If we went with the Japanese submarines - a proven design - back in 2014, we would have them by now. But Turnbull got into bed with the French and wasted billions of dollars and got nothing
The French gazumped the Japanese with a proposal that was too good to be true. It was vapourware. When the contract was finally cancelled in 2021 the French had not provided a design or met any milestones.
In fairness, Australia always needed nuclear boats. The distance and missions your submarines need to cover are outside the capabilities of any conventional submarine, even the Japanese type offered then, regardless of how much better than the French model it may have been
the japanese subs were simply not fit for purpose, not enough range not enough endurance, and the french contract wanst a total waste, you got all the electronic components that will be used for the collins life of type extension
The Mogami's have the advantage of lower crew numbers (around 90) per vessel through automation. Crewing any vessel in the future will be a major challenge.
Not really, it's 90 to 100 core crew without the air crew (around 20 to 25). MEKO is about 120-125 with aircrews included. So it's similar with only 10 people difference.
I tend too lean towards the meko class, the Germans would offer this newer class if it is not up too scratch! The model was on display at the pacific defence and maritime exhibition. Space and weight for additional systems, including vls launch missiles, energy weapons, can fit Saab's, and ceafar and communications etc. Commonality, is important, thus the need too use Australian owned suppliers. This basically no different to the Japanese, except for the Japanese are testing their constitution, to beable too sell weapons internationally.
The Mogami design has barely any VLS (16 cells), neither does the German design. Not sure what these ships are supposed to be tasked with but assuming they need to be capable of defending themselves against a Chinese threat, you'll need 7 just to get level on fire power with a type 055 with its 112 cells.
@@anonimosu7425 I'm making the point that maybe fewer ships of a heavier displacement is more cost efficient, not to mention more survivable. For $10B you could have 5 Arleigh Burkes which would have 3x the combined firepower.
@@xmst5 Initial procurement cost of c. AUD2B (based on the latest batch ordered by the USN at USD1.4B each, before munitions etc.). Obviously unlikely you'd get the same rates as the USN, but there's a lot of margin for error
@@starchild5793less crew isn't always good on a ship. Most of the ship crew is more maintenance and operations of equipment. Not combat. Less crew means more stuff that could break and less people to fix them. A balance has to be struck. Well australia is facing recruitment issues so it might be a good pick. What's the point of having more crew slots when you don't have sailors.
Well, we know Japan has good quality of their indigenous technology to build warships. The US can also grant their technology into Japanese shipyards if the Australian navy wants the components. Plus Japanese shipyards have proven to be able to build warships faster and cheaper than any American or European shipyards that have too much bureaucracy and conflict of interest.
@@agus_medan LOL, Japanese shipyards have been facing issues of worker turnover and recruitment difficulties for over a decade, and now they are filled with Filipino workers. I recommend that you directly hire Filipinos to build ships in Australia, without the need for an additional middleman and higher costs.
All the worst defence procurement stuff-ups of the last 50 years are down to Liberal governments. Collins class, Taipan helicopter, the failed French subs plan, the F35. If we want the best equipment we won't get it under a coalition government.
If Japan wins the contract and builds these warships on time and on budget Australia’s government needs to strongly consider getting Japan to build another three of the vessels in Japan ( with already established production lines capable of efficiently producing ships in a timely manner. ) What is guaranteed is that when we begin construction of them in Australia the process will be long and drawn out and at least double the cost! The public admission of this government that the strategic environment is extremely serious must surely translate into the mitigation of the building process - and that can only be achieved by more ships built overseas and even a concurrent build in WA. The planned process in the 2030’s will only serve to maintain ‘one for one’ replacement which will stymie the declared intention to double the size of the fleet. The early decommissioning of HMAS ANZAC and soon to be a second vessel means there are only nine warships in the RAN.
I am all for the Japanese ship's whether they build them or us, I have deep respect for the Japanese they are honourable. I see our countries as two kids that meet in a dark alley 80 odd years ago, we duked it out and it led to a respected friendship. It's a hard way to meet but it is also an honest way to meet, all cards are on the table.👍❤️🇭🇲❤️🇯🇵
The problem with the Japanese submarines is that they are not nuclear-powered. It's fine for Japan to go with conventionally-powered submarines, as they do not intend to use their submarines to project force and do not have such a large coastline or maritime territory to cover. Australia has a far larger maritime territory and coastline to cover than Japan, necessitating a nuclear-powered submarine that is capable of far greater at-sea and submerged endurance than a diesel-electric submarine. Yes, the nuclear submarines will cost significantly more and will arrive far later than is ideal, but once we have them, we will have a far more capable and fit-for-purpose submarine force than what we would have with the Japanese option.
Without a doubt, the Japanese ships would be the favorable choice, as their technology is more advanced, and while you are at it, place an order for a couple of Aircraft carriers, we haven't had one for 42 years.
Where are you getting your information from the A210 is more advanced. And fitted with Australian systems and radar. If your talking about the a 200 then yes you would be right. But we are looking more at the A210 vs new upgraded. Mogami
Our defence priorities don’t seem quite right when Australia only has 1 air wing of fighters. Dutton made the investment in the Abrams M1A2 Sep v3, not enough of them, but he could at least get us to the point of 2 air wings with more F35s and some F15EXs.
Get real man I do recall that the reason why the Gov't never bought the Japanese subs because it would have been an insult to our biggest trading partner
It's time for Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and others to form a unified Pacific military (similar to the unified European military) proposed by Macron to act as a bulwark against China so as to relieve the American taxpsyers of a couple hundred billion each year as the US has pretty much been the defenders of the region for some time and it's not our responsibility.
Singapore is already in bed with China. They're already defending Chinese actions in the South China Sea. You're more likely to see Japan, South Korea, Australia, Taiwan, NZ, and the Philippines come together.
Huh? Why is it racist? It's politically motivated, not anything to do with race. It's just a fact of life that SG is closer in relations to China and often touts that in public, even brokering for China with other Asian nations.
I could never understand why the Anzacs weren't put into continuous build. The type IIs could have taken the changes made to the original design and built upon them. They could have been made longer to accommodate more VLS as well as larger engines to power the new systems. The Americans do this with their Arleigh Burkes, so why couldn't Australia do it with the Anzacs? Why do they always have to buy overseas designs and then modify them for Australian conditions? And why do they never buy enough to make a difference? A continuous build program would make a great deal of sense.
Agree with the continuous build but we needed to follow the Anzacs with something bigger more capable, that is when we should have been building the Hobarts, not 10 years later. The original plan released in 1987, called for 8 tier 2 Patrol Frigates (Anzacs) followed by 8 larger more capable tier 1 ships (Hobarts).
One feature that Japanese or Korean ships tend to have is that they are far heavily armed than their European counterparts. They have more VLSes than Europeans ships, that means they can carry more missiles. I think it would be better to go with the Japanese ones.
Not really, depends on classification of ship, of course a destroyer is going to have more missiles than a frigate or corvette, the difference is the ocean/sea they are operating in and who the perceived threat is.
@@boredatsea I think, the reason why the Japanese and Korean ships are more heavily armed than their European counterparts could be because they perceive threat to be China and to a certain degree Russia. Both those countries are fielding heavily armed frigates and destroyers.
What a shame that a developed nation like Australia has no robust warship and submarine building industry. Time to ponder and plan for long-term for sovereignty of Australian nation in decision-making.
@jonlaurenzreyes1902 Disagree with you on your comment on engineering.Germany has overtaken Japan and is the 3rd biggest economy in the world, Japan is 4th biggest economy now. Give me a BMW Benz or Audi anyday over a Jap car! The cost of living in Germany is a hell of a lot cheaper than here in Australia let me tell you they must be doing something right, Germany actually produced the best warships in WW2 Japan is just imitates Germany. Japan actually had British designs on their warships. The US and China have bigger economies than Germany but that's only because they have much bigger populations than Germany. On per capita basis Germany absolutely creams those countries! Germany has always been the creame de la creme of engineering with the exception of England to some degree. China imports German machinery, China's high speed trains were built using German technology.
In any case, the recent development in Japan and Australia’s security relationship is quite remarkable. Most Japanese now consider Australia as a de-facto ally, just next to the US. Though it’s not official like the Japan-US alliance, both nations are certainly in a semi-alliance phase.
AUS, really should work towards more domestic production, even if smaller ships. Japan, Korea and Germany are having demographic issues. Maybe a build out of the basics and the fitting out domestically like what was done with the Canberra class. Or disbursed module construction or flat pack components in smaller communities in AUS may be better for the overall economy.
I live in USA , I agree with you Japan has better deal here than Germany. 1 big thing is the Japan frigates much newer than the German design that hull of meko a 200 design was created in 2001 .
Ask both to build 1 or 2 from each bidder of the same design. Then make a selection after operating them to see which one has the best quality. There is always slight differences...One ship is not cheap. It also prevents the "enemy" or allies from getting the actual design to combat, find a weakness or develop a defense against your ship.
One advantage of letting Japan build the ships other than it is nearer to Australia is that if conflicts starts you need safe harbors for repair and easy to acquire parts. If it would came from Germany, it would take more time or it may even be blocked by enemy forces. If it's from Japan they can repair it by borrowing nearby shipyards of close Ally nations like for example the Philippines.
You don't deserve Japanese frigates. It's much cheaper to buy retired Aegis from US. Besides, it's not for sale. It's not about money. It's forbidden against the constitution to do that.
Definitely choose the Mogami extended range 32 VLS vessel. But given their established construction line and output - and the serious strategic outlook they should build six vessels in Japan not three ( we are already decommissioning ANZAC frigates) The remaining five should be built here ASAP - concurrently with the second batch of three built in Japan. There is no time to waste! China is building the equivalent of the British navy every eighteen months.
