超级军网澳洲ABC 4月21日新闻(未证实)：日本潜艇出局（含日本外 ...
来源：百度文库 编辑：超级军网 时间：2024/05/02 06:20:21
看来很多人只看标题就回文了，我只好把标题写跟说明写得更长更清楚。
这篇报导只是ABC的一则消息，内容是有可能的、靠谱的，文中的顾虑是真实的，但消息终究是未证实的，甚至澳洲是否下周就公布竞标结果都是推测，只因为5月3日澳洲要出台国防预算，所以外界就猜会在这个时间点公布潜艇案结果。照先前的消息，要等到6月以后。
原始新闻来自ABC的独家消息
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/20 ... utm_campaign=buffer
4月21日澳洲ABC的新闻，澳洲SEA 1000潜艇案即将在下周揭晓。
这篇报导释放的重磅独家消息是：ABC打听到前晚（4月20日）澳洲内阁安全会议（National Security Committee）讨论了三项牵涉到国际招标的军备案，其中虽然不确定潜艇案是否已经有结论，但日本潜艇提案已经被排除，德国、法国还在竞争中。
主要理由不是什么性能上的缺陷，而是澳洲官方认为，日本官僚体制明显对这项军备输出兴趣缺缺，在长期会有远患，日本可能反悔取消（文中用undo）。日本潜艇浮上台面，是澳洲前首相托尼.艾伯特与安倍联手强力推动，但托尼.艾伯特去年9月下台了，安倍也不可能永远在台上。
（这是情有可原，大家已经看得明白，只因为安倍晋三这个家伙在台上不断带著防卫省，推著川崎与三菱这两家态度消极被动的厂商往前走，日本才一直参加竞争到现在，否则日本厂商早该在去年11月30日提交文件截止时就出局了；这两家日本厂商的潜艇部门根本不太想为一个竞标程序提供那些他们视为机密的参数技术，甚至连完成文件都有困难。安倍不会永远在台上，下一任日本首相跟他的防卫大臣态度会怎样？又回到过去日本的万年常模？天晓得，说不定届时日本真的取消或刁难。安倍虽然通过防卫技术转移三原则，但事在人为，下一个无心输出军火的政府照样可以让法条变成摆设）
另外，先前外界盛传的说法（包括前澳洲官员在公开媒体投书），美国私下支持澳洲选择日本潜艇，因为美国不会愿意把最先进的潜艇战斗系统装在欧洲潜艇上，其实这也是很合理的推测。然而，这篇ABC报导指出，澳洲政府已经获得奥巴玛政府确认，选什么潜艇是澳洲家里的事，绝不影响美国与澳洲的军事同盟，无论澳洲选谁家的潜艇。如果此消息为真，澳洲非选日本不可的理由就不存在了。
当然，报导还是强调，澳洲首相Mr Turnbull对任何消息都不作证实，甚至没证实结果揭晓的日期是否在7月澳洲大选之后。现在悉尼港里有艘苍龙型潜艇来访，估计在日本打道回府前，澳洲不会公布正式决定。
ps.现在澳洲潜艇案重要背景事件是：今年7月2日的澳洲下议院大选───这也是托尼.艾伯特去年被拉下来的关键因素。原本日本方案在澳洲国内最不受欢迎，是因为日方不愿转移技术，托尼.艾伯特也愿意潜艇在日本建造，这成为工党大加挞伐之处。现在虽然连日本都迫于形势愿意在澳洲建造，但工业合作的条件与经验肯定没有德国与法国厂商丰富。原本日本厂商在澳洲公关是最消极最不给力的，即便这几个月急起直追应该都还存在劣势，主要就是靠美日澳同盟的政治优势在推动。要不是7月的大选，说不定潜艇订单早给日本了，而日本潜艇也真的可能因为澳洲内部这个因素而翻船。
自由党可能因此在大选前宣布潜艇建造方案，确保南澳地区的工作机会然后拉拢选票。如果澳洲国防部有办法熬到大选结束再公布结果，日本潜艇胜算可能会增加；没了选票压力，谁管南澳有多少工作机会？
自由党感受压力，觉得必须在大选前公布潜艇建造计画安定南澳人心，足见澳洲先前舆论对于自由党、日本潜艇这方面的印象是多么负面。托尼.艾伯特执政时不保证潜艇会澳洲建造，国防部长凯文.安德森也说澳洲只会集成战系，当时甚至高调批评南澳方面要求潜艇在南澳建造的言论，他的前任大卫.琼斯敦甚至曾批评南澳的ASC船厂「连造一艘独木舟都有问题」....
