Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade
AMTP10E    7/8/2005 6:18:17 AM
JANE'S NAVY INTERNATIONAL - JULY 01, 2005 Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade Ian Bostock Additional issues with the upgrade of four Adelaide-class guided missile frigates (FFG) for the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) have pushed the programme further back and caused the delay of sea trials planned for the first completed ship, HMAS Sydney. The A$1 billion (US$761 million) project is already around two and a half years behind schedule due to issues that prime contractor ADI Limited continues to address, mostly in the area of systems integration. ADI has been unable to integrate all elements of the Australian Distributed Architecture Combat System with other combat system-related, undersea warfare and fire-control software. There are also reports of ship stability issues in HMAS Sydney due to the installation of a below-deck vertical-launch system forward. The delays prompted the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) to negotiate a contract-change proposal with ADI to extend the project's completion date by another 24 months. As a result of internal changes to the DMO's processes and contracting practices, the Australian Department of Defence has accepted a share of the responsibility for the delays. Acceptance of HMAS Sydney back into RAN service is now not expected until 2006. Until the ship successfully meets the trials programme criteria and is accepted back into service, the RAN will not release another FFG for ADI to begin work on. Complicating the issue is the recent discovery of hull cracking in several of the FFGs. Because of the implications for sea worthiness, sea trials with HMAS Sydney cannot commence until repairs are made. As the cracking is not related to the upgrade work being carried out by ADI, the RAN will meet the costs associated with repairs. These will be undertaken by ADI at its Garden Island facility. ADI had earlier proposed to the DMO a provisional acceptance of HMAS Sydney in late August this year. However, it will now, by its own admission, not be able to meet this deadline, the director of ADI's naval business group Ali Baghaei told JNI in early June. It is understood that a revised timetable to resolve the remaining software issues and for contractor sea trials will be released around this time. *-*-*-*-* There is a real chance that SYDNEY will never re-enter front line service again.
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2
gf0012-aust    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 7:00:03 AM
does that mean delisting or reduced to a training role like the old HMAS ANZAC?
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 7:19:04 AM
When are the FFGs going to be paid off.
 
Quote    Reply

AMTP10E    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 7:22:12 AM
Not sure. Navy has real incentives to get the FFG UP to work in a real hurry as it has all sorts of VERY bad implications. ADI is right next to Fergacs on my 'to bomb' list. There is a growing frustration with defence industry within Navy. The idea of build it here/upgrade it here isn't providing Navy with what it needs, when it needs it, and at a decent price.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 7:47:01 AM
On a side note, I noticed that the morons at ADI have gievn the Chinese 2 x HMEV's for evaluation. Now the silly ferkers have given them a copy of the Bushmaster, HSEV etc...as well and wonder why the Yanks think that they're a security risk. ;) to paraphrase bugs bunny, "what a maroon"
 
Quote    Reply

AussieEngineer    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 8:17:55 AM
Is ADI a private company? If it's not the government should sack whoever is incharge and employ someone competent for a change.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 11:25:53 AM
ADI - Another Dumb Institution.
 
Quote    Reply

ThePuss    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 11:26:26 AM
ADI was a 100% goverment owned company till only a few years ago.......then we sold it to the french. The buzzes I have heard about Sydney are not good. I sure wouldn't be keen to be on her in a rough sea :(
 
Quote    Reply

ThePuss    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 11:47:34 AM
In Addition to my last ADI(and im sure you all know this) used to stand for Australian Defence Industries. But the Technocrats(or what ever that means) Decided that a name like Australian Defence Industries would limit international sales.....Correct me if im wrong but the only significant international sales that Australian def.....Sorry ADI.... sale has been a few thousand Styer rifles to New Zealand (which was made in the Australian Defence Industries days). Dose it concern anybody else that the sole company that locally produces munitions for the ADF is entirely foreign owned...It sure worries me!
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear    RE:Delays continue for Australian FFG upgrade   7/8/2005 11:51:34 AM
Probably no worse than any other industry where everything is owned by foreigners. I remember the stink when Arnotts biscuits got bought by Heinz or some Yank outfit. The biscuits are still made in Brissy, ultimately who cares. I'm wondering if we shouldn't just get rid of all our OHP FFG's as soon as possible. Could we build half a dozen new build stretched Anzacs?
 
Quote    Reply

Cootamundra    How did they get it so wrong?   7/11/2005 12:46:48 AM
Fella's Excuse me for sounding a little surprised here but I can't understand why we are faced with this particular problem (and a large one at that). From what I can gather we have a defence contractor pushing back a project delivery timeframe because they've run into technical difficulties with regards to the VLS (ship stability) and combat systems integration....why the ferk weren't these things sorted out before they started ripping holes in one of our 4 remaining FFG's! Basic Project Management principles along with any half decent platform re-acrhitecture program should've ensured that a considerable amount of planning and re-design work had actually occurred before the deal was finalised with ADI. I mean this stuff up could end being critical - we have an opportunity for the FFG's to have a considerable capability improvement, the gov has fronted up with the $$$$'s yet we still can't seem to get it right. Is it that ADI are sh1thouse, or, is it that the old DMO was fecked, or, worse still is it that both orgs are buggered and now we are one ship down with the possibility of it never returning (according to our distinguised navy mates)? We need answers and someone ought to hang....this kind of e would not stand in the private sector. Coota
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy