And you missed the point. I really dont care what parameters are perceived as better or worse for the alternatives.
We have an active contract with probably heavily penalties for termination. I dont believe that there will be just a termination for convenience clause here. As taxpayers, we need proper due process here.
DCNS makes a nuclear sub. The sub previously chosen is that sub with a different propulsion unit. At least its actually been assessed to some degree againt its competition.
Perhaps there are other nuclear subs, if the requirement has changed.
It should be contested in the market, at least if not USA/Brit vs the French sub at a minimum.
As to the current budget position of the project by DCNS, the fact its over right now does not mean the project budget wont come in later. Given the USA's appaling history of delivering military technology on time/on budget, you cant yet criticise the French at this point in proceedings and then replace them with a producer with another bad track record.