即便托尼.艾伯特下台后继任首相对此态度大转变，还是难以扭转先前的恶劣印象。甚至竞争结果揭晓后，如果到时候还是自由党执政，还是有人怀疑自由党会片面推翻评估结果另外选择，这是有前例的（当年选择更新柯林斯潜艇的战斗系统时，原本程序选择德国系统，当时自由党政府却选择跟美国建立潜艇技术同盟，并且改成用美国战系）
个人观点：如果这是从澳洲内阁安全会议打听到的，则是有可能的；文中澳洲政府的顾虑完全是真实的，甚至可以确定澳洲内部本来就有这种声音，不太信任日本官僚体系对军备输出的诚意。然而即便会议中有这样的声音，也不代表已经是最后结论，而安全会议也不代表就决定澳洲政府的最后决定，还要看首相这边。
政府高层的考量也不等于澳洲海军的倾向，虽然澳洲军方过去已经有好几次因为政府当局考量工业合作等关系工作机会的考量，而选择澳洲军方比较不青睐的选项的纪录，包括舍柏克改而选西班牙F100防空护卫舰。
Submarine deal: Successful bid for new Royal Australian Navy boats to be announced next week
EXCLUSIVE BY POLITICAL EDITOR CHRIS UHLMANN
UPDATED WED AT 11:53AM
The Federal Government is preparing to announce the successful bidder for Australia's new fleet of submarines next week.
Key points:
Unknown if a final decision on the subs contract has been made
Coalition MPs and senators in SA have been pressing the Government for a decision
Window for announcement narrows with Budget looming
The ABC understands Cabinet's National Security Committee discussed the three international bids for the $50 billion contract last night.
While it is not clear if the committee has made a final decision, it has all but eliminated the Japanese bid to build a fleet of 12 submarines to replace the Royal Australian Navy's ageing Collins Class subs.
That leaves France and Germany still in the race.
Defence department officials have had reservations about the Japanese bid from the outset, because it emerged as an understanding struck between former prime minister Tony Abbott and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Officials feared there was less enthusiasm in the Japanese bureaucracy for the deal and that would undo it in the long run.
The Japanese bid has been pushed by some US officials who raised the prospect that America might not allow its most advanced combat systems to be installed in the European subs.
The Government is now convinced that is not that case and one senior source said President Barack Obama had made it clear to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull the submarine deal was a sovereign issue for Australia and there would be no implications for the alliance, no matter which bidder won.
This morning Mr Turnbull was not prepared to confirm whether the decision would be announced prior to the election.
"It will be made in due course, it will be made shortly," he told Adelaide radio station FIVEaa.
"I'm not going to be drawn on dates."
The lead up to the submarine contract has involved election promises, business and political campaigns and lots of speculation.
But with South Australian MPs and senators sweating on the announcement there is a small window in which it can be made.
There is currently a Japanese submarine in Sydney Harbour and the Government will not make any statement until it clears Australian waters.
The budget is on May 3 and shortly after that the Prime Minister will ask the Governor-General for an election and no major decisions can be made in the caretaker period.
The new submarine project has been embroiled in politics from the outset with the deal between prime ministers Abbott and Abe sparking fears in South Australia that it would lose its shipbuilding industry.
The political pressure on the Government did not dissipate, even after all three bidders made it clear the subs could be built entirely, or substantially, in Adelaide.
It has been a political gift for popular independent senator Nick Xenophon, who is running candidates in Lower House seats in South Australia at the July election.
Coalition MPs and senators in that state have been pressing the Government for a decision to try to stem the political bleeding that threatens several seats.
The window for the announcement has narrowed to next week, ahead of the budget.
Years of campaigning before announcement
The South Australian campaign to secure the submarine construction work for the state has been underway for about two years, Premier Jay Weatherill said yesterday.
Earlier this year the Defence White Paper revealed the Government planned to order 12 new vessels as part of its future submarine program.
（这就是自由党政府需要在选举前公布结果的关键原因：选票。Mr Weatherill 表示自由党政府必须这么做，明确宣示潜艇会在南澳建造，否则对自由党的选情可能会有负面影响。）
Mr Weatherill said a submarine announcement would be needed before the election to help Liberal Industry, Innovation and Science Minister Christopher Pyne retain the SA seat of Sturt at the federal election.
"I hope Christopher and the team are able to get that organised before the federal election is announced because I think it would be politically suicidal for him not to do so," Mr Weatherill said.
The Liberals need to commit to building the next generation of submarines in Adelaide to avoid a potential voting backlash at the looming federal poll, a politics analyst said.
Professor in politics and international studies Carol Johnson, of the University of Adelaide, said there were electoral risks for the Liberals if Adelaide did not fare well from the submarines project.
"The problem is that the submarines are not only important for their build but also because of some of the high-tech components in it, so potentially it will still be damaging to the Liberals if they just have the ship build [offshore patrol vessels] and not the submarines as well," she said.