Which design are you referring too from the meko family, the enhanced version is a great option. Both designers are able too include vls, nsm, meko, offering energy weapons. Both design incorporate high degree of automation.
Got to love the idea of "On time and on budget!" Something that is totally foreign to the Australian Government. Let alone the state governments. Can't look at them being built in Australia, as the energy costs would blow the budget big time real quickly! And the quality will be far superior than what can be expected from anywhere else. But common sense will be out the door on this, as its labor and their pathetic bureaucracy.
Our Japanese friends will always share our interests. Europeans will always put their own interests first. When the shooting starts in the Indo-Pacific our European friends will not be there for fear of upsetting China. They have even vetoed a modest proposal to open a NATO office in Japan. Australia should have bought a Japanese submarine back in 2013. A French company won the competitive evaluation process but by 2021 doubts had arisen about their reliability in the event of a conflict over Taiwan. The French had of course placed an embargo on the supply of Mirage parts to Israel after 1967 and warned Australia not to supply parts out of our own stock. Australia was also unwilling to use Mirages in Vietnam (after reconfiguration to the ground attack role) in case France objected. Our Swedish friends also cut off the supply of artillery parts and ammunition for use in Vietnam. Despite this a Swedish firm was invited to build the Collins class submarines in the 1980s but also quietly told not to bother put in a bid to build the replacement in 2013.
Whichever ship is chosen, it should have the Australian radars and combat systems that are already used on other RAN ships to keep maintenance facilities, training, etc as simple as possible.
I don’t know which is the best but shouldn’t we leave it to the experts to pick rather than morons from the media to comment on which frigate should be picked.
That's why you end up with fraud and nothing. Look at what's happens the last twenty years, what you just said is exactly what has happened. Unfortunately the experts are not managed, and it's EASY to bribe them into nothing. This is a lesson as old as history. The "experts" need to be managed so they don't steal. It's unfortunate but every navy deals with it. That's why y'all lost 100million on a sub deal that never produced any subs. Fraud and lies from the "experts".
If they're interested in joining future stages of the AUKUS agreement then why not. They're already putting a lot of faith, money and defence in Australia as it is
A point that has been neglected in this conversation is that OZ has a hurting history of shipbuilders not having produced their designs abroad - Navantia‘s road into OZ was unpaved and bumpy for the AWD. MHI has the same non-track-record. It is not only about the ship design and the geo-political strategy and producing in their home country, but also about producing a proven design in OZ. TKMS can do that, MHI has still to prove that.
The Japanese submarines (and the French subs) were diesel electric. The Virginia and AUKUS nuclear powered submarines will be much quieter, faster and have more than 10 times the range.
Problem with anything built here, unions interfere and the final costs end up 10 times the original price. Look at the number of Made in Australia factories that have gone overseas…or gone broke…..and everyone was left unemployed. Thanks to the unions.
we did we built 10 meko ships two American deigned ships and destroyers in Adelaide ,all over costs including the Collins subs ,all ready to be retired except for a few ,Australia cant build them fast enough ,takes to long due to unions and red tape.
Hell I’d say the U.S. should consider them too or at least a frigate partnership with our NATO allies. The constitution class is way behind schedule, then navy failed to uphold the design requirements which was that the ship was to maintain 80% commonality with its European design-instead its less than 15%-the design work is still not done.
Australia will first dither for at least a decade while counting on the US to defend them. Politicians will then pander to the unions and ultimately go with a home-built design that costs ten times as much and barely floats, but that's alright because none will ever be delivered. How are those submarines coming along? My advice to Australian schoolchildren: learn Chinese.
Have you seen how CCP treats its people? How CCP reneges on an international treaty it signed with the UK about the future of Hong Kong & Hongkongers? What about the Uyghurs?
I'd trust Labor on this. Libs stuffed around with defence for a decade. The decisions and projects Labor has achieved in the last 3 years should be applauded no matter your political side.
It would be smart to purchase Japanese built warships as any potential peer conflict Australia would be allied with Japan. Therefore in wartime, repairs and resupply would be easier.
@@nathanquinn3499 The 96 cell VLS Hunter is far and away the best choice for Australia. Should be the minimum for a tier 1 ship - as opposed to the Hobart class and it's 48 cells...
I must differ with the commentator. It does indeed make sense if the Australian government has an agenda that differs with public expectations. In that light, it makes perfect sense. One must call out corruption for what it is.
A Gov that submits to defense contracts & building military alliances. Yet can't seem to commit it's resources to fixing domestic issues of a significant national importance. 👻👽🤔
The first three will be built offshore reason being is that since Australia ship building is so bloody slow it would bd faster to build it offshore because the Anzacs are being retired and Australia needs to plug the gap as soon as possible.the next 8 Frigates will be built in Australia and hopefully by then the ship builders have pulled their shit together
Defense Procurement will do what they always do. Purchase some still on the drawing board design which has a supposedly low price tag, then run for cover when the design flops and the price goes astronomical. They did it with our F-111's, FA-18's. Tiger attack helicopters, and our near submarine purchase from France. One wonders whether this is because of incompetence, graft, or both? The head of Defense Procurement should be sacked and get replaced by his tea lady, who would have more common sense.
As a Japanese national, looking over this selection, if the Japanese Mogami frigates are adopted, politically it is a matter that will greatly contribute to the security alliance between Japan and Australia and various related policies. In terms of military geopolitics, Japan and Australia are at the same latitude, which makes it easier for direct exchange in maintenance, construction, and communication. Japan will offer many new options for frigates for Australia. However, I doubt that Australia would dare to adopt a Japanese frigate, as it already has the operational know-how of a German warship with the Anzac-class frigates that Australia currently operates. And I hope they don't repeat the same mistakes as in the submarine selection project. For Germany, too. For Japan. And for Australia.
America should consider license building the Mogami Class. It's a good hull and the right size. Just replace the Japanese sensors with the SPY-6(v)2 and a SPQ-9B. 16 Mk41 VLSes are plenty even though the hull will take 32 like the Constellation if it has to.
Make love not war, but carry a big stick. It’s not the original quote, but we currently have a small twig. Be defensive by having the best possible offensive capabilities.
If we went with the Japanese submarines - a proven design - back in 2014, we would have them by now.
But Turnbull got into bed with the French and wasted billions of dollars and got nothing
The French gazumped the Japanese with a proposal that was too good to be true. It was vapourware.
When the contract was finally cancelled in 2021 the French had not provided a design or met any milestones.
Japanese sub is almost as much of a POS as the French subs.
In fairness, Australia always needed nuclear boats. The distance and missions your submarines need to cover are outside the capabilities of any conventional submarine, even the Japanese type offered then, regardless of how much better than the French model it may have been
yep now you are going with our Virgina class attack subs and nuclear
the japanese subs were simply not fit for purpose, not enough range not enough endurance, and the french contract wanst a total waste, you got all the electronic components that will be used for the collins life of type extension
As an armchair Admiral with zero naval experience I demand that everyone read this comment.
Best comment I ever read. Concise, clear, coherent. Couldn’t do better myself.
Top comment 😂
Yes sir
Salute you.
pass the soap,cabin boy
The Mogami's have the advantage of lower crew numbers (around 90) per vessel through automation. Crewing any vessel in the future will be a major challenge.
Not really, it's 90 to 100 core crew without the air crew (around 20 to 25). MEKO is about 120-125 with aircrews included.
So it's similar with only 10 people difference.
I tend too lean towards the meko class, the Germans would offer this newer class if it is not up too scratch!
The model was on display at the pacific defence and maritime exhibition. Space and weight for additional systems, including vls launch missiles, energy weapons, can fit Saab's, and ceafar and communications etc. Commonality, is important, thus the need too use Australian owned suppliers.
This basically no different to the Japanese, except for the Japanese are testing their constitution, to beable too sell weapons internationally.
AI is not undefeatable.
@@RUHappyATM , I actually hadn't thought about Al.
Another moron
Build them in Japan? Absolutely!
Because we all know if they were built here, they would definitely run over budget and time frame.
The Mogami design has barely any VLS (16 cells), neither does the German design. Not sure what these ships are supposed to be tasked with but assuming they need to be capable of defending themselves against a Chinese threat, you'll need 7 just to get level on fire power with a type 055 with its 112 cells.
@@PJH13why are you comparing a frigate to a heavy destroyer lmao.
@@anonimosu7425 I'm making the point that maybe fewer ships of a heavier displacement is more cost efficient, not to mention more survivable. For $10B you could have 5 Arleigh Burkes which would have 3x the combined firepower.
@@PJH13 how much do Arleigh Burkes cost in AUD?
@@xmst5 Initial procurement cost of c. AUD2B (based on the latest batch ordered by the USN at USD1.4B each, before munitions etc.). Obviously unlikely you'd get the same rates as the USN, but there's a lot of margin for error
Which ones do the sailors recommend. That would be my guide.
The ship that needs less crew and can hold the most missiles (32)
@@starchild5793less crew isn't always good on a ship. Most of the ship crew is more maintenance and operations of equipment. Not combat. Less crew means more stuff that could break and less people to fix them. A balance has to be struck.
Well australia is facing recruitment issues so it might be a good pick. What's the point of having more crew slots when you don't have sailors.
Well, we know Japan has good quality of their indigenous technology to build warships. The US can also grant their technology into Japanese shipyards if the Australian navy wants the components. Plus Japanese shipyards have proven to be able to build warships faster and cheaper than any American or European shipyards that have too much bureaucracy and conflict of interest.
@@agus_medan LOL, Japanese shipyards have been facing issues of worker turnover and recruitment difficulties for over a decade, and now they are filled with Filipino workers. I recommend that you directly hire Filipinos to build ships in Australia, without the need for an additional middleman and higher costs.
@siroyiryuu the problem is the technology and technical component, which is as important as the manpower.
