Aussie AAD Destroyer Program In Trouble.

[Ex-Dragoon]

Oh oh.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/overdue-and-over-budget-8bn-destroyer-plan-in-crisis/story-fn59niix-1226063739830

Overdue and over budget: $8bn destroyer plan in crisis
EXCLUSIVE Cameron Stewart From: The Australian May 27, 2011 12:00AM 84 comments

BITTER infighting has erupted between government and industry over the nation's largest defence project, the $8 billion plan to build the navy's new air warfare destroyers, which is two years late and hundreds of millions of dollars over budget.

The government was yesterday forced to admit publicly that the flagship project was badly behind schedule after it became aware The Australian had the story and was planning to publish it today.

Insiders say the plan to build three 6500-tonne destroyers is in crisis barely a year after construction of the ships' steel hulls began in Melbourne, Newcastle and Adelaide. They warn that the AWD project threatens to become the biggest defence industry bungle since the Collins Class submarine construction in the 1990s.

Unless rectified quickly, it could cruel the future of naval shipbuilding in Australia.

A series of engineering mistakes, poor project management and lack of naval shipbuilding expertise has delayed the construction of the first warship, HMAS Hobart. And it has sparked a heated internal dispute between the government's Defence Materiel Organisation and one of the AWD sub-contractors, BAE Systems, over who should be blamed for the debacle.


Related Coverage
ADF: Delays hint at funding 'train wreck'
STEFANIE BALOGH: Defence dodge 'a disgrace'
Ship design dispute adds to delays Adelaide Now, 5 hours ago
More than 2400 faults in destroyer data The Australian, 1 day ago
Shipyard forced to send job overseas The Daily Telegraph, 1 day ago
Labor warned of defence delays, blowouts The Australian, 3 days ago
Sub-building capability queried Adelaide Now, 3 days ago

The Australian understands BAE has accused DMO chief Stephen Gumley of making exaggerated claims about BAE's culpability, and that relations between several key partners in the project have become badly strained.

BAE has accused the main AWD shipbuilder - the Australian Submarine Corporation - and the ship's Spanish designer, Navantia, of contributing to the mistakes by providing poor-quality drawings and information about the hull construction. The government has tried to conceal its problems with the AWD project, refusing to place it on Defence's public "projects of concern" list, despite knowing for months the project was in deep trouble.

The Australian last October revealed the AWD project's first serious setback when BAE's Melbourne shipyard in Williamstown botched the central keel block of the first warship. The 200-tonne central keel block was built to inaccurate dimensions as a result of faulty welding. At that stage, the projected delay was only six months. Since then, the project has continued to slip, with BAE now predicting a 12-month delay on its hull blocks. Mr Gumley insists BAE's actions have caused a two-year delay on the project.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith moved yesterday to prevent further delays by stripping BAE of some of its AWD work.

"The advice of (project manager) AWD Alliance is that if no action is taken to relieve the pressure on the Melbourne BAE Systems shipyard, the first ship would be two years late, approximately 25 per cent over schedule," Mr Smith said.

He said up to 13 steel hull blocks would be reallocated among the Australian shipyards, and up to five more would be reallocated to Navantia's shipyards in Spain.

"The AWD Alliance has advised that this action will reduce the delay of the completion of Ship 1 by up to 12 months, and of all three AWDs by up to 12 months," Mr Smith said.

The long delay means the three destroyers, based on the Spanish F111 boats, will not enter service from 2014 as planned.

Mr Smith said the decision, which will be widely viewed as a punishment of BAE, would have minimal impact on about 300 workers at the Williamstown shipyard because the yard is also helping to build the navy's Landing Helicopter Dock ships.

The AWD Alliance includes the government-owned ACS, the DMO and Raytheon Australia. Its critics say the structure is cumbersome and ineffective, with no clear lines of responsibility.

The AWDs will be the most potent warships built in Australia and will be armed with Aegis combat systems, allowing them to provide theatre ballistic missile defence over a wide area.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Fascinating little exercise here: Read the various comments following the article and substitute Canada, DND/CF or Canadian every time you see Australia, ADF or Australian, then change the commentator's locale to a Canadian town (any will do): You cant tell the difference between the comments we regularly see about the CF here in Canada concerning any of our materiel programs and those Australian comments. Pretty telling I say.

 

[RDBZ]

There could have been some insightful comments made about the boom and bust nature of Australian naval shipbuilding, and the issues this causes. I guess getting to the core of the issue doesn't sell newspapers.

 

[Kalatzi]

American are having similar problems with programmes like their LPD-17.  shoddy workmanship and endless finger pointing.

One hopes that those involved in project management here can draw some useful lessons

A helpful video can be found here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyakI9GeYRs

 

[jollyjacktar]

American are having similar problems with programmes like their LPD-17.  shoddy workmanship and endless finger pointing.

One hopes that those involved in project management here can draw some useful lessons

And rightfully so.  I spent some time in 06 speaking with a recently retired USN chap who was on the project.  He mentioned that the San Antonio had cost upwards of $20B in development costs, so much so that at the time they could not afford to finish the VLS in the Fos'cle.  The contractor who was given a portion of the propulsion system went under half way through the design and build.  This forced the Navy to start the process to find a contractor to design and manufacture the needed system right from scratch again.  Ouch!
It was not all doom and gloom though.  There were many cutting edge things with her that were very impressive.  At the end of the discussion, I did not feel quite as bad about our money pit subs or other JSS boondoggles.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Fascinating little exercise here: Read the various comments following the article and substitute Canada, DND/CF or Canadian every time you see Australia, ADF or Australian, then change the commentator's locale to a Canadian town (any will do): You cant tell the difference between the comments we regularly see about the CF here in Canada concerning any of our materiel programs and those Australian comments. Pretty telling I say.

Exercise complete and you are correct! We have even more in common, I still wont cheer for the Wallabies in this years rugby world cup though!  :nana:

Another interesting point is how many people point to Spain as the place they would like to see future RAN ships built. I didn't know Spain was a shipbuilding country to be honest.

 

[RDBZ]

Exercise complete and you are correct! We have even more in common, I still wont cheer for the Wallabies in this years rugby world cup though!  :nana:

Another interesting point is how many people point to Spain as the place they would like to see future RAN ships built. I didn't know Spain was a shipbuilding country to be honest.

I'm not sure the that the Spanish link is anything more than a reflection of Navantia's role in the current AWD and LPH projects.  But, as both navies use US sourced weapons systems there could be scope for a longer term alliance; integrating AN/SPY1 and its successors (AN/SPY3?) into a hull is not I presume a simple matter.  It's hard to see how you could simply integrate that radar on a German Sachen class for example.

A more interesting questions will be who, if anyone, the RAN partners with for the Collins class replacement.  The only other operator of similarly sized boats seems to be Japan, which raises a whole raft of issues.