看来很多人只看标题就回文了，我只好把标题写跟说明写得更长更清楚。
这篇报导只是ABC的一则消息，内容是有可能的、靠谱的，文中的顾虑是真实的，但消息终究是未证实的，甚至澳洲是否下周就公布竞标结果都是推测，只因为5月3日澳洲要出台国防预算，所以外界就猜会在这个时间点公布潜艇案结果。照先前的消息，要等到6月以后。
原始新闻来自ABC的独家消息
2802588-3x2-460x307.jpg (47.85 KB, 下载次数: 31)
下载附件 保存到相册
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/20 ... utm_campaign=buffer
4月21日澳洲ABC的新闻，澳洲SEA 1000潜艇案即将在下周揭晓。
这篇报导释放的重磅独家消息是：ABC打听到前晚（4月20日）澳洲内阁安全会议（National Security Committee）讨论了三项牵涉到国际招标的军备案，其中虽然不确定潜艇案是否已经有结论，但日本潜艇提案已经被排除，德国、法国还在竞争中。
主要理由不是什么性能上的缺陷，而是澳洲官方认为，日本官僚体制明显对这项军备输出兴趣缺缺，在长期会有远患，日本可能反悔取消（文中用undo）。日本潜艇浮上台面，是澳洲前首相托尼.艾伯特与安倍联手强力推动，但托尼.艾伯特去年9月下台了，安倍也不可能永远在台上。
（这是情有可原，大家已经看得明白，只因为安倍晋三这个家伙在台上不断带著防卫省，推著川崎与三菱这两家态度消极被动的厂商往前走，日本才一直参加竞争到现在，否则日本厂商早该在去年11月30日提交文件截止时就出局了；这两家日本厂商的潜艇部门根本不太想为一个竞标程序提供那些他们视为机密的参数技术，甚至连完成文件都有困难。安倍不会永远在台上，下一任日本首相跟他的防卫大臣态度会怎样？又回到过去日本的万年常模？天晓得，说不定届时日本真的取消或刁难。安倍虽然通过防卫技术转移三原则，但事在人为，下一个无心输出军火的政府照样可以让法条变成摆设）
另外，先前外界盛传的说法（包括前澳洲官员在公开媒体投书），美国私下支持澳洲选择日本潜艇，因为美国不会愿意把最先进的潜艇战斗系统装在欧洲潜艇上，其实这也是很合理的推测。然而，这篇ABC报导指出，澳洲政府已经获得奥巴玛政府确认，选什么潜艇是澳洲家里的事，绝不影响美国与澳洲的军事同盟，无论澳洲选谁家的潜艇。如果此消息为真，澳洲非选日本不可的理由就不存在了。
当然，报导还是强调，澳洲首相Mr Turnbull对任何消息都不作证实，甚至没证实结果揭晓的日期是否在7月澳洲大选之后。现在悉尼港里有艘苍龙型潜艇来访，估计在日本打道回府前，澳洲不会公布正式决定。
ps.现在澳洲潜艇案重要背景事件是：今年7月2日的澳洲下议院大选───这也是托尼.艾伯特去年被拉下来的关键因素。原本日本方案在澳洲国内最不受欢迎，是因为日方不愿转移技术，托尼.艾伯特也愿意潜艇在日本建造，这成为工党大加挞伐之处。现在虽然连日本都迫于形势愿意在澳洲建造，但工业合作的条件与经验肯定没有德国与法国厂商丰富。原本日本厂商在澳洲公关是最消极最不给力的，即便这几个月急起直追应该都还存在劣势，主要就是靠美日澳同盟的政治优势在推动。要不是7月的大选，说不定潜艇订单早给日本了，而日本潜艇也真的可能因为澳洲内部这个因素而翻船。
自由党可能因此在大选前宣布潜艇建造方案，确保南澳地区的工作机会然后拉拢选票。如果澳洲国防部有办法熬到大选结束再公布结果，日本潜艇胜算可能会增加；没了选票压力，谁管南澳有多少工作机会？
自由党感受压力，觉得必须在大选前公布潜艇建造计画安定南澳人心，足见澳洲先前舆论对于自由党、日本潜艇这方面的印象是多么负面。托尼.艾伯特执政时不保证潜艇会澳洲建造，国防部长凯文.安德森也说澳洲只会集成战系，当时甚至高调批评南澳方面要求潜艇在南澳建造的言论，他的前任大卫.琼斯敦甚至曾批评南澳的ASC船厂「连造一艘独木舟都有问题」....
即便托尼.艾伯特下台后继任首相对此态度大转变，还是难以扭转先前的恶劣印象。甚至竞争结果揭晓后，如果到时候还是自由党执政，还是有人怀疑自由党会片面推翻评估结果另外选择，这是有前例的（当年选择更新柯林斯潜艇的战斗系统时，原本程序选择德国系统，当时自由党政府却选择跟美国建立潜艇技术同盟，并且改成用美国战系）
个人观点：如果这是从澳洲内阁安全会议打听到的，则是有可能的；文中澳洲政府的顾虑完全是真实的，甚至可以确定澳洲内部本来就有这种声音，不太信任日本官僚体系对军备输出的诚意。然而即便会议中有这样的声音，也不代表已经是最后结论，而安全会议也不代表就决定澳洲政府的最后决定，还要看首相这边。
政府高层的考量也不等于澳洲海军的倾向，虽然澳洲军方过去已经有好几次因为政府当局考量工业合作等关系工作机会的考量，而选择澳洲军方比较不青睐的选项的纪录，包括舍柏克改而选西班牙F100防空护卫舰。
Submarine deal: Successful bid for new Royal Australian Navy boats to be announced next week
EXCLUSIVE BY POLITICAL EDITOR CHRIS UHLMANN
UPDATED WED AT 11:53AM
The Federal Government is preparing to announce the successful bidder for Australia's new fleet of submarines next week.
Key points:
Unknown if a final decision on the subs contract has been made
Coalition MPs and senators in SA have been pressing the Government for a decision
Window for announcement narrows with Budget looming
The ABC understands Cabinet's National Security Committee discussed the three international bids for the $50 billion contract last night.
While it is not clear if the committee has made a final decision, it has all but eliminated the Japanese bid to build a fleet of 12 submarines to replace the Royal Australian Navy's ageing Collins Class subs.