Nothing wrong at all with Toyota or Mitsubishi. Top products.
God help the RAN if the decision is up to Albo, a few free boat rides would see the lesser ship ordered.
Australia will probably insist on only buying Frigates built by indigenous people of Australia... LOL!
@@dwightlooibit racist .
All the worst defence procurement stuff-ups of the last 50 years are down to Liberal governments. Collins class, Taipan helicopter, the failed French subs plan, the F35. If we want the best equipment we won't get it under a coalition government.
Albo. Worst Government Australia has ever had. And that's saying something. We've had some shockers in the past.
@@MonaroMan-j6j LOL... but Penny Wong is cute!
If Japan wins the contract and builds these warships on time and on budget Australia’s government needs to strongly consider getting Japan to build another three of the vessels in Japan ( with already established production lines capable of efficiently producing ships in a timely manner. ) What is guaranteed is that when we begin construction of them in Australia the process will be long and drawn out and at least double the cost! The public admission of this government that the strategic environment is extremely serious must surely translate into the mitigation of the building process - and that can only be achieved by more ships built overseas and even a concurrent build in WA.
The planned process in the 2030’s will only serve to maintain ‘one for one’ replacement which will stymie the declared intention to double the size of the fleet.
The early decommissioning of HMAS ANZAC and soon to be a second vessel means there are only nine warships in the RAN.
Japan is a close allie a great idea,
Our manufacturing is gone, purely due to union arrangements with labor govts.
Not completely because of union arrangements with Labour governments. Both foreign and trade policies by both parties are the main cause.
@@ElByrnesO dude you are sooo wrong its all because of the communist unions grow up sun learn to google
we, Indians can help!
Wtf are talking about how are we building naval ships then,? What in any way has this got to do with the above article
If Australia government ends up choosing the Meko over the upgraded Mogami class I hope they atleast choose the A210 newest version.
I am all for the Japanese ship's whether they build them or us, I have deep respect for the Japanese they are honourable. I see our countries as two kids that meet in a dark alley 80 odd years ago, we duked it out and it led to a respected friendship. It's a hard way to meet but it is also an honest way to meet, all cards are on the table.👍❤️🇭🇲❤️🇯🇵
The problem with the Japanese submarines is that they are not nuclear-powered. It's fine for Japan to go with conventionally-powered submarines, as they do not intend to use their submarines to project force and do not have such a large coastline or maritime territory to cover. Australia has a far larger maritime territory and coastline to cover than Japan, necessitating a nuclear-powered submarine that is capable of far greater at-sea and submerged endurance than a diesel-electric submarine. Yes, the nuclear submarines will cost significantly more and will arrive far later than is ideal, but once we have them, we will have a far more capable and fit-for-purpose submarine force than what we would have with the Japanese option.
Without a doubt, the Japanese ships would be the favorable choice, as their technology is more advanced, and while you are at it, place an
order for a couple of Aircraft carriers, we haven't had one for 42 years.
And you never will again.
Where are you getting your information from the A210 is more advanced. And fitted with Australian systems and radar. If your talking about the a 200 then yes you would be right. But we are looking more at the A210 vs new upgraded. Mogami
I bet germany would be chosen anyway
Our defence priorities don’t seem quite right when Australia only has 1 air wing of fighters. Dutton made the investment in the Abrams M1A2 Sep v3, not enough of them, but he could at least get us to the point of 2 air wings with more F35s and some F15EXs.
Dutton is a fool that sunk our navey and submarines .... thats why theres a rush now
Australia must have protection for everyone with mogami fighters protecting all people in Australia 😊😅😮😢😊😅😮😢
Get real man I do recall that the reason why the Gov't never bought the Japanese subs because it would have been an insult to our biggest trading partner
It's time for Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and others to form a unified Pacific military (similar to the unified European military) proposed by Macron to act as a bulwark against China so as to relieve the American taxpsyers of a couple hundred billion each year as the US has pretty much been the defenders of the region for some time and it's not our responsibility.
A pacific NATO would be more suitable.
Add India too
Singapore is already in bed with China. They're already defending Chinese actions in the South China Sea.
You're more likely to see Japan, South Korea, Australia, Taiwan, NZ, and the Philippines come together.
It should be Asia versus Australia. Why want to ally with certain Asian countries against another Asian country when you are racist towards Asians ?
Huh? Why is it racist? It's politically motivated, not anything to do with race. It's just a fact of life that SG is closer in relations to China and often touts that in public, even brokering for China with other Asian nations.
I could never understand why the Anzacs weren't put into continuous build. The type IIs could have taken the changes made to the original design and built upon them. They could have been made longer to accommodate more VLS as well as larger engines to power the new systems. The Americans do this with their Arleigh Burkes, so why couldn't Australia do it with the Anzacs? Why do they always have to buy overseas designs and then modify them for Australian conditions? And why do they never buy enough to make a difference? A continuous build program would make a great deal of sense.
