Continuous submarine production as an Australian procurement alternative

How could Australia have avoided the high cost and disruption of restarting submarine production?

It could have kept a slow continuous Collins-class build going, preserving skills and evolving the design instead of rebuilding the industrial base for each program.

The proposed alternative is to keep Collins-class construction alive at a slow but uninterrupted rate instead of closing the line after HMAS Rankin. A new submarine roughly every four or five years, combined with refit and maintenance work, could have retained the yard, supplier base, and experienced workforce. Several additional boats could then have expanded the fleet or allowed the oldest Collins hulls to be sold, reserved, or retired in sequence. Continuous production would also let the design evolve in service instead of forcing Australia to recreate an industrial base for a wholly separate successor program. Spare capacity and accumulated experience are long-term strategic assets whose loss makes the next procurement much more expensive.