Katherine Ziesing | Canberra
If the recently released Integrated Investment Program is be taken at face value, the approvals program for maritime programs alone in 2016 will leave government, defence and industry reeling. With competitive evaluation process (CEP) decisions on the OPVs, Future Frigate and Future Submarine all ostensibly due this year, there is much to do for all players in this space.
News that an early double dissolution election is all but certain and an early Budget for May 3 rather than May 10 as ADM went to press also add another layer of complexity and potential delay to the timeline. To be clear, the timelines for all three of these major programs have not changed at the back end; steel is due to be cut for the OPVs in 2018 and in 2020 for the Future Frigate.
"Minister for Defence Senator Marise Payne did confirm that the Naval Shipbuilding report would be out in the second half of 2016."
The timeframe for the Future Submarine remains less clear at this time. The chosen design partner will work with Defence to present a solution that all players won’t publicly go against i.e. making sure Defence can handle the boats when they get them, industry can meet the schedule/budget set out and government can appease any potential political fallout. Reports that various government officials were unaware of the submarine replacement timeline perhaps have more to do with relevant reports not being read or briefs from Defence not being listened to, I suspect.
Add in a life extension program for Collins and the ANZAC class along with the minor surface vessels fleet and the dance card looks full. Once regular sustainment work is factored in alongside an ambitious capital works program on the infrastructure front, it’s hard not get excited about the program of work on the horizon for Navy.
Naval helicopters are going relatively well with 17 Romeos in country at the time of writing and the balance of the 24 due by the end of the year. The MRH-90 Taipan still has issues on a few fronts but sea trials are progressing.
The LHDs are literally making waves around the world with HMAS Canberra undertaking important HADR work in Fiji, deploying quickly with a range of Navy and Army assets in response to Cyclone Winston. All reports speak highly of the capability Canberra brings to the table (see P40 for more).
Work on the AWDs continues, with the combat system for Hobart coming online earlier this year and training support has also begun for the first crew. Sydney’s keel was laid at the end of last year and is beginning to look like a ship with block consolidation work going strongly. The program has had its issues – just have a look at the ADM online archives or the ANAO report – but looks to be in calm waters at the moment.
The whole naval enterprise is to be supported by a national shipbuilding plan that the current government has promised will be released in 2016. Again, what impact the current political turmoil will have on this promise is unknown. A request to the Minister’s office about how the report is progressing or even confirmation that work is being done and by whom, was not answered before this edition had to go to the printer.
An additional sitting of Senate Estimates on March 17 did see Minister for Defence Senator Marise Payne confirm that the report would be out in the second half of 2016.
The extra session also saw a continuous line of questioning on the nature of the tanker procurement as to who recommended what and when and to whom. The original questioning series can be seen on P52 this month.
The extra session did not leave Defence or the government looking particularly stellar, with many questions being taken on notice and some just danced around by officials. No one was willing to confirm if Daewoo was even still in the running in any meaningful way despite Navantia being named as preferred tenderer.
“Navantia is the preferred tenderer; that does not mean that there is a final selection in place yet,” Rear Admiral Tony Dalton, head of joint systems division, CASG said. “We still need to go through a process.”
Navy has a lot of strategic thinking ahead of it if all the opportunities for new technologies and innovation are to be realised. Chief of Navy’s Plan Pelorus, with its 2018 timeframe, will miss a lot of the big ticket items arriving but it does allow for the hard thinking to be done in order to meet the challenges of the future.