That leaves France and Germany still in the race.
Defence department officials have had reservations about the Japanese bid from the outset, because it emerged as an understanding struck between former prime minister Tony Abbott and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Officials feared there was less enthusiasm in the Japanese bureaucracy for the deal and that would undo it in the long run.
The Japanese bid has been pushed by some US officials who raised the prospect that America might not allow its most advanced combat systems to be installed in the European subs.
The Government is now convinced that is not that case and one senior source said President Barack Obama had made it clear to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull the submarine deal was a sovereign issue for Australia and there would be no implications for the alliance, no matter which bidder won.
This morning Mr Turnbull was not prepared to confirm whether the decision would be announced prior to the election.
"It will be made in due course, it will be made shortly," he told Adelaide radio station FIVEaa.
"I'm not going to be drawn on dates."
The lead up to the submarine contract has involved election promises, business and political campaigns and lots of speculation.
But with South Australian MPs and senators sweating on the announcement there is a small window in which it can be made.
There is currently a Japanese submarine in Sydney Harbour and the Government will not make any statement until it clears Australian waters.
The budget is on May 3 and shortly after that the Prime Minister will ask the Governor-General for an election and no major decisions can be made in the caretaker period.
The new submarine project has been embroiled in politics from the outset with the deal between prime ministers Abbott and Abe sparking fears in South Australia that it would lose its shipbuilding industry.
The political pressure on the Government did not dissipate, even after all three bidders made it clear the subs could be built entirely, or substantially, in Adelaide.
It has been a political gift for popular independent senator Nick Xenophon, who is running candidates in Lower House seats in South Australia at the July election.
Coalition MPs and senators in that state have been pressing the Government for a decision to try to stem the political bleeding that threatens several seats.
The window for the announcement has narrowed to next week, ahead of the budget.
Years of campaigning before announcement
The South Australian campaign to secure the submarine construction work for the state has been underway for about two years, Premier Jay Weatherill said yesterday.
Earlier this year the Defence White Paper revealed the Government planned to order 12 new vessels as part of its future submarine program.
（这就是自由党政府需要在选举前公布结果的关键原因：选票。Mr Weatherill 表示自由党政府必须这么做，明确宣示潜艇会在南澳建造，否则对自由党的选情可能会有负面影响。）
Mr Weatherill said a submarine announcement would be needed before the election to help Liberal Industry, Innovation and Science Minister Christopher Pyne retain the SA seat of Sturt at the federal election.
"I hope Christopher and the team are able to get that organised before the federal election is announced because I think it would be politically suicidal for him not to do so," Mr Weatherill said.
The Liberals need to commit to building the next generation of submarines in Adelaide to avoid a potential voting backlash at the looming federal poll, a politics analyst said.
Professor in politics and international studies Carol Johnson, of the University of Adelaide, said there were electoral risks for the Liberals if Adelaide did not fare well from the submarines project.
"The problem is that the submarines are not only important for their build but also because of some of the high-tech components in it, so potentially it will still be damaging to the Liberals if they just have the ship build [offshore patrol vessels] and not the submarines as well," she said.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/d ... ustralias-new-subs/
当然，日本「外交学者」网站立刻回应一篇「日本潜艇真的出局了吗」？其中提到这也只是ABC的孤立消息，没有佐证，也与先前外界已知的
信息违背。更早些还有一篇消息说「德国潜艇因技术因素将出局」，在尘埃落定前外界什么流言都有。
反正，SEA 1000本来就会在今年上半（原本说是6月）确定；就算不是下周，也快了。到时候就知道谁的脸被打。
Did Japan Just Lose the Bid to Build Australia's New Subs?
The Australian government has allegedly ruled out Japan’s sub bid, according to an Australian media report.
L1001025
By Franz-Stefan Gady
April 21, 2016
182 1 2
185 Shares
The Cabinet of Australia’s National Security Committee has purportedly ruled out Japan’s bid for a $50 billion ($38.8 billion) contract–Australia’s largest defense deal ever–to build the country’s new submarine fleet in partnership with Australian industry, according to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).
“While it is not clear if the committee has made a final decision, it has all but eliminated the Japanese bid to build a fleet of 12 submarines to replace the Royal Australian Navy’s ageing Collins Class subs,” ABC revealed this Wednesday. Japan is offering a variant of its 4,000-ton Soryu-class diesel-electric attack stealth submarine fitted with a new lithium-ion battery propulsion system.
Australian defense officials have voiced their concerns over a Japanese offer that initially emerged as an “understanding struck between [former Australia Prime Minister Tony] Abbott and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe,” the report continued.
Among other things, the Australian Defense Department appears concerned that any deal signed with Japan could be negated by the powerful Japanese bureaucracy, which allegedly showed ”less enthusiasm (…) for the deal and that would undo it in the long run.”
Quiet U.S. pressure to opt for the Japanese submarines–U.S. officials allegedly indicated that the United States would not allow its most advanced weapons systems to be installed on European-made subs–has also apparently been dropped. U.S. President Barack Obama made it clear to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull that the submarine deal was a sovereign issue of Australia and that the selection of France or Germany would not in any way affect the Australia-U.S. alliance.
The news that Japan has apparently lost the bid comes a day after Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), one of two Japanese shipmakers building Soryu-class subs–the second Japanese defense contractor building the boats is Kawasaki Shipbuilding Corporation–established a fully owned subsidiary in Sydney.
The subsidiary was setup to “to strengthen ties with Australia’s governmental institutions and economic and industrial sectors” and “to serve as a base for developing relationships with Australia’s academic bodies, including universities and research institutes,” according to an April 19 report by The Japan Times that quotes an MHI press release.
It is also worthwhile noting that in November 2014, Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation References Committee rejected the Soryu-class as an option.
As I reported previously:
In February 2015, the Australian government asked Germany, France, and Japan to bid for the country’s largest defense procurement program (the so-called SEA-1000 acquisition project)—a contract to build up to 12 new submarines for the Australian Royal Navy, replacing the six Collins-class submarines currently in service.
The requirements outlined in the bid including a 4,000-ton displacement, a range and endurance similar to theCollins-class submarines, sensor performance and stealth abilities better than the Collins, and a combat system and heavyweight torpedo developed jointly by the U.S. and Australia as the preferred combat system and armament, makes an off-the-shelf solution not an option.
As I outlined before, the Australian submariner community has remained skeptical of the Soryu-class boats:
Among other things, they point out that on average Japanese subs are constructed to last for around 19 years, whereas the Australian governments expects at least a 30-year active service life span. The Japanese boats also have much less accommodation space than Collins-class submarines.
Additionally, the much talked about air-independent propulsion (AIP) system is actually Swedish technology. However, the Australian government has so far not shown any interest in AIP, preferring a lithium-ion battery option, which will be built into the next batch of Soryu-class subs. Nevertheless, advanced lithium-ion batteries are one of Japan’s top military secrets and it seems unlikely that Tokyo has agreed to share this sensitive technology with Canberra despite media reports.
There is also a safety concern over the use of advanced lithium-ion batteries as a former submarine engineer recently pointed out: “In the life of 100,000 [lithium-ion] cells and a fleet of 12 submarines there is likely to be a failure that cannot be stopped or controlled, with a catastrophic outcome. The Boeing 787 battery fires and the burning of the US Navy’s Advanced Seal Delivery System are reminders that contemporary lithium-ion is not yet safe enough for submarines.”
In addition, I explained:
The Japanese subs also allegedly have less range than the current Collins-class submarines in service. Furthermore, another concern is the integration of a U.S. combat system and weapons ( Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS heavyweight torpedoes) into the Japanese hull.
However, Japan recently issued a report claiming that concerns over the submarine’s limited cruising range were unfounded.
Overall, the ABC report cannot be verified independently and has to be taken with a grain of salt. As I reported in January 2016 (See: “Has Germany Lost the Bid to Build Australia’s New Submarines?”),Germany allegedly also has already lost the bid over technical concerns, according to information supplied by an anonymous industry source. Yet the recent ABC report makes it clear that Germany continues to be one of the three contenders.
当然，日本「外交学者」网站立刻回应一篇「日本潜艇真的出局了吗」？其中提到这也只是ABC的孤立消息，没有佐证，也与先前外界已知的
信息违背。更早些还有一篇消息说「德国潜艇因技术因素将出局」，在尘埃落定前外界什么流言都有。
反正，SEA 1000本来就会在今年上半（原本说是6月）确定；就算不是下周，也快了。到时候就知道谁的脸被打。
Did Japan Just Lose the Bid to Build Australia's New Subs?
The Australian government has allegedly ruled out Japan’s sub bid, according to an Australian media report.
L1001025
By Franz-Stefan Gady
April 21, 2016
182 1 2
185 Shares
The Cabinet of Australia’s National Security Committee has purportedly ruled out Japan’s bid for a $50 billion ($38.8 billion) contract–Australia’s largest defense deal ever–to build the country’s new submarine fleet in partnership with Australian industry, according to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC).
“While it is not clear if the committee has made a final decision, it has all but eliminated the Japanese bid to build a fleet of 12 submarines to replace the Royal Australian Navy’s ageing Collins Class subs,” ABC revealed this Wednesday. Japan is offering a variant of its 4,000-ton Soryu-class diesel-electric attack stealth submarine fitted with a new lithium-ion battery propulsion system.
Australian defense officials have voiced their concerns over a Japanese offer that initially emerged as an “understanding struck between [former Australia Prime Minister Tony] Abbott and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe,” the report continued.
Among other things, the Australian Defense Department appears concerned that any deal signed with Japan could be negated by the powerful Japanese bureaucracy, which allegedly showed ”less enthusiasm (…) for the deal and that would undo it in the long run.”
Quiet U.S. pressure to opt for the Japanese submarines–U.S. officials allegedly indicated that the United States would not allow its most advanced weapons systems to be installed on European-made subs–has also apparently been dropped. U.S. President Barack Obama made it clear to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull that the submarine deal was a sovereign issue of Australia and that the selection of France or Germany would not in any way affect the Australia-U.S. alliance.
The news that Japan has apparently lost the bid comes a day after Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), one of two Japanese shipmakers building Soryu-class subs–the second Japanese defense contractor building the boats is Kawasaki Shipbuilding Corporation–established a fully owned subsidiary in Sydney.
The subsidiary was setup to “to strengthen ties with Australia’s governmental institutions and economic and industrial sectors” and “to serve as a base for developing relationships with Australia’s academic bodies, including universities and research institutes,” according to an April 19 report by The Japan Times that quotes an MHI press release.
It is also worthwhile noting that in November 2014, Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation References Committee rejected the Soryu-class as an option.
As I reported previously:
In February 2015, the Australian government asked Germany, France, and Japan to bid for the country’s largest defense procurement program (the so-called SEA-1000 acquisition project)—a contract to build up to 12 new submarines for the Australian Royal Navy, replacing the six Collins-class submarines currently in service.
The requirements outlined in the bid including a 4,000-ton displacement, a range and endurance similar to theCollins-class submarines, sensor performance and stealth abilities better than the Collins, and a combat system and heavyweight torpedo developed jointly by the U.S. and Australia as the preferred combat system and armament, makes an off-the-shelf solution not an option.
As I outlined before, the Australian submariner community has remained skeptical of the Soryu-class boats:
Among other things, they point out that on average Japanese subs are constructed to last for around 19 years, whereas the Australian governments expects at least a 30-year active service life span. The Japanese boats also have much less accommodation space than Collins-class submarines.
Additionally, the much talked about air-independent propulsion (AIP) system is actually Swedish technology. However, the Australian government has so far not shown any interest in AIP, preferring a lithium-ion battery option, which will be built into the next batch of Soryu-class subs. Nevertheless, advanced lithium-ion batteries are one of Japan’s top military secrets and it seems unlikely that Tokyo has agreed to share this sensitive technology with Canberra despite media reports.
There is also a safety concern over the use of advanced lithium-ion batteries as a former submarine engineer recently pointed out: “In the life of 100,000 [lithium-ion] cells and a fleet of 12 submarines there is likely to be a failure that cannot be stopped or controlled, with a catastrophic outcome. The Boeing 787 battery fires and the burning of the US Navy’s Advanced Seal Delivery System are reminders that contemporary lithium-ion is not yet safe enough for submarines.”
In addition, I explained:
The Japanese subs also allegedly have less range than the current Collins-class submarines in service. Furthermore, another concern is the integration of a U.S. combat system and weapons ( Mk 48 Mod 7 CBASS heavyweight torpedoes) into the Japanese hull.
However, Japan recently issued a report claiming that concerns over the submarine’s limited cruising range were unfounded.
Overall, the ABC report cannot be verified independently and has to be taken with a grain of salt. As I reported in January 2016 (See: “Has Germany Lost the Bid to Build Australia’s New Submarines?”),Germany allegedly also has already lost the bid over technical concerns, according to information supplied by an anonymous industry source. Yet the recent ABC report makes it clear that Germany continues to be one of the three contenders.
吹了一年，终于吹破了。
看来以前超大对苍龙的估计还是太乐观了。
有必要这么快解释吗？不观察多几天？
鬼子把自己的东西当成宝了
吧里日吹何在？
tg007 发表于 2016-4-21 15:16
有必要这么快解释吗？不观察多几天？
我提到的每一种考量都是已经存在而且有道理的，可以当作对澳洲状况认知的科普。
而且说不定这篇新闻就是纯粹放小道消息，下周结果并没有出台也说不定。
如果澳洲国防部熬到大选之后才宣布，日本潜艇胜算就会增加，因为没了大选压力谁管花更多钱去支持工合方案提供南澳工作机会？
有必要这么快解释吗？不观察多几天？
我提到的每一种考量都是已经存在而且有道理的，可以当作对澳洲状况认知的科普。
而且说不定这篇新闻就是纯粹放小道消息，下周结果并没有出台也说不定。
如果澳洲国防部熬到大选之后才宣布，日本潜艇胜算就会增加，因为没了大选压力谁管花更多钱去支持工合方案提供南澳工作机会？
一直不关心羊矿洲选啥，不过看在某些人围绕此事上蹿下跳的辛苦劲上，姑且顶一下吧……
一直不关心羊矿洲选啥，不过看在某些人围绕此事上蹿下跳的辛苦劲上，姑且顶一下吧……
我还是觉得澳大利亚会选择日本的，毕竟这个对美国主导下的美日澳军事同盟意义重大 美国一定会施压澳大利亚选择日本潜艇 ，在安全上 澳大利亚无力反抗美国
等等再看 反正不会太久
漆室葵忧 发表于 2016-4-21 15:13
看来以前超大对苍龙的估计还是太乐观了。
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
袋鼠国现在明显就是首鼠两端，帮美帝摇旗呐喊甚至跟着美帝后面巡航南海这些都是做了就过去的事情，明天马上翻脸跟土共抛媚眼都没有心理压力。而买了11区潜艇那就是坐实了跟着美帝一条路走到黑，除非把潜艇自沉了否则永远都是和11区勾搭的铁证
最好的例子就是欧洲各个国家见老蛤蟆N次都没有大碍，荷兰、法国卖给4V潜艇和战斗机就被土共猛搞很多年
看来以前超大对苍龙的估计还是太乐观了。
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
袋鼠国现在明显就是首鼠两端，帮美帝摇旗呐喊甚至跟着美帝后面巡航南海这些都是做了就过去的事情，明天马上翻脸跟土共抛媚眼都没有心理压力。而买了11区潜艇那就是坐实了跟着美帝一条路走到黑，除非把潜艇自沉了否则永远都是和11区勾搭的铁证
最好的例子就是欧洲各个国家见老蛤蟆N次都没有大碍，荷兰、法国卖给4V潜艇和战斗机就被土共猛搞很多年
撸发冲天 发表于 2016-4-21 16:19
我还是觉得澳大利亚会选择日本的，毕竟这个对美国主导下的美日澳军事同盟意义重大 美国一定会施压澳大利亚 ...
