"So after Kevin Rudd, it seems now Malcolm Turnbull considers that France has been deliberately and unelegantly betrayed.
That makes two ex-Australian PM against one - but for some reasons, it seems commentators here do prefer the N° 3, Scott Morrison (why ? no idea - that's internal Aussie politics, and I don't really care)"

That's two blowhard narcissists that were binned before they even served one term, it's a wonder you haven't mentioned that francophile clock collector Keating.
And yes, you do care, you are weeping into your croussants all the time.

So go the rumors they presented the documents in french the naval guys said we want them in english, NG said you didn't specifiy but will we do it for a **** ton of money. RAN said do it or we walk

Also good vid on the whole saga

In fairness, that happens here on Civil projects as well. It's not uniquely French. Some construction companies have teams of Lawyers read through Tenders looking for Variation opportunities & lower their bid as they know they'll recoup the difference, and some, when they "discover" variations after signing.

Not quite sure what you mean?
My point - probably not clearly enough made - was that if the shooting starts any big surface vessel is now highly vulnerable to weapons like the DF-21.
Personally, if I had to be at sea at that point - I'd rather be under it - or over it - rather than floating on top of it in a big, fat target.

Two points I made - badly:

1. DF-21 is not something that nothing can be done about. As well as giving naval and other forces anti ballistic missile capabilities, there is a whole kill chain to be disrupted, including the enemy reconnaissance assets that determine where the target is. Aside from things like spoofing, deception via electronic transmissions, controlling the emissions from friendly forces, enemy submarines and aircraft can be countered (which was a carrier role during Second World War and during the Cold War), and even satellites in low earth orbit can be engaged by weapons such as SM-6. Remember when the Americans splashed one of their own faulty satellites?

2. Even in time of conflict, huge quantities of equipment and forces have to be moved by sea. There is no alternative.

Thus the investment in balanced naval forces - capable surface combatants and ASW helicopters, and submarines.

Moving into a whole new area of tracking and identification let alone engagement. Plus we are moving into an era of cubesat sized constellations in their thousands (even the UK is going to have one) with almost instant launch and replace capability.

Boeing Pelican would probably be the cheaper solution - particularly for the Pacific island chain theatre....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Pelican

There is broader dimension to the Trilateral Alliance than SSN technology transfer. The 2016 Defence White Paper and 2020 Strategic Update presented by Canberra set out a coherent plan to meet challenges in the 21st century. The ADF procurement list is unique. Triton. Peregrine. Wedgetail. Poseidon. Growler. LRSM. PrSM. Australia is either the first or only foreign customer trusted by the US to operate these platforms/weapons. Although this is primarily a naval thread the last detail on that list is relevant.

The Australian Army plan to acquire the precision strike missile. Now that Intermediate Range Treaty has gone out the window (never to return) can the natural defence of Australia's land mass and geographical isolation be any defence against future attack from a hypersonic weapon. Australia is cooperating with the US to develop precision strike capability at ranges previously banned by the INF Treaty - presumably, that will include targets at sea.

On the subject of geographical isolation being a natural defence - that did not deter Japan from sending Betty bombers to attack a one horse town in Western Australia during WW2. The threat? A USN submarine base at Exmouth. :E

https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/l...255040732.html

So they moved the base to Freo. problem solved. Perth is the most isolated capital city in the world. A good place to start when looking for geographical isolation. Certainly the State Premier thinks so in his dealings with Covid.

Exmouth remains, with every litre of fuel supplied from Fremantle by road train. The point is what assets are in place at that joint operated location. If it was considered strategically important for DARPA to relocate hardware from White Sands to the North West Cape, maybe that coastal target is still within reach. As others have referenced here, space has become a contested domain during two decades in pursuit of the Bush Doctrine. Australia is uniquely placed to offer ground based surveillance and even opportunities for equatorial launch or launch into polar orbit.

Although that article doesn't reflect it. Australia has partnered with the US in the development of the +1,000km PrSM
https://www.australiandefence.com.au...e-announcement

I am not Australian, but Australia is an important contributor to World security and stability, including at sea. Before bowing out, I will make a few final points.

1. Satellites may be difficult to target, particularly small ones, but the ground segment is not.

2. Submarines are primarily about sea denial (stoppings others from using the sea for commerce, resupply, or for offensive action), the carrier and surface forces in general exist for sea control. If you are prepared to hand over control of the seas, then you might as well join the Communist Communist Party. It really is that blunt.

3. We hear a lot about the DF-21, but China still feels the need to build things like carriers and amphibious vessels, despite the fact that the United States has similar technologies. Could it be that Chinese and Russian anti Western (values - not geography or race) propaganda includes things such as relentless attacks against the reputation of of systems and capabilities, which representing their own as 100% reliable and undefeatable?

4. I suspect a lot of what this article says also applies to China and the Indo-Pacific: IT’S TIME TO TALK ABOUT A2/AD: RETHINKING THE RUSSIAN MILITARY CHALLENGE

There a bidding process out for indian submarines. AIP powered barracuda is one of the contenders. The others are spanish S-80, russian amur, and indian based on scorpene.

Wonder if part of issue is with australia withdrawing is that it could have had a bad look for the attempt at winning the indian sub contract

The Indians will go their own way - come back in 10 years and they may have made a decision that they've stuck to

I know what you mean, but I think there is an urgency about this requirement because of the strategic situation and their rapidly obsolescent existing fleet.

I am involved with one of the bidding platforms - rattman's list is not correct. The Indians want an AIP sub with vertical launch tubes for long range land attack missiles.

How am I incorrect, thats the list from the indians. AIP and VLS will added to barracuda. NG has submitted both the barracuda and the scorpene for the program

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...p-75i-program/

The past experience with urgent requirement procurements from India is that they tend to evaporate or be delayed.
Missile launching subs are a maintenance and operating nightmare, hugely expensive to buy and to operate. I'd expect this requirement too to evaporate, it just asks for too much.

You may be correct, Sir, but from the Indians' point of view, the naval situation is deteriorating rapidly. With Chinese SSNs roaming the Indian Ocean hunting down India's future SSBN Fleet and surface combatants, some wonky old Kilos and a few Scorpenes are not going to cut the mustard. They're going to need something much more capable than they currently own.

The NavalNews article is well researched and correctly lists the remaining four shortlisted platforms. One of those is currently in service and meets all the Indians' requirements but is not listed in your post #552. Only one of the shortlisted platforms is French.

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news...istic-missile/

Why does everyone forget about seaborne commerce and crisis response shipping? I suspect that the PLA(N) submarine threat is the reason that the Indian Navy is acquiring a significant number of ASW helicopters, including ones meant to be carrier based. I understand that they are purchasing MH-60R at the rush, and I wonder if they will operate them with an Observer like the RAN?