Agree with the continuous build but we needed to follow the Anzacs with something bigger more capable, that is when we should have been building the Hobarts, not 10 years later. The original plan released in 1987, called for 8 tier 2 Patrol Frigates (Anzacs) followed by 8 larger more capable tier 1 ships (Hobarts).
Australia should also strongly consider Japanese High Speed Rail!!!
As Japanese, I am rooting for my country, but I have immense respect and admiration for the Germans and their manufacturing, technology etc
The Labor gov will allways go for the cheapest least capable as usual.
The phrase "Stuff up" seems to go with every U-Tube about Albo's government.
One feature that Japanese or Korean ships tend to have is that they are far heavily armed than their European counterparts. They have more VLSes than Europeans ships, that means they can carry more missiles. I think it would be better to go with the Japanese ones.
Not really, depends on classification of ship, of course a destroyer is going to have more missiles than a frigate or corvette, the difference is the ocean/sea they are operating in and who the perceived threat is.
@@boredatsea I think, the reason why the Japanese and Korean ships are more heavily armed than their European counterparts could be because they perceive threat to be China and to a certain degree Russia. Both those countries are fielding heavily armed frigates and destroyers.
Why is the pm involved ? He is incompetent yeh.
An-Al will go with the Chinese model.
What a shame that a developed nation like Australia has no robust warship and submarine building industry. Time to ponder and plan for long-term for sovereignty of Australian nation in decision-making.
オーストラリアさんが買ってくれたら嬉しいな。日豪友好万歳！😆
You can’t go wrong with Japanese made
Germany produces better warships than Japan. Germany has the reputation for high quality engineering
@@Peter-f4o4z ok, let's see what they went with.
@@Peter-f4o4z So do the Japanese.
@@Peter-f4o4z you mean over engineering, latest German Frigates are over sized with underwhelming firepower.
@jonlaurenzreyes1902 Disagree with you on your comment on engineering.Germany has overtaken Japan and is the 3rd biggest economy in the world, Japan is 4th biggest economy now. Give me a BMW Benz or Audi anyday over a Jap car! The cost of living in Germany is a hell of a lot cheaper than here in Australia let me tell you they must be doing something right, Germany actually produced the best warships in WW2 Japan is just imitates Germany. Japan actually had British designs on their warships. The US and China have bigger economies than Germany but that's only because they have much bigger populations than Germany.
On per capita basis Germany absolutely creams those countries! Germany has always been the creame de la creme of engineering with the exception of England to some degree.
China imports German machinery, China's high speed trains were built using German technology.
In any case, the recent development in Japan and Australia’s security relationship is quite remarkable. Most Japanese now consider Australia as a de-facto ally, just next to the US. Though it’s not official like the Japan-US alliance, both nations are certainly in a semi-alliance phase.
Historically their damage control is second to none, worst.
Just lost a mine sweeper due to fire.
Practically zero analysis based on the capability and integration of the selected design here
AUS, really should work towards more domestic production, even if smaller ships. Japan, Korea and Germany are having demographic issues. Maybe a build out of the basics and the fitting out domestically like what was done with the Canberra class. Or disbursed module construction or flat pack components in smaller communities in AUS may be better for the overall economy.
I live in USA , I agree with you Japan has better deal here than Germany. 1 big thing is the Japan frigates much newer than the German design that hull of meko a 200 design was created in 2001 .
Ask both to build 1 or 2 from each bidder of the same design. Then make a selection after operating them to see which one has the best quality. There is always slight differences...One ship is not cheap. It also prevents the "enemy" or allies from getting the actual design to combat, find a weakness or develop a defense against your ship.
What happened to the type 26?
It will be reduced from 9 to 6
dont mess this up like the sub deal .... we are a island don't forget
Albo won't do anything he is just fence sitter
What for?
The enemy is already here and there's not much left worth defending anymore.
Just keep voting Labor anf get it over and done with.
One advantage of letting Japan build the ships other than it is nearer to Australia is that if conflicts starts you need safe harbors for repair and easy to acquire parts. If it would came from Germany, it would take more time or it may even be blocked by enemy forces. If it's from Japan they can repair it by borrowing nearby shipyards of close Ally nations like for example the Philippines.
So,the Murdoch's have shares in this Japanese company, right?
Government cronies fishing for kickbacks.
I hear New Zealand is selling a ship really cheap and comes with fish 🐟. You just need to go to the bottom on the ocean to collect it 😂😂 DEI country
haha she still got job hope they sack her
You don't deserve Japanese frigates. It's much cheaper to buy retired Aegis from US. Besides, it's not for sale. It's not about money. It's forbidden against the constitution to do that.
Definitely choose the Mogami extended range 32 VLS vessel. But given their established construction line and output - and the serious strategic outlook they should build six vessels in Japan not three ( we are already decommissioning ANZAC frigates)
The remaining five should be built here ASAP - concurrently with the second batch of three built in Japan.
There is no time to waste!
China is building the equivalent of the British navy every eighteen months.
