not. It's a different design.
    Let me get this straight: Your argument against the French sub is that because of the redesign which happened entirely according to Australian specifications and wishes (from nuclear->not nuclear), it would not be possible to transform a non-nuclear sub to a nuclear sub. This is genius. I feel so stupid now. Here I was thinking that it would have been quite easy for the French to simply keep in nuclear had the Australians not asked for the propulsion to be conventional. You're right. Subs get changed from diesel to nuclear and back all the time. That's a serious issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by Vanoi View Post
    That has been explained. You just didn't like the answer.
    Cite me the answer then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  13. #1893

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cope View Post
    France is functionally irrelevant in the Pacific but not in Europe. I suspect that the melodramatic reaction, much like Macron's criticism of NATO, is designed (in part) to sell the need for an EU military which would effectively put France at the head of any prospective EU foreign policy.
    I agree. France seems determined to throw as big a tantrum as possible over this, quickly overshadowing any reaction from China. I’m confused as to how the French would expect the situation to have transpired, given they’re blaming the US as much or more than Australia. They’ve succeeded in getting the EU to back them, highlighting a narrative where apparently AUKUS was supposed to consult not just France but the entire EU as part of making a defense agreement that had nothing to do with Europe. I’m curious as to where this idea comes from. France has said, “The Europeans’ fundamental interests need to be taken into account by the United States. which is our ally. And the Europeans shall not be left behind in the strategy chosen by the United States.” To my knowledge, the EU didn’t consult the US government nor its interests when cracking down on US tech firms, for example. The US government was not consulted nor accounted for when the EU solidified plans to go ahead with an EU/China investment treaty. The US was not consulted nor accounted for as France and Germany have called for strategic autonomy from US interests, including with regards to Indo Pacific strategy. Meanwhile, the EU has formally pumped the breaks on trade, tech and defense talks with AUKUS, which are unrelated to submarine contracts, in retaliation for France getting hurt feelings.

    So what is this mutually harmful punishment supposed to teach the Anglos? Don’t agree to share defense technology with Asia-Pacific allies if it might result in lost revenue for French firms? Don’t do anything without asking France for permission? If Australia gets milkies Europe must be compensated with even moar milkies because no fair? IMO the French are clutching pearls over this in a cynical bid to increase their own influence in Europe and pursue existing national priorities at the expense of “perfidious Albion” and her children, and the reaction has very little to do with the Indo-Pacific. We’ll see how it works out for them, but unless the EU is actually going to shift its Pacific strategy to a more neutral or China-friendly stance compared to now, I don’t see what it plans to accomplish by shooting itself in the foot, canceling or postponing unrelated priorities that we all share. If France wants to tell Indo Pacific partners “it’s me or her” in a challenge to US interests, we all know who’s winning that one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    No, we don't care about your libertarian "evidence".
    “To live without faith, without a heritage to defend, without battling constantly for truth, is not to live but to ‘get along’; we must never just ‘get along’.” - Pier Giorgio Frassati

  14. #1894

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    I think this is more of posturing in light of recent revelations that indicate that Milley and likely a good portion of Biden's cabinet are Chinese assets that actively share intel with Beijing, so whole Australian debacle is more of compensation then anything. Australian government itself needs a good distraction too, given how its own population is now trying to overthrow it due to hamfisted lockdowns measures that pissed off everyone.
    So in light of all that, it is understandable why Macron is mad, since the submarine deal was broken for reason having nothing to do with submarine deal and France altogether.

  15. #1895
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,215

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Let me get this straight: Your argument against the French sub is that because of the redesign which happened entirely according to Australian specifications and wishes (from nuclear->not nuclear), it would not be possible to transform a non-nuclear sub to a nuclear sub. This is genius. I feel so stupid now. Here I was thinking that it would have been quite easy for the French to simply keep in nuclear had the Australians not asked for the propulsion to be conventional. You're right. Subs get changed from diesel to nuclear and back all the time. That's a serious issue.
    On your last point really which successful class would that be?

    The real point remains Australia was trying again to push DE boats past really what they can do and France came in with a good looking offer - that than kept getting worse financially. Do the per unit cost out of the last projection of 90 Billion for 12 subs. Its clear the french could not deliver a working DE sub (not even AIP) with competitive unit cost compare to the Japan's new Taigei class or a US Virginia class. I see why France is mad they were over pricing a not really prime time sub and got burned.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  16. #1896
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,258

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    On your last point really which successful class would that be?
    None, I was being facetious pointing out how stupid vanoi's argument was.
    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    The real point remains Australia was trying again to push DE boats past really what they can do and France came in with a good looking offer - that than kept getting worse financially. Do the per unit cost out of the last projection of 90 Billion for 12 subs. Its clear the french could not deliver a working DE sub (not even AIP) with competitive unit cost compare to the Japan's new Taigei class or a US Virginia class. I see why France is mad they were over pricing a not really prime time sub and got burned.
    See, I'm not privy to the considerations made by the Australian side going into the deal, nor am I fully knowledgeable as to what the budget and time overruns were due to. I'm much more reticent to qualitatively access something where I do not have all the information needed, and I'm quite confident you don't either.

    Almost all of it will have been due to redesign according to Australian specifications. To imply that all budget- and time overruns are necessarily always the fault of the producer and never the consumer is to be oblivious. It is also moot to compare the French boat to the Japanese boat. First of all because the Japanese boat was not chosen this time around either and if it had been it would also have to be done with a redesign, and secondly because the French design will have been chosen for a reason.

    Thirdly, for this whole argument to have much grounds in reality we'd have to know the budget and time allocated to the new deal. We know very little about it apart from them not receiving the boats before the 2040s. Which is so late that Australia is likely going to lease UK/US boats for a while in the meantime, and which once more makes the "could not deliver" claim baseless. If the AUKUS deal does not incur delays and huge cost overruns, this will have been the first major weapons programme in UK/US recent history to have been like that. So no, all these claims here are excuses post factum and don't deal with the reality at heart of this all. Which is simply the geostrategic realignment that we're seeing.

    And there's tons to be said that makes this new deal quite bad, even with next to zero knowledge of the specifics of this deal, because this deal unlike the previous one is very obviously not one standing on its own. Geopolitical considerations are at the absolute front row and the technical specifics of the U-boats will at best have gotten a second thought. Likely none, since they discussed the deal within a few months in secrecy, so a major part of the design specifics unknown to us are probably not just secret but are yet to be defined.

    The things we can expect have some significant Uff's: Australia will rebuild a harbour into being capable of handling nuclear armed US and UK subs, as such, Perth is going to be in ICBM crosshairs. AUS will lose strategic sovereignty, and lose the capability to operate independently should any future leadership desire such (but who are we kidding - any such insubordinate leadership would be dealt with).

    It is borderline guaranteed that it will take a much longer time until this sub will see service, and it will be far more expensive because nuclear propulsed subs always are. Australia has zero industry in that regard and will neither retain money nor influence as far as the propulsion is concerned, which will be delivered from the allies. In the meantime, AUS will likely pay for leased subs, which almost certainly will remain under US control, and the US will effectively get paid whilst obtaining yet another new naval base.

    With the way this information was handled (which you guys keep talking about as if it were normal even though it absolutely is not), the US and UK can be very happy, as Australia losing yet more options geopolitically and closing itself out of Europe will make it yet more dependent on Anglomurrica. The talk by Vanoi and Cope that "France doesn't matter in the Pacific" & "Australia doesn't need France" is completely ridiculous since Australia is desperately in need of trade partners globally.

    And if anyone wonders what the Australian neighbours are thinking, well, the reactions from Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore have been negative. Quad partners India and Japan are unlikely to be all that happy about being degraded to secondary status.

    Meanwhile Australia's main export good to it's main trade partner is in huge trouble. China is about to get its iron ore from Africa.

    With all this in mind, all the AUKUS fans here should finally address the two main issues:
    1) Please finally address this here. It can't be that hard:
    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    What remains completely unexplained, and I still wait for cope/vanoi to do so, is why the three felt the need to snub the French so completely. This "leaking" to the press is the equivalent of breaking up with your GF per SMS, when she's also your coworker and you'll have to see her every day 8 til 5. After telling her on a romantic dinner that you love her and make marriage plans, all the while you've already hooked up with another and are on your way out.
    and 2) How the hell has this development made the geopolitical prospects of Australia any better?! Since, you know, you guys are calling it a "good deal" whilst completely ignoring the angle it was negotiated from.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  17. #1897
    conon394's Avatar hoi polloi
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Colfax WA, neat I have a barn and 49 acres - I have 2 horses, 15 chickens - but no more pigs
    Posts
    14,215

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Meanwhile Australia's main export good to it's main trade partner is in huge trouble. China is about to get its iron ore from Africa.
    That conclusion does not follow from your link, rather just China is cutting steel product for climate reasons and probably also in reaction to deal with an overheated building boom. Good long post though when I get more time today I reply more fully.
    IN PATROCINIVM SVB Dromikaites

    'One day when I fly with my hands - up down the sky, like a bird'

    But if the cause be not good, the king himself hath a heavy reckoning to make, when all those legs and arms and heads, chopped off in battle, shall join together at the latter day and cry all 'We died at such a place; some swearing, some crying for surgeon, some upon their wives left poor behind them, some upon the debts they owe, some upon their children rawly left.

    Hyperides of Athens: We know, replied he, that Antipater is good, but we (the Demos of Athens) have no need of a master at present, even a good one.

  18. #1898

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod
    What remains completely unexplained, and I still wait for cope/vanoi to do so, is why the three felt the need to snub the French so completely. This "leaking" to the press is the equivalent of breaking up with your GF per SMS, when she's also your coworker and you'll have to see her every day 8 til 5. After telling her on a romantic dinner that you love her and make marriage plans, all the while you've already hooked up with another and are on your way out.
    Why is that the dynamic? Seems more like the opposite case. You told your gf you were going to give her a big pile of money for your anniversary, so she starts planning all the fun things she’s going to do with it, including buying gifts for you. You later back out because you decide to buy something for yourself instead, as part of a partnership with some close family. Not a nice thing to do, I suppose, but then your gf has a complete public meltdown, threatens to break up with you, tells her friends to cut contact with you, and refuses to speak to your family. She tells everyone you “brutally” punched her in the face while ing another woman right in front of her, and all kinds of outlandish sob stories, to make you look bad and rally her friends behind her for her own purposes. I don’t need to explain why that is a deliberate overreaction on her part. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
    With the way this information was handled (which you guys keep talking about as if it were normal even though it absolutely is not), the US and UK can be very happy, as Australia losing yet more options geopolitically and closing itself out of Europe will make it yet more dependent on Anglomurrica. The talk by Vanoi and Cope that "France doesn't matter in the Pacific" & "Australia doesn't need France" is completely ridiculous since Australia is desperately in need of trade partners globally.
    If the entire EU wants to rally behind France and postpone or cancel trade talks with Australia in retaliation, there’s not much Australia can do about it. Retaliation through mutually destructive and unrelated means highlights how de facto expendable Europe views its relationship with Australia in the first place. Australia did not prioritize a new relationship over an existing one. Quite the opposite. The Anglosphere predates any formal relationship Australia may have had with Continental Europe, and Australia will always be a part of it. For decades, Five Eyes, ABCANZ, etc, have sought to integrate cooperation among our family. This defense pact is another component of that. My bias is I want Pacific NATO, and I want the Anglosphere to work towards free trade, mutual defense, and freedom of movement. Naturally, those goals take precedence over not offending France, and that seems to be part of the logic underpinning the AUKUS defense pact.
    It is borderline guaranteed that it will take a much longer time until this sub will see service, and it will be far more expensive because nuclear propulsed subs always are. Australia has zero industry in that regard and will neither retain money nor influence as far as the propulsion is concerned, which will be delivered from the allies. In the meantime, AUS will likely pay for leased subs, which almost certainly will remain under US control, and the US will effectively get paid whilst obtaining yet another new naval base.
    The first of the French subs wasn’t expected to see service until the 2030s anyway, and to my knowledge, the French Navy wasn’t boosting Australian defense in the interim, lease or no lease.
    See, I'm not privy to the considerations made by the Australian side going into the deal, nor am I fully knowledgeable as to what the budget and time overruns were due to. I'm much more reticent to qualitatively access something where I do not have all the information needed, and I'm quite confident you don't either.
    Yet you make specific claims about said cost/time overruns. Official Australian DoD reports predating this latest spat indicate delays were caused, at least in significant part, by French failure to meet requirements and deliverables. Australia has maintained that France was fully aware of these problems for years and thus should not have been so surprised that Australia sought alternatives.
    France should not have been surprised that Australia cancelled a submarine contract, as major concerns about delays, cost overruns and suitability had been aired officially and publicly for years, Australian politicians said.

    Yet as early as September 2018, an independent oversight board led by a former U.S. Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter had advised Australia to look at alternatives, and questioned whether the project was in the national interest, a 2020 public report from the country's Auditor-General shows.

    Australian parliamentary hearings and reports on the project, first priced at $40 billion and more recently at $60 billion, even before construction had begun, also showed problems emerging. In June the defence secretary told parliament "contingency planning" for the programme was under way.

    The deal was first announced in 2016. A pre-design review was delayed in 2018 because the "work provided to Defence by Naval Group did not meet Defence's requirements", the Australian audit said, citing lack of design detail, operational requirements and 63 studies not completed.

    The 2020 Auditor-General's report examining the submarine deal - the Department of Defence's biggest ever - found the department had been "frank and timely" in communicating concerns with Naval Group.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-p...rs-2021-09-21/
    Despite understandable shock at Australia abruptly terminating its existing $38.6 billion and growing contract with France’s Naval Group for 12 Shortfin Barracuda-based Attack-class diesel-electric submarines, there were ample indications that cost overruns, significant delays, and reduced Australian industry involvement were aggravating Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s government. With these cost overruns, the French Naval Group pushed the price tag of conventional submarines up into the range normally associated with nuclear-powered submarines.

    The politics are messy, but the reasons why countries want to be in the nuclear-powered submarine club are crystal clear. Power and endurance, both for propulsion and the need to supply electrical power for onboard systems, are critical to any navy—and nuclear power is simply the best option. Even the French deal was done on the premise that the submarines could eventually be converted to nuclear propulsion.

    Australia’s fait accompli should be celebrated by those favoring robust allied sea power as a bulwark against Chinese aggression—and at least understood by all who believe in national interests and sovereign decisions.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/20...marines-china/
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludicus View Post
    No, we don't care about your libertarian "evidence".
    “To live without faith, without a heritage to defend, without battling constantly for truth, is not to live but to ‘get along’; we must never just ‘get along’.” - Pier Giorgio Frassati

  19. #1899
    Cookiegod's Avatar Civus Divus Ex Clibane
    Citizen

    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    In Derc's schizophrenic mind
    Posts
    4,258

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by conon394 View Post
    That conclusion does not follow from your link, rather just China is cutting steel product for climate reasons and probably also in reaction to deal with an overheated building boom.
    The sentence where the link is given is fully supported by the link. And yes, the Evergrande is a big reason for short term woes, as the Chinese building boom is on time-out for the time being. The second sentence that I mentioned is indeed not in that specific article. I didn't do it because it was out of topic and more meant as a "that iron export issue is also in huge trouble long term", as the iron ore extraction from the Simandou hills in Guinea is yet to affect the markets and one can reasonably expect the internal market issues in China to be temporary. China's dependence on Australian iron ore is/was the one trump card Australia has over China and arguably a geostrategic Chinese weakness that rivals the Taiwanese monopoly over chip production.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    From Socrates over Jesus to me it has always been the lot of any true visionary to be rejected by the reactionary bourgeoisie
    Qualis noncives pereo! #justiceforcookie #egalitéfraternitécookié #CLM

  20. #1900
    Vanoi's Avatar Dux Limitis
    Civitate

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    16,616

    Default Re: Some unrelated recent military procurment storiess since I am getting bored of Ukraine

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookiegod View Post
    Let me get this straight: Your argument against the French sub is that because of the redesign which happened entirely according to Australian specifications and wishes (from nuclear->not nuclear), it would not be possible to transform a non-nuclear sub to a nuclear sub.
    Except that's not what I said. The Shortfin can be converted but again it's still not a true purpose built nuclear sub.

    This is genius. I feel so stupid now. Here I was thinking that it would have been quite easy for the French to simply keep in nuclear had the Australians not asked for the propulsion to be conventional. You're right. Subs get changed from diesel to nuclear and back all the time. That's a serious issue.
    And once again the French never offered them Barracuda nuclear subs nor the ability to even maintain them.

    Cite me the answer then.
    My posts are on the last page for you to read.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •