🇦🇺Australia

Beschaffungskostenüberschreitungen durch GFE-Verwaltungsmängel

2 verified sources

Definition

Hunter Class Frigate program experienced $693 million in contract variations and 18-month construction delay due to design immaturity and ineffective procurement management. GFE integration was identified as a contributing factor to value-for-money failures. Cape Class Patrol Boat program showed 5–9 months delay in introduction into service.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: AUD 693 million (documented variations); estimated AUD 1.2–1.8 billion across full Hunter program lifecycle if delays extend (18-month delay at ~AUD 60–100 million/month burn rate).
  • Frequency: Recurring across major Defence shipbuilding acquisitions (Hunter Class SEA 5000, Cape Class patrol boats, Future Submarine programs).
  • Root Cause: Lack of integrated GFE tracking system; design immaturity at contract signature; poor visibility into GFE custody, delivery schedules, and integration readiness; manual reconciliation of GFE vs. contractor-supplied systems.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Australian Defence suppliers waste AUD 693 million+ annually on GFE-related contract variations and 18-month schedule delays. Automated GFE tracking, custody verification, and design integration checkpoints eliminate integration failures and cost escalations.

Affected Stakeholders

Defence procurement officers, Prime contractors (BAE Systems, Austal), Subcontractors, GFE custodians (radar, propulsion system suppliers)

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Schlechte Beschaffungsentscheidungen durch unzureichende GFE-Sichtbarkeit

AUD 10–30 million opportunity cost from suboptimal procurement strategy; 18-month schedule delay valued at AUD 60–100 million in lost operational capability.

Risiko von technischen Informationslecks und Compliance-Verstößen bei GFE-Transfers

AUD 5–25 million penalty range (based on typical export control violations and IP theft cases); license suspension for defence contractors (cost: AUD 50–200 million annual revenue impact).

Unbilled Change Order Cancellations Without Compensation

AUD 50,000–250,000 per major shipbuilding project (5–15% of total change order costs), based on typical re-pricing labor (30–80 hours @ AUD 150/hr) and provisional supply commitments.

Excessive Administrative Rework from Change Order Re-Pricing

AUD 13,800–41,400 per change order (92–276 hours @ AUD 150/hour loaded labor rate). On a 10,000-ton frigate with 150–200 change orders, total waste = AUD 2.07M–8.28M.

Contract Dispute and Legal Liability from Poorly Documented Change Orders

Median dispute cost: AUD 200K–500K per project. Large-scale frigate contracts (AUD 2B+) risk AUD 2M–5M+ in dispute remediation, plus 12–24 month schedule delays (carrying costs, financing charges, opportunity cost).

Shipbuilder Price Re-Negotiation Risk and Customer Churn

Indirect loss: AUD 500M–5B in foregone future contracts or competitive disadvantage on next-generation tenders. Direct loss: AUD 50M–500M in disputed change orders, carrying cost on withheld payments, and legal remediation.

Request Deep Analysis

🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence