• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Defence quietly cancels another navy contract – after denying problems

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,905
Points
1,260
Shared from the AOPS thread, but the article talks about other projects which have been stalled.

Interestingly, highlighted in yellow, the "battlefield airlifter" C-27J is now not so much a battlefield anything...

The project with the longest delays, the army’s MRH90 helicopters, were running 95 months over schedule, the ANAO found. Mr Dutton axed that project last week in favour of buying off-the-shelf Blackhawk and Seahawk helicopters from the United States.

The remotely piloted Triton maritime surveillance drone is 66 months late, although this schedule has been affected in part by the US government imposing a two-year pause on production. Australia has committed to three Tritons out of a possible six or seven.

Another air force project running late is the C-27J Spartan aircraft, purchased as a replacement for the RAAF’s small Caribou cargo planes. The Spartan is 54 months late, with one of its problems being that it lacked self-protection systems when flying into battlefields.

The RAAF in July decided to cut its losses trying to make the aircraft safe for warzones, and will restrict it to just conducting disaster relief missions, such as flying in supplies.

The troubled civil and military air traffic control system known as OneSKY is 46 months late. The system was initially expected to be operational by June last year, but has been pushed to beyond June next year.

Officials last year expected it to be fully operational by April 2026 but the ANAO now says the date is to be advised.

The audit report does not factor in the subsequent termination of the $90 billion French-designed submarine project, nor the 18-month delay granted to the $45 billion future frigate program.

Opposition defence spokesman Brendan O’Connor said the combined delays of more than 33 years reflected poorly on a “revolving door” of defence ministers.

“This means Australian Defence Force personnel are not getting the equipment and platforms they need to do their jobs and Australia is facing capability gaps with national security implications,” he said.

 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,035
Points
1,090
Shared from the AOPS thread, but the article talks about other projects which have been stalled.

Interestingly, highlighted in yellow, the "battlefield airlifter" C-27J is now not so much a battlefield anything...



I know it’s tacky, but I actually let out a sigh of relief when I saw it wasn’t us… 🥵
 

calculus

Member
Reaction score
123
Points
630
I never understood why people point to the Australians as an example of how to procure equipment. That article points out a lot of current issues, but in addition, they haven't built a major surface or subsurface naval ship in 30 years that wasn't either late, over budget, or both.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,905
Points
1,260
I never understood why people point to the Australians as an example of how to procure equipment. That article points out a lot of current issues, but in addition, they haven't built a major surface or subsurface naval ship in 30 years that wasn't either late, over budget, or both.
I'd say it's because the RAAF aircraft fleet is pretty much all equipment from the last 15-20 years or so.

People see the new stuff, but not so much the integration issues like the C-27J example.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,035
Points
1,090
I think most people would assume that a modern aircraft like the C-27J would be delivered capable of performing the very job it was marketed to do... myself included.

That it doesn't come with the basic self defense equipment required to operate in a conflict area? I was genuinely surprised to read that... 🤨
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
7,910
Points
1,360
I think most people would assume that a modern aircraft like the C-27J would be delivered capable of performing the very job it was marketed to do... myself included.

That it doesn't come with the basic self defense equipment required to operate in a conflict area? I was genuinely surprised to read that... 🤨
I think there was a not-insignificant gap between reality and the “it’s just half a Herc, so it’s a proven capability,” marketing from Alenia/Leonardo.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,905
Points
1,260
I think most people would assume that a modern aircraft like the C-27J would be delivered capable of performing the very job it was marketed to do... myself included.

That it doesn't come with the basic self defense equipment required to operate in a conflict area? I was genuinely surprised to read that... 🤨
I wouldn't be surprised if "the job it was marketed to do" is simply "get things from here to there", and if "there" ends up needing self-protection measures, it better be in the Statement of Requirements.
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
671
Points
1,060
I never understood why people point to the Australians as an example of how to procure equipment. That article points out a lot of current issues, but in addition, they haven't built a major surface or subsurface naval ship in 30 years that wasn't either late, over budget, or both.
I've been a little critical at times, but you can't deny that they fish or cut bait when the situation calls for it and seem to have an alternative plan to act on
 
Top