6 ms·

I don't understand how a contract that have been awarded after a rigorous and public competition between German/Japanese/French propositions and probably voted

by Rexxar 5y ago

I don't understand how a contract that have been awarded after a rigorous and public competition between German/Japanese/French propositions and probably voted by Australian parliament can be just dismissed after a secret discussion with US and UK.

akmarinov 5y ago
There are probably some clauses for compensation in this event. Other than that what is France gonna do about it? Invade Australia?
- tuatoru 5y ago
  Well, it has a track record in the region... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior
detritus 5y ago
Partly because the cost had inflated drastically, to the point that comparisons with France's own purchase of brand new nuclear subs - for a much lower cost - made the deal look increasingly duff. Apparently this has been a background issue in Australian politics since at least the start of the year. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38790/australia-reportedly-looking-at-an-alternative-to-its-costly-new-french-designed-submarines https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38790/australia-report...
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  Australia did not want nuclear subs so the design of the French subs had to be modified to accommodate classic propulsion, hence the extra complexity. Now Australia says it wants nuclear subs and is going for a new deal that's even more expensive. My opinion is that all this emphasis on cost and problems with the French deal is just a smoke screen. For the French the commercial aspect is not the most important aspect, actually. They have been much more seriously and deeply shafted and that will have a lasting impact.
  - detritus 5y ago
    This seems to imply a subtler point in the distinction: "Canberra was reportedly particularly keen on the French bid because of the ability to switch the Barracudas from diesel to nuclear power — technology that was deemed political poison so recently after the Fukushima disaster in Japan, but that the government believed could become more palatable in time." https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-its-french-sub-deal/ https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-...
  - jeeeb 5y ago
    It was no secret or last minute change that Australia wanted diesel electric subs. France submitted a competitive tender to provide a diesel electric sub at a particular price point, with much of the manufacturing being done in Australia, and was chosen over other bids on that basis. If France couldn’t provide that at the cost they bid then they shouldn’t have bid. There were other competitive bids from Japan and Germany both of which have proven diesel electric sub designs.
- mySubSub 5y ago
  Actually it was quite different - Australians wanted their own specifications, built on their own soil, where no local industry nor experience was present, and with US weapon system. The last point meant for that a full redesign was necessary, almost from scratch, and that they had to collaborate with a competitor who was given much more leeway for delays and great incentives to make the french contract go sour. This is what happened finally, the french have lost their contract, the US will now build those subs and the Australian taxpayers will have to foot the bill.
ssss11 5y ago
The costs and schedule blew out. It’s been a big problem for Australia and surely the French knew that. Australia should probably have informed them in a better way though.
- Rexxar 5y ago
  > The costs and schedule blew out It seems easy to tell this after the fact and there is different official way to complain about the contract. Additionally, that don't answer to the question: Why they don't have to follow the standard and legal process for the next deal ?
  - ssss11 5y ago
    After the fact? It’s been in news articles for years. I agree with your second point - I don’t know what the process should have been but they clearly haven’t followed it

by Rexxar 5y ago

akmarinov 5y ago

There are probably some clauses for compensation in this event. Other than that what is France gonna do about it? Invade Australia?

tuatoru 5y ago
Well, it has a track record in the region... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_of_the_Rainbow_Warrior

detritus 5y ago

Partly because the cost had inflated drastically, to the point that comparisons with France's own purchase of brand new nuclear subs - for a much lower cost - made the deal look increasingly duff. Apparently this has been a background issue in Australian politics since at least the start of the year. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38790/australia-reportedly-looking-at-an-alternative-to-its-costly-new-french-designed-submarines https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/38790/australia-report...

mytailorisrich 5y ago
Australia did not want nuclear subs so the design of the French subs had to be modified to accommodate classic propulsion, hence the extra complexity. Now Australia says it wants nuclear subs and is going for a new deal that's even more expensive. My opinion is that all this emphasis on cost and problems with the French deal is just a smoke screen. For the French the commercial aspect is not the most important aspect, actually. They have been much more seriously and deeply shafted and that will have a lasting impact.
- detritus 5y ago
  This seems to imply a subtler point in the distinction: "Canberra was reportedly particularly keen on the French bid because of the ability to switch the Barracudas from diesel to nuclear power — technology that was deemed political poison so recently after the Fukushima disaster in Japan, but that the government believed could become more palatable in time." https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-its-french-sub-deal/ https://www.politico.eu/article/why-australia-wanted-out-of-...
- jeeeb 5y ago
  It was no secret or last minute change that Australia wanted diesel electric subs. France submitted a competitive tender to provide a diesel electric sub at a particular price point, with much of the manufacturing being done in Australia, and was chosen over other bids on that basis. If France couldn’t provide that at the cost they bid then they shouldn’t have bid. There were other competitive bids from Japan and Germany both of which have proven diesel electric sub designs.
mySubSub 5y ago
Actually it was quite different - Australians wanted their own specifications, built on their own soil, where no local industry nor experience was present, and with US weapon system. The last point meant for that a full redesign was necessary, almost from scratch, and that they had to collaborate with a competitor who was given much more leeway for delays and great incentives to make the french contract go sour. This is what happened finally, the french have lost their contract, the US will now build those subs and the Australian taxpayers will have to foot the bill.

ssss11 5y ago

The costs and schedule blew out. It’s been a big problem for Australia and surely the French knew that. Australia should probably have informed them in a better way though.

Rexxar 5y ago
> The costs and schedule blew out It seems easy to tell this after the fact and there is different official way to complain about the contract. Additionally, that don't answer to the question: Why they don't have to follow the standard and legal process for the next deal ?
- ssss11 5y ago
  After the fact? It’s been in news articles for years. I agree with your second point - I don’t know what the process should have been but they clearly haven’t followed it