MELBOURNE, Australia \u2014\u00a0Australian\u00a0Defence Minister\u00a0Sen.\u00a0Marise Payne confirmed on November 30 that the three companies selected to compete for the country’s AUD 50 billion (US $36.44 billion) Future Submarine program had submitted their proposals in full.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
MELBOURNE, Australia\u00a0\u2014 Now that all three competitors have issued\u00a0final proposals in Australia’s AU$D<\/span> 50 billion (US $36.44 billion) Future Submarine program, an expert advisory panel will begin\u00a0its evaluations and issue findings next year to guide the government’s selection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Up to 12 twelve <\/span>large conventional submarines will be acquired under Project Sea 1000. and in February, <\/span>The Australian government selected France\u2019s DCNS, TKMS of Germany and the government of Japan to participate in a competitive evaluation process (CEP).\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Since the CEP began in February, all three participants have worked closely with [the Department of]\u00a0Defence and they should be congratulated for the hard work and significant investment they have made to reach this point,” Australian Defence Minister Sen. Marise\u00a0Senator <\/span>Payne said in a statement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Submarines are Defence’s most complex, sensitive and expensive capability, so it is important that evaluation process is fair and robust.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Senator Payne said that the evaluation process will be overseen by an expert advisory panel, which the Australian government has appointed to ensure it is conducted fairly. The panel is due to report its findings to the government during the course of next year, after which one of the contenders will be invited to move forward in partnership with the Commonwealth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Each of the three bidders is required to submit three strategies for construction of the Future Submarine, from full completion in their home shipyards;\u00a0through to <\/span>a hybrid model where initial boats are built in the home yard and the remainder in Australia;\u00a0and a complete build in an Australian shipyard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n DCNS of France <\/span>is proposing a conventionally\u00a0powered derivative of its Barracuda nuclear attack submarine, known as the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A. The company announced that its proposal, which includes a government-to-government agreement between the Australian Department of Defence and France\u2019s Direction G\u00e9n\u00e9rale de Armament, (DGA), <\/span>was had been <\/span>submitted on Nov.ember<\/span> 27.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Germany\u2019s <\/span>TKMS is bidding a submarine which uses its existing HDW Type 216 boat as a reference design, but will be significantly scaled up to meet Australia\u2019s requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the Pacific 2015 Maritime Exposition held in Sydney in October, TKMS Australia Chairman Dr<\/span> John White announced that the design would be named “Endeavour,”\u00a0after the barque of Capt.ain<\/span> James Cook who landed on Australia\u2019s east coast in 1770.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Japanese government, in partnership with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Shipbuilding, is dealing directly with the Australian Defence Department\u2019s procurement organization, the Capability Acquisition and Sustainment Group. (CASG). <\/span>The Japanese are proposing proposal will be for <\/span>a new submarine design\u00a0based upon the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force\u2019s current Soryu-class boat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The CEP, Competitive Evaluation Process, <\/span>which is being followed for both Sea 1000 and Australia\u2019s Future Frigate (Sea 5000) programs in lieu of the traditional tender process, has attracted a great deal of comment from defense analysts and industry in Australia, with some likening it to a “beauty pageant.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Graeme Dunk, the manager of a national defense industry organization, the Australian Business Defence Industry, writing in the Australian Strategic Policy Institutes “The Strategist”\u00a0blog in August, warned that the information resulting from the CEP will be less reliable have a lesser degree of fidelity <\/span>than that coming from a tender process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “While Defence will no doubt do a good job of the evaluation process, the results will therefore be more amenable to interpretation,” he wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Simply put, the selection of the contestants and the lack of detail in the information provided means that it will be easier for the government to make a decision other than the one that might be recommended by Defence.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n However Senator <\/span>Payne defended the strategy in her keynote speech to the Submarine Institute of Australia\u2019s Science, Technology and Engineering Conference in Adelaide on Nov.\u00a017, saying the government was determined to get the best capability and best <\/span>value for money through the CEP process.for the Future Submarine.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n “The aim of the CEP is to inform government’s decision on the international partner to work with Australia to develop and deliver the Future Submarine. Through this process, we will assess the ability of the participants to work closely with us, including how each would approach our capability and sustainment needs, and how cost and schedule would be managed throughout the program,” she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “For a program of this nature, we need to work closely with the selected international partner to fully develop the Future Submarine. This is going to be very resource-intensive for both Defence and the selected partner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Once the partner is selected, there will be about three years of further development work before we finalize the Future Submarine’s capability and cost.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n