Not wanting to seem like "Mr Mean" here, but the uproar over the budgetary austerity down here is reading off the scale, yet the PM is saying "what ever it takes" to find a plane that may not even be there, and realistically Australia has no more stake in than any random country.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...robust-history-of-rancor-and-barbed-comments/
First, as a Kiwi, i should say something ‘smart’ about Aussies paying for things, but i wont. Good on yer mate!
i have not been directly involved in this search, but in the ones i have; the initial search was conducted by the country who regard themselves as the ‘keeper’ of that section of the earths surface. In this case, Australia made a good choice, they really don't want China or India swanning around down there, they may want to stay.
Australia will ‘lead’ such a search, but use resources as needed. Sometimes a country will choose to regard it as a military training exercise, and sometimes, as here, will farm it out to suitable contractors.
As its usually a cost+ basis, and not a contract as such, the contractor might ask for monthly payments, but though possible, are rare.
Finally the job is done, plane found, or declared missing, and the bill is toted up. Technically, the Malaysian airline is responsible here, though the Malaysian government owns the airline, so they are finally responsible. They do pay the bill, though in many case, bills like this are rounded up into national debt, and finally become part of the IMF or World Bank settlement. Typically the contractor carries the cost burden until the job is finished, and then for a few years after that while the various parties (IMF etc) ‘discuss’ it, but eventually they are paid. Classically this takes a long time, so these companies need deep pockets to start with. These ‘companies’ are often consortiums, formed to do this particular job, share the cost burden, and grab individual experts as needed. These 'experts', like me, usually get expenses, but must wait for the end to get 'their' money as well. They roll the cost of money into their charges too, but it still takes years. The good companies (consortiums) have first class equipment, ships, and personnel, but there are, or were, a few seriously underfunded ‘shoestring’ operations out there. Normally Australia would only have to bear administrative costs immediately, but even that is eventually reimbursed.
Typically, the Americans, Boeing, and Universities are very generous, lending equipment and personnel at little or no charge. It gives them an opportunity to test new equipment, and techniques. The bill itself is subject to close scrutiny, so inventing and building new equipment is rarely sanctioned, but development of new equipment and techniques is always a possibility. Acoustic Inferomity being one such for underwater search.
Australia, or other selected host nations, might get access to the latest American and/or British SAR equipment, early, or at all. In this case P-8’s, or some surface assets early? I'm surprised we haven't heard more about MAD detection, perhaps its too deep, or there is too much metal in the sea bed.