Can we just pick the best frigate rather than pandering to either country to make them feel better.
its time for "Made In Japan" to take a new leap into the defense sector
It’s time for made in Japan to dominate once again. Not sure why they been so absent and let cheap low quality China take the market
Which design are you referring too from the meko family, the enhanced version is a great option. Both designers are able too include vls, nsm, meko, offering energy weapons. Both design incorporate high degree of automation.
Got to love the idea of "On time and on budget!" Something that is totally foreign to the Australian Government. Let alone the state governments. Can't look at them being built in Australia, as the energy costs would blow the budget big time real quickly! And the quality will be far superior than what can be expected from anywhere else. But common sense will be out the door on this, as its labor and their pathetic bureaucracy.
do we even have any personnel to man them
Choose superior Nippon steel.
I mean this makes perfect sense given 21st-century geopolitics, but still tennoheika banzai intensifies
I thought we were getting the British type 26 & 31?
We are getting Type 26 subclass but that has been reduced from 9 to 6
Our Japanese friends will always share our interests.
Europeans will always put their own interests first. When the shooting starts in the Indo-Pacific our European friends will not be there for fear of upsetting China. They have even vetoed a modest proposal to open a NATO office in Japan.
Australia should have bought a Japanese submarine back in 2013. A French company won the competitive evaluation process but by 2021 doubts had arisen about their reliability in the event of a conflict over Taiwan. The French had of course placed an embargo on the supply of Mirage parts to Israel after 1967 and warned Australia not to supply parts out of our own stock. Australia was also unwilling to use Mirages in Vietnam (after reconfiguration to the ground attack role) in case France objected.
Our Swedish friends also cut off the supply of artillery parts and ammunition for use in Vietnam. Despite this a Swedish firm was invited to build the Collins class submarines in the 1980s but also quietly told not to bother put in a bid to build the replacement in 2013.
They should see the new french frigate .......but of course french won't let Australian politicians deal with ....
Whichever ship is chosen, it should have the Australian radars and combat systems that are already used on other RAN ships to keep maintenance facilities, training, etc as simple as possible.
I don’t know which is the best but shouldn’t we leave it to the experts to pick rather than morons from the media to comment on which frigate should be picked.
....Frigate about it......
That's why you end up with fraud and nothing. Look at what's happens the last twenty years, what you just said is exactly what has happened. Unfortunately the experts are not managed, and it's EASY to bribe them into nothing. This is a lesson as old as history.
The "experts" need to be managed so they don't steal. It's unfortunate but every navy deals with it. That's why y'all lost 100million on a sub deal that never produced any subs. Fraud and lies from the "experts".
When unqualified to make, yet qualified to choose. Then Choose QUAD.
If they're interested in joining future stages of the AUKUS agreement then why not. They're already putting a lot of faith, money and defence in Australia as it is
They should of just kept building the Hobart class
it needs large crew they are already having problem recruiting sailors, also they are expensive
Better than building it locally. It’ll take 5 years to get contracts made then 5 years at triple the cost to deliver 1
Yes!
A point that has been neglected in this conversation is that OZ has a hurting history of shipbuilders not having produced their designs abroad - Navantia‘s road into OZ was unpaved and bumpy for the AWD. MHI has the same non-track-record. It is not only about the ship design and the geo-political strategy and producing in their home country, but also about producing a proven design in OZ. TKMS can do that, MHI has still to prove that.
Fine Craft Man Ship!!
The Japanese submarines (and the French subs) were diesel electric. The Virginia and AUKUS nuclear powered submarines will be much quieter, faster and have more than 10 times the range.
Problem with anything built here, unions interfere and the final costs end up 10 times the original price. Look at the number of Made in Australia factories that have gone overseas…or gone broke…..and everyone was left unemployed. Thanks to the unions.
It's mind-boggling to me that a country like Australia, given their geography, doesn't build its own warships
We do. We built our own Submarines. We built our own Destroyers.
we did we built 10 meko ships two American deigned ships and destroyers in Adelaide ,all over costs including the Collins subs ,all ready to be retired except for a few ,Australia cant build them fast enough ,takes to long due to unions and red tape.
Hell I’d say the U.S. should consider them too or at least a frigate partnership with our NATO allies. The constitution class is way behind schedule, then navy failed to uphold the design requirements which was that the ship was to maintain 80% commonality with its European design-instead its less than 15%-the design work is still not done.
Australia can work out an energy plan, what hope is there
Australia will first dither for at least a decade while counting on the US to defend them. Politicians will then pander to the unions and ultimately go with a home-built design that costs ten times as much and barely floats, but that's alright because none will ever be delivered. How are those submarines coming along? My advice to Australian schoolchildren: learn Chinese.
Have you seen how CCP treats its people? How CCP reneges on an international treaty it signed with the UK about the future of Hong Kong & Hongkongers? What about the Uyghurs?
I'd trust Labor on this. Libs stuffed around with defence for a decade. The decisions and projects Labor has achieved in the last 3 years should be applauded no matter your political side.
didnt germany have to scrap a ship due to it being over weight?