袋鼠国有安全问题么？
除非三体人来了，否则地球人都不会去入侵他们
丫现在就是想骑墙到底
我还是觉得澳大利亚会选择日本的，毕竟这个对美国主导下的美日澳军事同盟意义重大 美国一定会施压澳大利亚 ...
袋鼠国有安全问题么？
除非三体人来了，否则地球人都不会去入侵他们
丫现在就是想骑墙到底
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-21 17:00
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
http://sn.people.com.cn/n2/2016/0420/c358036-28182520.html
经济跟战略可能被分开处理。
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
http://sn.people.com.cn/n2/2016/0420/c358036-28182520.html
经济跟战略可能被分开处理。
等结果出来的那天，脚盆有哭的一天。
onepiece 发表于 2016-4-21 17:34
http://sn.people.com.cn/n2/2016/0420/c358036-28182520.html
经济跟战略可能被分开处理。
经济和战略既不会完全绑定但也不可能完全分开
对于这些国家，明智的做法就是可以有倾向，但不要明确站队
中美一天没有真正开打冷战，他们就尽量骑墙一天
没见英国前阵子和中国打得火热，最近又开始帮着美帝说中国改变南海现状云云了么？
http://sn.people.com.cn/n2/2016/0420/c358036-28182520.html
经济跟战略可能被分开处理。
经济和战略既不会完全绑定但也不可能完全分开
对于这些国家，明智的做法就是可以有倾向，但不要明确站队
中美一天没有真正开打冷战，他们就尽量骑墙一天
没见英国前阵子和中国打得火热，最近又开始帮着美帝说中国改变南海现状云云了么？
我不怎么看，日奥两家合作，是好是事，一个敢于发动战争的日本，才是好日本，中日战争对中国崛起及其有利
这是个不好信息
就是要把日本胆子养肥，养成一条敢于发动战争的日本，才是好日本
中国需要战争来崛起
正好日本堵住了去路
简直是瞌睡来了，有枕头
袋鼠国么，安心独霸澳洲就好了……再想多的那都是浮云。
这个国家的军事化有多大的必要性，恐怕袋鼠们自己都应该打个问号——所以肯定是便宜料足，更重要的是保护费交对人最重要啦。
所以袋鼠Leader的正确决定当然买美国的。
美国的最差也买美国的，美国的最贵那就少买点。跟别人谈那都是为了压价，虽然压不压价其实不太重要。
如果它不这么想，作为一只小兔子我谢谢他。
这个国家的军事化有多大的必要性，恐怕袋鼠们自己都应该打个问号——所以肯定是便宜料足，更重要的是保护费交对人最重要啦。
所以袋鼠Leader的正确决定当然买美国的。
美国的最差也买美国的，美国的最贵那就少买点。跟别人谈那都是为了压价，虽然压不压价其实不太重要。
如果它不这么想，作为一只小兔子我谢谢他。
脚盆鸡自用的AIP都是问瑞典买的，技术都未必吃透就拿去外贸，这tm不是坑爹吗？
买德国的是一个多方都能接受的方案
着俩天一直在口水，就没停下过，但是德国人说如果在澳洲干，这事得涨价。因为澳洲人没经验，干不好。澳洲人说你们的人我们不用太贵了，如果用我们的人至少人力成本就能降好多。这还得口水。
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
文章里没一个字提到中国
澳大利亚的巡逻机可是长年在南海巡逻的，根本不怕得罪中国
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
文章里没一个字提到中国
澳大利亚的巡逻机可是长年在南海巡逻的，根本不怕得罪中国
撒西哈拉 发表于 2016-4-21 20:47
文章里没一个字提到中国
澳大利亚的巡逻机可是长年在南海巡逻的，根本不怕得罪中国
谁会明说我怕得罪中国？
文章里没一个字提到中国
澳大利亚的巡逻机可是长年在南海巡逻的，根本不怕得罪中国
谁会明说我怕得罪中国？
2016-4-21 21:26 上传
库洛伊德 发表于 2016-4-21 21:27
袋鼠招标的这个玩意可不是为了安全问题
根据澳大利亚的招标书,要求巡逻半径应超过3500公里，最大可能为5 ...
“澳大利亚没有安全问题”是客观事实
“澳大利亚招标要求巡逻半径3500公里”是他们的主观要求
袋鼠招标的这个玩意可不是为了安全问题
根据澳大利亚的招标书,要求巡逻半径应超过3500公里，最大可能为5 ...
