Meanwhile the USS Connecticut SSN just struck an underwater object in the South China Sea (not near the seabed). Getting crowded there!

Nice work! It looks like the French were going to make us pay either way. Its very hard to be stabbed in the back when your alleged assailant is being bent over and about to have a pineapple inserted.

Exactly what the Israelis said in 1967 when the French failed to provide naval vessels and 50 Mirages that were paid for. Strangely none of the French cheer squad want to even mention it in their "outrage" over the submarine contract which ,if you bother to read the articles golder has provided, has been on shakey ground for a while.

They watch too many movies. The Chinese are doing 'crazy Ivan'

If there subs are as good as their helicopters. I'd say we did the right thing. Also this complete dummy spit with Australia, along with the issues it is having with other countries. Show that they may not have been the most stable of partners. As the examples show, something else would have set them off. They don't play well with others. Even within NATO, there are issues.

A signed contract with an exit clause which, based on the next quote, you know all about!
It is France that has linked a commercial contract to a defence policy. Was AUD90Bn the cost of Frances support in the Indo-Pacific?

Buy my car and I'll be your friend...You didn't buy my car. I'm not your friend anymore.

Nem.con M Barnier recently apologised for the french arrogance over recent years and its faltering position in public perception.
Truth be that the UK now has the dominant Navy in the european area and that will not sit well with some.

Actually, some people here have a superficial understanding of how military contracts work. Its not like signing up for a phone contract. In a major contract such as this there are a number of "gates" which allow the client to back out with a predefined penalty which must be paid to the other side. This is what has happened and the Australian govt are entirely within their rights to do so. No breach of contract.

France sent their ambassador back to Australia, I trust they'll make him quarantine for 2 weeks!

hopefully in the Kingsford Hotel in Brisbane.

This is laying up a great foundation to see how people in various countries behave when someone backs out of a multi-billion dollar contract with them. Hopefully with the equinamity they would like to see from the French.

Just like the UK with Skybolt? Or perhaps France/Dassault pulling out of the AFVG in 1967?

You have to learn that, in such matters, nations have interests - not friends - and adapt accordingly.

And another 12 x Romeos for the Royal Australian Navy. In part to be rid of the MRH-90? That's two European helicopters gone in a year from Australia's force structure. The Apache order in January ending the Tiger.


https://www.australiandefence.com.au...0r-helicopters

As you know, there were issues with the MRH-90, So the naval ASW NFI-90 wasn't purchased. The RAN went with Romeos for the ASW role.

I would expect the existing MRH-90 to continue their current role in the RAN. I think we are keeping the fleet of MRH-90, for now.
https://www.navy.gov.au/aircraft/mrh-90-taipan

The navy operates 6, its still to be determined wether these romeos are replace the MRH-90, but considering its a pretty large excess Romeo's and MRH-90 being transferred to army. Its not confirmed but seem everyone believes the navy will be transferring them to army under sea-1000

It's possible they will give the 6 they have on rotation back to the army. Then use some of the Romeo for general purpose. We will find out.

"Just like the UK with Skybolt?"

ORAC - the UK didn't pull out of Skybolt - it was cancelled by the USA - which led eventually (but not immediately) to the offer of Polaris

Except it wasn’t a signed contract.

Ok then if it's that simple....:rolleyes:

I recon that Wikipedia is not the best place for accurate information, can you please go there and update its wording?
"Terminated the not signed yet contract for convenience"
Naval Group said that Australia had "terminated the contract for convenience". The French Ministry of Defense claimed that on the day that the contract was cancelled, Australia had written to France stating that "they were satisfied with the submarine's achievable performance and with the progress of the program." The French foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said that Australia told France one hour before the public announcement of the cancellation. He called the decision to cancel the contract and the secret AUKUS negotiations a "stab in the back". He said in regards to NATO alliance partners the US and the UK that "In a real alliance you talk to each other, you don’t hide things, you respect the other party." Christian Cambon, chairman of the Committee of the French Senate’s Foreign Affairs, Defence and Armed Forces, said the decision to cancel the contract must lead France "to wonder about the recurrent attitude from some of our allies,

Who was plane bold lying to who?

I wouldn't worry too much, I'm sure someone will write in wiki about its troubled history. Dating from 2018. You have already been told it was a step by step program, with exit ramps along the way.
Australia signed for the design, of which there were 3 stages. Australia exited the program at stage 2. Before entering the detailed design phase.
Australia never signed to build the submarine. That was the next step and only one was to be built, before the next exit ramp.

https://www.anao.gov.au/work/perform...tion-to-design
"Design and Mobilisation Contract (entered into in September 2016); Strategic Partnering Agreement (entered into in February 2019); and Submarine Design Contract (entered into in March 2019). "
https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/defaul...19-2020_22.pdf


February 2021.
https://indaily.com.au/news/2021/02/...y-february-25/
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has ordered a top level study to look at how to terminate the $90 billion contract, while also investigating alternative options to contract Swedish Shipbuilders Saab Kockums or renovate the Australian Navy’s current Collins Class fleet.

January 14, 2020
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fede...14-p53rd2.htmlThe audit report also reveals that during negotiations over a key agreement with French company Naval Group in 2018, the federal government's hand-picked advisory group floated the idea of walking away from the contract with the French shipbuilder.

The Naval Shipbuilding Advisory Board told Defence that it should consider whether proceeding with the project was in the national interest "even if negotiations succeeded" with the Strategic Partnering Agreement.


Australia Reportedly Looking At An Alternative To Its Costly New French-Designed Submarines
JANUARY 19, 2021
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ned-submarines