– The Conversation – France will be awarded the contract to partner with Australia to build the next generation of submarines to replace the Collins-class…But what was at stake in…
All three companies have proven track records in submarine design and construction. Building overseas would have seen the Japanese leave their comfort zone. However, they brought defence and geostrategic advantages to the negotiation table. Offering the RAN supply and repair bases in Japan was one of their most persuasive arguments.
The Germans pushed their vast submarine design and building experience – more than 160 submarines delivered to 20 navies over the past 50 years. This experience, TKMS claimed, would have put the FSP in a “safe pair of hands”.
The French Navy operates submarines across the five oceans. DCNS argued that the experience and propulsion technology they transferred from their conventional and nuclear submarines made them the preferred candidate for the FSP. And they turned out to be right.”
Now I don’t know about you but looking at the timeframes and l’histoire why choose the most disabled capability unless the “secret” requirements were headed by the category; Strategic Sabotage?