“澳大利亚没有安全问题”是客观事实
“澳大利亚招标要求巡逻半径3500公里”是他们的主观要求
吹了也好，日本军工少个500亿美元的经费入账，要是苍龙巡逻半径没2000海里，生意成了也好，省的袋鼠买了潜艇就到南海来搞事
买法国货好了，以前法国曾是最不使美国省心的盟国，但萨科齐上台以后愈发朝美国跟班方向发展了。
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-21 17:03
袋鼠国有安全问题么？
除非三体人来了，否则地球人都不会去入侵他们
当年日本人就差点登陆澳洲了，还空袭了澳洲北部几个城市。
这次日本潜艇开进悉尼，就有新闻说有澳大利亚的二战老兵回忆起当年日本潜艇击沉澳大利亚的医院船、渡船之类民用船只。
袋鼠国有安全问题么？
除非三体人来了，否则地球人都不会去入侵他们
当年日本人就差点登陆澳洲了，还空袭了澳洲北部几个城市。
这次日本潜艇开进悉尼，就有新闻说有澳大利亚的二战老兵回忆起当年日本潜艇击沉澳大利亚的医院船、渡船之类民用船只。
yummism_china 发表于 2016-4-21 23:07
当年日本人就差点登陆澳洲了，还空袭了澳洲北部几个城市。
这次日本潜艇开进悉尼，就有新闻说有澳大利 ...
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
当年日本人就差点登陆澳洲了，还空袭了澳洲北部几个城市。
这次日本潜艇开进悉尼，就有新闻说有澳大利 ...
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
坐等看好戏吧！我估计11区单子要吹。
看来我要重看一遍上一期的寰宇大战略了
来自: 手机APP客户端
来自: 手机APP客户端
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-22 00:19
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
深仇大恨也要看对比啊。毕竟这是澳大利亚本土第一次遭到攻击。之前一战的德国都是在海上并且力量非常有限。
再说直接击沉医院船也够严重了。
只不过毕竟都是美国的盟友，当年那点事也被遮住了。
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
深仇大恨也要看对比啊。毕竟这是澳大利亚本土第一次遭到攻击。之前一战的德国都是在海上并且力量非常有限。
再说直接击沉医院船也够严重了。
只不过毕竟都是美国的盟友，当年那点事也被遮住了。
铺垫了大半年 这要吹了 日杂岂不是很尴尬苍龙这东西，能拿到瑞典aip还是德国人脑子犯浑的结果，不是蒂森要垄断对应细分强行收购考库姆并且将至雪藏，就没瑞典政府委托saab收购考库姆这事，瑞典在之后将技术扩散估计也就没了。
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-22 00:19
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
深仇大恨要看现实的政治需求。
1980年代中国也没跟日本计较什么「深仇大恨」
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
深仇大恨要看现实的政治需求。
1980年代中国也没跟日本计较什么「深仇大恨」
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-21 17:00
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
“有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
袋鼠国现在明显就是首鼠两端，帮美帝摇旗呐喊甚至跟着美帝后面巡航南海这些都是做了就过去的事情，明天马上翻脸跟土共抛媚眼都没有心理压力。而买了11区潜艇那就是坐实了跟着美帝一条路走到黑，除非把潜艇自沉了否则永远都是和11区勾搭的铁证
最好的例子就是欧洲各个国家见老蛤蟆N次都没有大碍，荷兰、法国卖给4V潜艇和战斗机就被土共猛搞很多年”——这话很经典啊！
我认为最关键还是怕得罪土共
有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
“有些事情就是可以做但不能留下实证
袋鼠国现在明显就是首鼠两端，帮美帝摇旗呐喊甚至跟着美帝后面巡航南海这些都是做了就过去的事情，明天马上翻脸跟土共抛媚眼都没有心理压力。而买了11区潜艇那就是坐实了跟着美帝一条路走到黑，除非把潜艇自沉了否则永远都是和11区勾搭的铁证
最好的例子就是欧洲各个国家见老蛤蟆N次都没有大碍，荷兰、法国卖给4V潜艇和战斗机就被土共猛搞很多年”——这话很经典啊！
SayUSayMe 发表于 2016-4-22 00:19
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
怎么说呢，当年在新几内亚，日本兵可是真吃了不少澳大利亚士兵的人肉啊！
但澳大利亚和日本毕竟没有深仇大恨
怎么说呢，当年在新几内亚，日本兵可是真吃了不少澳大利亚士兵的人肉啊！
yummism_china 发表于 2016-4-22 02:10
深仇大恨也要看对比啊。毕竟这是澳大利亚本土第一次遭到攻击。之前一战的德国都是在海上并且力量非常有限 ...
另外当年在新几内亚，日本兵可是真吃了不少澳大利亚士兵的人肉啊！
深仇大恨也要看对比啊。毕竟这是澳大利亚本土第一次遭到攻击。之前一战的德国都是在海上并且力量非常有限 ...
另外当年在新几内亚，日本兵可是真吃了不少澳大利亚士兵的人肉啊！
澳大利亚新潜艇采购项目本来就没鬼子啥事，本来就是德国、法国和瑞典三家之间的竞争，德国人早在澳大利亚刚提出新潜艇采购计划的时候就开始跟踪，瑞典人是借参与澳大利亚科林斯项目继续介入，法国人参与较晚，鬼子参与最晚，结果上届澳大利亚政府在未经招标的情况下直接确定日本方案，此事当时就在澳大利亚国内引发了不少议论和批评。