UOR new equipment

[OldSolduer]

I hear Australia is buying new submarines......

 

[Maxman1]

And France is looking for buyers for the Attack class Australia was going to buy.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

And France is looking for buyers for the Attack class Australia was going to buy.

They are paper designs, so I don't think anyone is going to bite after that mess. Unless France commits to building their own demonstrator.

 

[Maxman1]

It's a diesel version of the existing Suffren class, the lead of which became fully operational last June, so not entirely vapourware like the Type 216.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It's a diesel version of the existing Suffren class, the lead of which became fully operational last June, so not entirely vapourware like the Type 216.

It turns out that is a bigger leap than expected. I was looking forward to the Short Fin Class as well. My guess is that the only way it will get built is that the order is placed in French yards and possibly they build a mock up of the Diesel engine room section.

 

[Maxman1]

I think most of the development issues were with having it built in Australia instead of France. That would be more expensive and take longer because of the transfer of technology for the shipyards to be set up to build them.

Ultimately it was the creation of AUKUS and the Australian government deciding to go nuclear that ended the program, abandoning their A$2.4 billion investment at that point.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think most of the development issues were with having it built in Australia instead of France. That would be more expensive and take longer because of the transfer of technology for the shipyards to be set up to build them.

Ultimately the creation of AUKUS and the Australian government deciding to go nuclear that ended the program, abandoning their A$2.4 billion investment at that point.

I don't disagree, but also apparently the French were difficult to work with and where the truth is in that is hard to say, but I think without a real sub in hand, then they will struggle to sell the class to any other customer. that will be a hard sell as France operates a nuclear only fleet.

 

[KevinB]

Why do I suspect the author is a member here

https://twitter.com/x/status/1635491995559899142

 

[Halifax Tar]

Why do I suspect the author is a member here

https://twitter.com/x/status/1635491995559899142

Dont read the replies to that tweet.

 

[KevinB]

Dont read the replies to that tweet.

I don’t

 

[Halifax Tar]

I don’t

I cant help it... lol

 

[KevinB]

I cant help it... lol

I had guessed it would be a train wreck of epic proportions, and didn’t feel like wanting to ruin my morning.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I had guessed it would be a train wreck of epic proportions, and didn’t feel like wanting to ruin my morning.

It's amusing, to say the least. Every spectrum of commentary from "what an embarrassment" "China....." "No! Nukes bad!"

The internet may have given everyone a voice, but some of those voices are coming from complete morons.

 

[McG]

Could [recent UORs] signal a more generalized way of improving the procurement process? Now she has been in both chairs perhaps she has found a way to insert a degree of urgency into the routine and devised a new process that she is prototyping?

I sure hope so. It would make my heart swell to see the UOR process become the de facto process for military procurement. Operational items, ofcourse; we can still play the game for office supplies, IT, and other aspects.

UORs follow the same process as every other process. The two exceptions are that they get prioritized for staffing (so something else sacrifices momentum for the UOR to live), and we buy quantities too small to fully support the CAF (so we pay a lower price, which lowers risk and may allow some gateways to be skipped). If you want a capability to be sustainable, you need to follow your UOR with a full project.

Don’t think any of the aFP UORs have the scope to address the full CA needs.

 

[Kirkhill]

UORs follow the same process as every other process. The two exceptions are that they get prioritized for staffing (so something else sacrifices momentum for the UOR to live), and we buy quantities too small to fully support the CAF (so we pay a lower price, which lowers risk and may allow some gateways to be skipped). If you want a capability to be sustainable, you need to follow your UOR with a full project.

Don’t think any of the aFP UORs have the scope to address the full CA needs.

Might one say then that this is a "Headline" exercise with convenient timing?

 

[suffolkowner]

It's a diesel version of the existing Suffren class, the lead of which became fully operational last June, so not entirely vapourware like the Type 216.

I don't disagree, but also apparently the French were difficult to work with and where the truth is in that is hard to say, but I think without a real sub in hand, then they will struggle to sell the class to any other customer. that will be a hard sell as France operates a nuclear only fleet.

The Attack class from what I read was going to differ substantially enough from the Barracuda's, drawing from them and the Scorpenes so I dont see the huge advantage over the U216/U214/U212/U218 line other than the French were actually building subs of that displacement. The French have one more kick at the can with the Dutch/Walrus replacement. Still surprised the French couldnt make the move to nuclear for Australia so obviously there was something in the relationship as Colin aludes to however Brazil continues to move forward with its nuclear sub with French help.

I dont see us ever getting nuclear subs but replacing ours with a new SSK should be on the table still lots to choose from

Possible Dutch replacements
A26 Sweden
U212CD Germany
Shortfin Barracuda France

others
S80+ Spain
Taigei Japan
KSS3 South Korea

 

[Maxman1]

I think the deciding factor was the fact French subs use low enriched uranium that must be refueled every ten years which requires a nuclear industry that Australia doesn't have, whereas American subs use weapons grade uranium that lasts the life of the sub. Presumably they decided it was more sensible to go with a clean sheet design instead of putting a British reactor in a French hull.

It seems it was announced just last week that Australia will purchase three Virginia class subs as an interim until the new design is ready, which will be the same used by the Royal Navy and will reportedly have VLS tubes, something the Barracudas lack (possibly another reason they chose a different design).

Britain's New Attack Submarine To Be First With VLS - Naval News

The future British attack submarine, the SSNR, will feature a vertical launch system (VLS). This is a first for the Royal Navy and will increase interoperability with American allies. This can be seen as a smart move, as the Ukraine War reinforces the importance of supply chains.

www.navalnews.com

 

[CBH99]

UORs follow the same process as every other process. The two exceptions are that they get prioritized for staffing (so something else sacrifices momentum for the UOR to live), and we buy quantities too small to fully support the CAF (so we pay a lower price, which lowers risk and may allow some gateways to be skipped). If you want a capability to be sustainable, you need to follow your UOR with a full project.

Don’t think any of the aFP UORs have the scope to address the full CA needs.

Could it be a matter of one foot in the door of sorts?

Kind of like when we had expressed interest in buying a squadrons worth of Super Hornets…only buying 12-16 jets at the time, but when it came time to award a replacement contract for the legacy Hornets, the Super Hornet was then placed in a much more advantageous position than its competitors.

So in this case, we UOR enough kit for the eFP in Latvia. Then when it comes time for the actual project to happen, we can simplify things & just order enhanced quantities of the same?

 

[quadrapiper]

Setting aside the immense question of infrastructure, expense, and will to establish a nuclear fleet: would Canada be better served individually/be more useful as a coalition partner with SSNs or long-haul SSKs?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Setting aside the immense question of infrastructure, expense, and will to establish a nuclear fleet: would Canada be better served individually/be more useful as a coalition partner with SSNs or long-haul SSKs?

It sounds like that would be a good question to be answered within the context of some kind of well developed, and supported, national defence focused strategic plan.

If we had one