Thanks David.

"Equally, the existing nuclear Barracudas only cost $2 billion each, so we could get twelve of those for $24 billion."

The answer is neclear submarines, either from the French or the Brits or the US. Leased or purchased with crew training as part of the deal.

The whole submarine episode has been one great fraud on the Australian taxpayer. It says something about the Government that it sacked the only defence minister that called out the Australian Submarine Corporation for what it is - a hopeless organisation that could not be trusted to build even a canoe!

We should learn from past mistakes and scrap this industry. We would literally save tens of billions by doing so and get submarines that worked and were delivered on time.

I have to agree the subs need to be nuclear and the reactors need to be WALK AWAY SAFE, molten salt reactors that ideally will use abundant thorium as the fuel, Which will put any destination within range and allow said vessel to sit for a year or more on the ocean floor.

The only weapons that will be of any use in any future conflict will be either undetectable or unmanned and sacrificial!

Today's nuclear subs are as large as WW11 aircraft carriers, have a top speed of fifty knots or better. So as to be able to outrun most if not all surface vessels. The only one with a snowflake's chance in hell, is the new hydrofoil?

Diesel subs are notoriously noisy, far slower and easier detected. Moreover, a dead sub invariably equates to a dead crew and 100% casualties!

As a deterrent? 12 subs don't amount to much and we may not have the luxury of time waiting for their assembly/delivery. And where they could be stationary surface targets, like the American fleet anchored in Pearl Harbor was.

As for them being cheaper built elsewhere. France has higher wages, a shorter working week and much higher taxes? So to worry like you seem to David, may hide a political motive to buy them somewhere else? Perhaps where the builder pays a finder's commision?

That aside, just 12 subs are not much deterrent unless nuclear armed or carrying fleets of mini subs that are construct here of space age stronger than steel acrylics. Which already hold the deepest dive record and built here.

We have strengths and certain knowhow and would be wise to deploy them, if we were ever in a conflict, where our very survival was at risk! And that scenario is why this job needs to be left to the experts, not bean counting/worry wart, cross bench Senators, needing a beat up or more public spotlight and photo opportunities?
Alan B.

Nothing is technically or politically quick and cheaper about submarines, despite what this ignorant Senator claims.

1. Politics is a major weapons' program reality. A submarine type had to be selected in April 2016, to be built in Adelaide, otherwise the Turnbull Government would have lost the 2 July 2016 Federal Election. Turnbull (and even an Abbott) needed the seats in Adelaide and Nick Xenophon Party's support, to win that Election.

2. The Japanese option (Soryu) has only half the range Australia needs - requiring major modifications. Soryu only have a 19 year life instead of the 33 years Australia needs.

Japan has turned to Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) for submarines that may be high risk technically (due to higher fire and explosion risks).

3. Australia new submarine will no longer be called the Shortfin Barracuda because or DELAYS and major COST OVERRUNS with the French Barracuda nuclear submarine project. Basically the Barracuda's reactor is out of date. If Australia bought Barracudas our Barracudas would need 2 or 3 one year refuels IN FRANCE over there 33 year lives.

4. Nuclear submarines (SSNs) like all things nuclear, are unacceptable to the Australian voting public. They would cost 2 to 3 times more than the particularly large conventional submarines Australia needs.

5. The other competitor, Germany, has so mismanaged its submarine effort that none of its submarine service are available for action.

Pete
Director
Submarine Matters
with 2,108,865 pageviews
http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/

Maybe we should use the rubber band type?....nah! build them in Adelaide.
Sooner or later they'll have to get it right 'cos they'll run out of people to blame at some point

The sub contract will go to the bidder that can anonymously donate the most money to the political party and the people making the decision.