I nside the cavernous factory, about 1½ times the size of a soccer field, three submarines are being built for three different customers.
At the front is a smaller sub, under construction for Singapore, although the company won't confirm the customer. Behind it is a larger submarine being built for the Israelis. Out the back, the finishing touches are being applied to a U-boat for the German navy after being "baptised" in the chilly Kiel fjord.
It is this ability to tailor-make submarines for a raft of countries that German industrial behemoth ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems hopes gives it the edge in the race to win the contract to build the new generation of Australian submarines to replace the maligned Collins Class boats from the early 2030s. 
With a $50 billion price tag to build 12 new subs, the Turnbull Government is close to announcing which of the three contenders has been successful.
It is a decision that has many factors flowing into consideration. It is not just which boat offers regional superiority and gets the best deal for taxpayers but also what is the future of the government-owned Australian Submarine Corporation, job creation and industry development and parish-pump politics. 
Australian Strategic Policy Institute defence and strategy program director Andrew Davies said Australia's submarine requirements were unique, requiring a non-nuclear-powered boat that had range and endurance - one that could be more than a month at sea and travel 3500 nautical miles.
"We send our submarines a greater distance than most European submarines, in particular, will travel in an entire mission - ours have to go that far before they start their mission," he told Agenda.
"You draw some circles on maps on how far 3500 nautical miles is and it will take them well up into the South China Sea or Bay of Bengal."
Australia's close relationship with the US means the new submarines will also use American combat systems, making it easier for the two navies to work together and share data.
It has been suggested the US wants Australia to go with the Japanese as a way to strengthen the tripartite relationship and help serve as a bulwark to China's ambitions in the South China Sea.
But serving US military officials say they are agnostic on the choice and Australian Defence insiders maintain there is no bias towards Tokyo.
On the flip side, there is a school of thought that going with a European project would avoid rousing Chinese ire.
That Australia is even seriously considering rival bids is a shift from the initial approach under Tony Abbott's leadership, when it was widely assumed he had struck a secret deal with Japanese counterpart Shinzo Abe for the submarines to be built in Japan.
Faced with the threat to his leadership in   February last year, Mr Abbott promised South Australian Liberals the submarine project would be subjected to a "competitive evaluation process", including the option of building the boats locally.
That has whittled the contenders down to the three finalists from Germany, France and Japan.
While the detailed specifics of what their boats would be capable of remain confidential, each offers Australia something unique.
TKMS cites its experience working with customer nations on building boats to meet their specific needs.
Since 1960, it has been contracted to build more than 160 subs for 20 nations, including 51 boats built in a customer's home country.
On a tour for Australian journalists this week, the company is offering to replicate its Kiel shipyard in Adelaide so all 12 boats can be built locally from day one at a price that is no more than it could cost to make the subs in Germany.
Phil Stanford, the chief executive of TKMS Australia and a former Collins Class submarine commander, said the company's export experience, willingness to transfer skills, technology and construction to Australia would minimise risk, deliver a regionally superior boat and create a sovereign submarine industry.
"I believe the TKMS bid provides an international partner that has experience in developing submarine technology to provide leading-edge conventional submarines," he said.
DCNS, which has the French Government as majority shareholder, is touting the stealth advantages of the quieter pump-jet propulsion system it plans to use over noisier conventional propellers.
"The Shortfin Barracuda will be the recipient of France's most sensitive and protected submarine technology and will be the most lethal conventional submarine ever contemplated," chief executive Sean Costello said.
While Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Kawasaki Heavy Industries would build Japan's submarine, the Japanese Government is running the bid, elevating it to government-to-government status rather than just being a simple commercial venture.
For Japan, long-restricted by its pacifist constitution, the submarine deal represents a watershed and would be the first time it has exported war machines to another country. 
Japan has been the most secretive about its bid. It is using an existing design, the Soryu class, as the basis for its offer. Japan gets to show off the capability of the Soryu class over the next few days after sending one of its submarines to Sydney for joint naval exercises.
But there has also been underwater sniping going on between rivals over perceived shortcomings. For example, the Soryu class would require extensive modifications for Australian needs, from bigger fuel tanks to increase range through to larger bunks because Australian submariners are taller.
Stung by a critical online article by a defence publication last week, Japanese Ambassador Sumio Kusaka defended the design, which used "accumulated experience and proven technologies".
DCNS faces difficulty converting its nuclear-powered design to a diesel-electric version and TKMS's weakness is it has never built a submarine as big as Australia wants.
TKMS countered this week that they have shown they can make boats bigger as postwar restrictions on size were eased.
Senior ministers are understood to now have the recommendations of the competitive evaluation process but whether they will announce the winner before the election campaign remains unclear.
Caretaker conventions dictate that governments don't enter into major contracts during campaigns, meaning an announcement would have to be before   May 11 if a double dissolution election were to be held on   July 2.
As a stop-gap, the Government may announce that whoever gets the contract will have to build in Adelaide.
It is now seen as inevitable the South Australian capital will be the focus of the assembly work to save the seats of government MPs in the rust-bucket State. With the demise of local car making, SA is positioning itself as the centre of defence industries to give its ailing economy a boost and is also chasing surface ship building contracts.
But defence contracts are also a lifeline for WA. Skills and technology for the oil and gas industry are seen as easily transferable to submarine construction and maintenance - something that makes even more sense given the new submarine fleet will be based at HMAS Stirling.
For example, Henderson-based steel fabricator Civmec, at its own expense, showed what it was capable of by casting a piece of hull using designs from Germany. 
And with plans for a new fleet of Offshore Patrol Vessels also going through a competitive evaluation process, Perth shipbuilders Austal and BAE Systems are keen on that project. 
WA Liberal Senator Linda Reynolds, who has taken the lead on the push as co-convener of the WA Defence Industry Council, argues South Australia should not be allowed to monopolise shipbuilding and maintenance.
"WA is highly competitive and well-placed to participate not only in the build but also in the long-term sustainment and maintenance of the next submarine fleet," she said.
Both the French and German companies promise there will be opportunities for WA companies in the submarine project, but the extent of that involvement will depend on contractual negotiations.
DCNS says it has identified more than 60 WA companies that could be part of the supply chain and TKMS names Civmec and another WA fabricator, Hofmann Engineering, as having the type of expertise they need.
The bidders say they have no clue to how the Government is leaning. But once that $50 billion question is answered, hopefully it will be full speed ahead for Australia's biggest defence acquisition.
The reporter travelled to Germany courtesy of TKMS 
South Australia should not be allowed to monopolise shipbuilding. 
Senator Linda Reynolds