Spain leads for $7bn navy contract * Patrick Walters, National security editor * March 01, 2007 SPAIN is poised to win the contest to design the navy's new air warfare destroyers, destined to be the biggest and most advanced warships in its fleet. As the race to win the contract to design the three vessels enters its final weeks, state-owned Spanish naval builder Navantia is heading its US rival on price and delivery time. The $7 billion program will be Australia's second-biggest defence project in the coming decade, after the $14 billion joint strike fighter for the air force. Long regarded as simply a stalking horse for a new warship designed by US firm Gibbs and Cox based on the US Navy's Arleigh Burke class destroyers, Spain's modified F100 warship is now an even-money bet to win the contract. The Spanish ship is much cheaper and would be delivered about two years earlier than the US design submitted by Gibbs and Cox. Gibbs and Cox has been the Howard Government's preferred designer for the air warfare destroyers, but the firm's bigger and more capable warship exists only in its preliminary design phase. And final target cost estimates due to be handed to the Defence Department tomorrow are expected to put the Spanish F100 warship ahead on price by more than $500 million, according to government and industry sources. The Government has committed $450 million to the project's start-up, with the cabinet due to take the final decision on the winning design in July. In August 2005, the Government announced that the Gibbs and Cox "evolved design" would compete with an "Australianised" version of the F100 for the right to be chosen as the navy's new frontline warship. The new ships will be equipped with the US-made Aegis combat system, giving them the ability to track hostile aircraft and missiles at ranges beyond 150km. Adelaide-based shipbuilder ASC has already been chosen to construct the vessels, while Raytheon will be the systems integrator, as part of a novel alliance with partners ASC and the Defence Materiel Organisation. Spain's belated recognition that its F100 could be selected has resulted in a last-minute lobbying push by the Spanish Government. The Spanish F100 air warfare destroyer Alvaro de Bazan arrives in Perth today at the start of a three-week visit designed to highlights the ship's advanced capabilities. Spain is also sending its naval chief and senior government officials to Australia this month in an effort to clinch the AWD contract. The design offered by Gibbs and Cox is a more powerful warship than the Spanish F100 air warfare destroyer, and remains the navy's preferred choice. Gibbs and Cox believes the heavily modified Arleigh Burke offers better all-round combat capability and better growth options for future technology upgrades than the F100. But with four F100s already in service with the Spanish navy, Navantia argues that its destroyer offers a low-risk and highly capable solution for the Royal Australian Navy. The first of the navy's new frontline destroyers is scheduled to be delivered in 2013, but the US design is not likely to be in service before 2015.
Pode ser que em compensação escolham o LHD da NAVANTIA.
Por el precio de tres buques , pueden tener cuatro y parece que lo estan pensando.
Defence backs Spanish warship for $7bn dealPatrick Walters, National security editor April 25, 2007 SPAIN'S F100 air warfare destroyer will become Australia's new front-line warship if the Howard Government accepts the Defence Department's firm recommendation on the $7billion contract.In backing the Spanish warship, Defence chiefs have rejected the navy's bid for a larger alternative based on the US Arleigh Burke class destroyer. The Defence Capability and Investment Committee - the Defence Department's top policy advisory committee - met last week and endorsed the F100 design offered by Spanish government shipbuilder Navantia. The design contest has seen the F100 finish more than $1billion cheaper than the US option and more than two years ahead on the delivery schedule for three warships. Cabinet's National Security Committee will also consider retaining an option to buy a fourth F100 destroyer when it makes a final decision on a go-ahead for the project in June. The decision to go for the smaller Spanish destroyer over an evolved design offered by Gibbs and Cox is a defeat for the navy chief, Vice-Admiral Russ Shalders, who made no secret of his preference for the larger US warship. Admiral Shalders said last month that although the F100 was a good ship, hewas after "capability, capability andcapability". The 8000-tonne Gibbs and Cox design offered the navy decisive combat advantages, including 64, rather than 48, vertical launch cells, longer range and the ability to take two helicopters. Admiral Shalders failed to convince his colleagues in the DCIC in a debate one senior defence source described as a "complete whitewash". Defence sources said the tender evaluation of the two bids submitted by Navantia and Gibbs and Cox had found conclusively in favour of the Spanish on all the key criteria. Navantia has come from behind six months ago to win the backing of Defence chiefs. It had long been regarded as simply a stalking horse for Gibbs and Cox, which the Government selected in 2005 as its preferred designer. Defence sources said a key handicap for Gibbs and Cox was that its proposed warship existed only in its preliminary design phase, increasing the technical risk for a local builder. The air warfare destroyers are due to enter service from 2013, and will be the biggest and most advanced warships in the RAN. The $7billion program will be Australia's second-biggest defence project in the coming decade, after the $14billion joint strike fighter for the air force.
Isso seria um encaixe financeiro bestial para os estaleiros Espanhóis. Matavam dois coelhos com uma cajadada, ou seja, garantiam um contracto muito lucrativo e ganhavam ainda mais destaque e visibilidade no mercado internacional.
Australian submarine force ‘is in crisis’Australia’s submarine force is reported to be in crisis through a lack of trainedsubmariners.It is claimed that the number of submariners is only 60 per cent of the 270 establishment forthe sixboat force which has forced the Royal Australian Navy to cut the days at sea. Animproved pay and conditions package is being offered in an attempt to boost numbersespecially among electronic and sonar specialists, mechanical and electrical technicians.Australian press reports suggest there is also a problem with the boats’ periscopes. It isclaimed they require more maintenance than originally envisaged.However, it is hoped a new type of seawater hose will overcome a problem encounteredfour years ago. A failed hose almost sank the submerged HMAS Dechaineux in 2003 andled to diving depth restrictions which may be eased if the new hose proves successful.