Albo will make the wong decision.
Why not make our own and build them here
tradies drag it out for the salary time.
日本人として日本製のフリゲートが候補に挙がっている事を知りませんでした、とても嬉しく思います
Just when i diddnt think government could stuff up much more
mate , 99% of us dont even know what a frigate is.
We need the meko.
The Japanese frigate sounds like the better option. In the US we are building Italian designed frigates in the United States.
How?
@saltymonke3682 the constellation class
@paulmathews4335 I know about constellation, but I'm asking about how does the Mogami is a better option for RAN?
It would be smart to purchase Japanese built warships as any potential peer conflict Australia would be allied with Japan. Therefore in wartime, repairs and resupply would be easier.
Impressive, the Japanese failed to land their troops in Australia during World War II, but now the Australians have taken the initiative to land them.
Nah, they landed, saw sand then left.
Most important, go with something non-Australian. And better let someone from abroad make the decisions. Otherwise we are doomed.
Interesting, what warships has the Japanese industry ever delivered to a foreign navy? Not just On target and on time? But literally, ever?
They've not been allowed to export arms since WW2.
They have been successful at industrial exports in that time.
Well, before the export ban :
Maeklong, Thonburi, Ninghai class, some other.
Is Australia still purchasing the 6 Hunter Class (Upgraded Type 26)
Yes.
Most likely will be block 2 with 96 vls as they are now a tier one ship.
@@nathanquinn3499 The 96 cell VLS Hunter is far and away the best choice for Australia. Should be the minimum for a tier 1 ship - as opposed to the Hobart class and it's 48 cells...
lets let our free palastine protestors decide seems thay decide what albo and labour does
Just like Abbott considered the Japanese submarines. He ran away and hid when china growled at him
Malcom binned the Japanese submarines, not Tony. Tony was all for them hence why Malcom binned it.
Japanese didn't want to build it in Oz because the alloy was so top secret. That's the consideration.
Wasn't the main objection that we didn't put it to tender ie. Canvas all possible options to compare.
I must differ with the commentator. It does indeed make sense if the Australian government has an agenda that differs with public expectations. In that light, it makes perfect sense. One must call out corruption for what it is.
The Japanese will have to read the contract well before signing, the French have experienced the value of an Australian signature.
They're chasing the contract hard.
Fixed price contracts is the way forward
A Gov that submits to defense contracts & building military alliances. Yet can't seem to commit it's resources to fixing domestic issues of a significant national importance. 👻👽🤔
Instead of buying ships built offshore, why don't we build them in Australia. Have our own defense industry and put money in to our community
We are not a smart country
The first three will be built offshore reason being is that since Australia ship building is so bloody slow it would bd faster to build it offshore because the Anzacs are being retired and Australia needs to plug the gap as soon as possible.the next 8 Frigates will be built in Australia and hopefully by then the ship builders have pulled their shit together
Defense Procurement will do what they always do. Purchase some still on the drawing board design which has a supposedly low price tag, then run for cover when the design flops and the price goes astronomical. They did it with our F-111's, FA-18's. Tiger attack helicopters, and our near submarine purchase from France. One wonders whether this is because of incompetence, graft, or both? The head of Defense Procurement should be sacked and get replaced by his tea lady, who would have more common sense.
As a Japanese national, looking over this selection, if the Japanese Mogami frigates are adopted, politically it is a matter that will greatly contribute to the security alliance between Japan and Australia and various related policies. In terms of military geopolitics, Japan and Australia are at the same latitude, which makes it easier for direct exchange in maintenance, construction, and communication. Japan will offer many new options for frigates for Australia.
However, I doubt that Australia would dare to adopt a Japanese frigate, as it already has the operational know-how of a German warship with the Anzac-class frigates that Australia currently operates. And I hope they don't repeat the same mistakes as in the submarine selection project. For Germany, too. For Japan. And for Australia.
The Japanese actually have a Navy
get them built offshore its quicker and easier .. on time on budget .. does the Mogami frigate have VLS how many tubes etc
The upgraded Mogami has a US Mk 41 32 cell VLS.
America should consider license building the Mogami Class. It's a good hull and the right size.
Just replace the Japanese sensors with the SPY-6(v)2 and a SPQ-9B.
16 Mk41 VLSes are plenty even though the hull will take 32 like the Constellation if it has to.
And then you are re designing the ship not so simple
Security expert - Buy the Japanese design because Japan is in the region. Earning those big bucks.
Make love not war, but carry a big stick.
It’s not the original quote, but we currently have a small twig.
Be defensive by having the best possible offensive capabilities.
“Made in Japan” had long been associated with quality
As long as the Liberal party don't make the procurement decision we should be OK.
I was gonna say you guys should just be focusing on submarines because what the hell is a frigate going to do
And this is why you are not an In navy.
@@nathanquinn3499hes notnl wrong though, ukraine war has shown ships are at risk of drone boats, submarines are ideal