Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

Status
Not open for further replies.

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
I think its written harshly from a preset negative view. Much of its criticisms aren't balanced or could be levelled at other participants. You could replace the word Japanese with French or German and it would be pretty much accurate.

I do think Australia joining the Japanese program will improve the Japanese program. Just like Australia signing up with the Germans or the French would be a big boost to their program.

I do think want the RAN would have in service will be quite different from Soryu, the Japanese have been very upfront about this. This isn't some sort of secret. It would be related but quiet different.

To say it in plain English, if the Collins were to fight the Soryu today Collins would kill it every time. And there is no technology offered by Japan to suggest any evolution of the Soryu can change this situation in the future.
Not so sure. This is the biggest issue I have with this story. That Soryu is worse than Collins, everywhere, implying that any Australia/Japan sub would then be worse than Collins. I don't think that accurate (or on what basis can you claim!). Its different, in many different areas. Built for very different purposes. Using that logic, Collins is inferior to the preceding Oberon class. After all Sweden had less technology, less know how, smaller size, less builds than the British.

I assume a decision has been made given the noises we have heard and the incoming election.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Off course those conducting the CEP have been totally oblivious to all these supposed shortcomings in Soryu and are happy to recommend an inferior sm to govt. they have also not examined any of the technology presented by other primes because they have predetermined the outcome due to a deal between Abe and Abbott.
Really, is it the authors God given gift to understand all Soryu shortcomings when others simply can't or won't? (Rant off)

It sounds like a grumpy Saab staff writer with a hell bent desire to discredit the Japanese offering. I'm not current enough to know whether some of the points are valid but I'm comfortable enough with the process, CEP, to know that the experts will choose the best compromise.
I'm also impressed enough by our Defmin to think that she will bring the best solution to the National Security Committee for the ultimate choice.
kind of funny for them to have a spray at Soryu when the other contenders only have paper submissions and nothing actually in the water for a real long term comparison.

there is so much wrong with that article that its not funny
 

kaz

Member
kind of funny for them to have a spray at Soryu when the other contenders only have paper submissions and nothing actually in the water for a real long term comparison.

there is so much wrong with that article that its not funny
To their advantage, the fact that the Soryu is in service gives their arguement much more substance as they compare it to the Collins. Better than yelling at clouds. I can spot no trace of shilling for the other bidders in their article. Rather, they're basically pleading to stick to an evolved Collins or an entirely domestic program.

Apparently, they've revealed the entire construction process of the Soryu from looking at a cartoon and claim that Japanese submarine engineers are unable to innovate with new solutions, the rest are no more than the pot-shots that belong to YouTube's comments section. Even worse is the fact that some analysts are already taking this seriously.

There's this phenomenon described in Japanese circles regarding people who suddenly become experts by deriving their hard-hitting analysis from looking at a couple of pictures and statements taken completely out of context. Basically a lack of research, inability to scrutinize the information they've gathered, and general obliviousness.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Aussie Digger said just after the DWP, stop wasting our money on the bloody things order the AH-1Z and be done with it
Did I? I certainly vote for being done with the damn things (Tigers) but I'm not sure I advocated soley for AH-1Z... If I did, I retract that statement.

I felt even back in 1999 when AIR-87 was being decided that we should just buy AH-64D Apache and be done with it.

Now I think we should look at AH-64E instead...
 

donald_of_tokyo

New Member
It will be easy to see

# Hi, this is my 1st comment in this forum.

I read a report that Japanese Soryu is very quiet, that the escort fleet and P-3/P-1 fleet of JMSDF struggles hard to defeat them in exercise. Comments from SSK crew (e.g. ex-Captain) in magazines are always aggressive (saying modern SSK is a big trouble), and those from surface fleet is always modest (saying the same). So it may be true.

I have no information of the Collins class, so I cannot compare them.

But, RN and JMSDF can easily compared them by exercise. We will see it. Surely much better than just comparing them based on "cartoon". Not only the acoustic technology, but even the exact range of our SSK is not known. The number disclosed on the web says "longer than", not the exact value (but I am not saying it shall be longer than Collins).

Issue of the longer range, higher speed in snort, and change of combat managing system (CMS) RAN requires are widely regarded as a technical challenge in Japan. Issue of Li-ion battery is not a problem for RAN. We are already building it, and will see the result quite soon.

I am not sure selling Soryus to RAN is a good thing for Japan. We are disclosing our technology to you, made mature with long-long development and huge investments. But, I think, to "try to sell our SSK" is good. MHI/KHI will be forced to "directly compare" our SSKs with other western ones, and know strong-points and weak-points. Good.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Before the last election the preferred option was a new local design and the fall back was an evolved Collins, this relied on a life extension of Collins and even then the timeframe was tight, realistically the decision should have been made by 2012 at the latest. With the change of government and contrary to all professional advice from the operators, maintainers, capability experts, not to forget expensive overseas consultants etc. the new government decided to listen instead to DFAT and former DFAT mandarins who were in favour of option J and killing off the local industry for reasons that were purely strategic in nature i.e. containing China through an Australian/Japanese Alliance, underwritten by the US.

The only way option J would get up would be to kill off any idea of an Australian design or the fall back evolved Collins.

Step one was to falsely claim Collins was shagged and in need of urgent replacement that would preclude local construction, let alone design.

Step two was to blame the situation on ASC, reaffirming step one, i.e. Collins is shagged, and a local build is impossible, it also ensured that no one would contemplate a local design as if ASC couldn't maintain the current fleet how could they possibly build the new one, even if a design was available to do so.

Step three was to exclude the only party other than ASC that could claim experience in designing and building a large ocean going DE sub for the RAN, Kockums.

Step four, claim the only suitable in production design was the Soryu.

Step five, order twelve Soryus from Japan after DFAT sorts out the appropriate strategic alliance (of topic but another prerequisite to this was finalising the FTA with Japan which inturn required killing the Australian Automotive industry as Japan would never sign off an FTA with an Automotive producer).

The comprehensive plan is handed to Abbott who loves it and gets Johnston (Defmin and ASCs only customer) and Corman (Finance Minister and ASCs owner) on side through promising that the new subs will be exclusively maintained in WA seeing both sharpening their knives and laying into ASC.

Johnston goes overboard and gets sacked and his replacement, though an Abbott ally and not too bright is not from WA and does not see the need to kill a sovereign capability for the sake of a hypothetical alliance, particularly a capability that has so recently been independently reviewed and found to be approaching best practice following the removal of government inspired road blocks and contractual constraints. At the same time Abbotts leadership style is on the nose with the parliamentary party and the public so it become politically impossible to so blatantly exclude a local build option. Local build is back on the table (though Corman is still sniping from the sidelines) and the CEP is pulled out of thin air (I know this because I have known the bloke who was seconded to create it, after Abbott announced it, for over twenty years) and suddenly the French and Germans are introduced to the mix for the sake of appearances.

Now that the original option J (straight near term MOTS acquisition of Soryus from Japan) is pretty much dead it is suddenly realised (for the second time in five or so years) that the Collins can be life extended economically and safely. Unfortunately we are now three years further down the road and a decision still has not been made meaning that while a local build is possible, even likely, a local design is dead as is an evolved Collins.

In a nutshell the article is three or more years out of date, a local design is impossible and a new bespoke OS design equally so. The only realistic options left are local and or Japanese construction of an evolved Soryu.

On the LI batteries, but for stability issues (they are significantly lighter than the current lead acid batteries) ASC, DSTO, RAN and DMO would be fine with using them on our current subs.
,
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
# Hi, this is my 1st comment in this forum.

I read a report that Japanese Soryu is very quiet, that the escort fleet and P-3/P-1 fleet of JMSDF struggles hard to defeat them in exercise. Comments from SSK crew (e.g. ex-Captain) in magazines are always aggressive (saying modern SSK is a big trouble), and those from surface fleet is always modest (saying the same). So it may be true.

I have no information of the Collins class, so I cannot compare them.

But, RN and JMSDF can easily compared them by exercise. We will see it. Surely much better than just comparing them based on "cartoon". Not only the acoustic technology, but even the exact range of our SSK is not known. The number disclosed on the web says "longer than", not the exact value (but I am not saying it shall be longer than Collins).

Issue of the longer range, higher speed in snort, and change of combat managing system (CMS) RAN requires are widely regarded as a technical challenge in Japan. Issue of Li-ion battery is not a problem for RAN. We are already building it, and will see the result quite soon.

I am not sure selling Soryus to RAN is a good thing for Japan. We are disclosing our technology to you, made mature with long-long development and huge investments. But, I think, to "try to sell our SSK" is good. MHI/KHI will be forced to "directly compare" our SSKs with other western ones, and know strong-points and weak-points. Good.
It would be fair to say that the Collins and the Soryu are the two most capable large conventions in the world at the moment. They each have their particular strengths and limitations, based more CONOPS of the parent navies and associated design compromises than any actual issue or fault.

At the end of the day there will be a two way street on technology transfer as there are things Collins does very well that its replacement will need to be able to do and the only way that will happen is if Australia tells Japan how they do it / have done it. The Soryu is a newer (by a full generation) design and the result of a continuous evolution from the base Barbel design where the Collins is a one off bespoke design so drastically changed from the base Swedish type coastal subs that there is no real comparison.

Both nations would win from an RAN acquisition of Japanese designed submarines, so long as the Japanese recognise Australia's achievements and successes in the field as well.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Subs have the largest single disproportionate effect on an enemies maritime movements - be they naval or merchant. Its an order of magnitude that dwarfs the "fright" of a skimmer in the same area of interest. It causes an enemy to allocate resources way beyond what normal opposition would generate
I just finished reading Erik Larson's Dead Wake novel. Although this is fiction novel, it contains many historical references/quotes. The first proof of your comment was the impact of submarines during WW1. German U-boat initial successes (sinkings of HMS Aboukir, Hogue, and Cressy) changed the RN's view of subs and and required a major rethink. The same rethink had Germany's High Seas Fleet committing ships to protect the departure and return of U-boats to home waters as these boats had become the German navy' principle offensive weapon which was certainly not what naval planners envisioned. Here we are almost 100 years later and submarines still have a disproportionate effect.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kaz

Member
At the end of the day there will be a two way street on technology transfer as there are things Collins does very well that its replacement will need to be able to do and the only way that will happen is if Australia tells Japan how they do it / have done it.
Only if they could be effectively integrated into their own philosophies of design. If the designs of either vessels are inherently too different, then the solutions given by the donor vessel may not work on the recipient.

The Soryu is a newer (by a full generation) design and the result of a continuous evolution from the base Barbel design where the Collins is a one off bespoke design so drastically changed from the base Swedish type coastal subs that there is no real comparison.
I'd argue against tracing Japanese submarine engineering as a purely linear development. The Soryu is an evolution of the Oyashio, which was already considered a radical departure from its predecessors than a mere modification of that design according to the literature published.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Before the last election the preferred option was a new local design and the fall back was an evolved Collins, this relied on a life extension of Collins and even then the timeframe was tight, realistically the decision should have been made by 2012 at the latest.

On the LI batteries, but for stability issues (they are significantly lighter than the current lead acid batteries) ASC, DSTO, RAN and DMO would be fine with using them on our current subs.
,
Well done on a well written piece.

Assuming that the days of local design and evolved Collins have past.
What has always perplexed me is if it was a forgone conclusion that Option J is a given: why would France and Germany bother to turn up for the show? Surely at both company and government level they are smart enough to see that they are just potentially being used by us ( Australia ) or were they actually in with a chance?
I would'nt consider the French or Germans naive in the business would.

Genuine question. Don't know the answer.
Were they ever in with a chance at SEA1000

Regards S
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Aussie Digger said just after the DWP, stop wasting our money on the bloody things order the AH-1Z and be done with it
There maybe merit in replacing the ARH Tiger with the AH-1Z or something else.
The fact is this will still take some time. As things stand it looks like we will have them till the early 2020's so lets exploit what they have to offer while we still look to better offerings
Like it or not we have to use what we have .
So I take your point but I'm just suggesting that the Tiger like all our rotary aircraft shoulf be certified as soon as possible on the LHD's.
It's just an insurance against an unforseen short term military contingency.
They may not have FOC but they can do something and I'm sure a battalion commander would prefere to have a ARH tiger rather than nothing when seting off on a LHD.

Regards S
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
There maybe merit in replacing the ARH Tiger with the AH-1Z or something else.
The fact is this will still take some time. As things stand it looks like we will have them till the early 2020's so lets exploit what they have to offer while we still look to better offerings
Like it or not we have to use what we have .
So I take your point but I'm just suggesting that the Tiger like all our rotary aircraft shoulf be certified as soon as possible on the LHD's.
It's just an insurance against an unforseen short term military contingency.
They may not have FOC but they can do something and I'm sure a battalion commander would prefere to have a ARH tiger rather than nothing when seting off on a LHD.

Regards S
The question then becomes, at what cost? From what I remember of the numbers, the Tigers need a MLU of some sort in order for them to stay (become?) relevant for future service. At present with the service certifications they have received, they have been available to participate in some exercises I believe, but have yet to be cleared for deployment and operational use. Between getting everything which still needs certification certified, and then the standard work/upgrades to keep kit working, the per machine cost for the Tiger ARH's met or perhaps exceeded the cost of new AH-1Z and AH-64 (not sure if D or E) Apaches, which already are certified.

Hence the question.

As for what a battalion commander would prefer... If the Tiger could be relied upon to provide the needed scouting/fire support when and where needed, I am sure a battalion commander would be delighted. OTOH, if the Tiger was or became a 'hangar queen' and unable to provide support when and where needed, or even worse, occupying limited available facilities in place of other needed kit like transport helicopters... I could see a battalion commander saying, "no thanks."
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
The question then becomes, at what cost? From what I remember of the numbers, the Tigers need a MLU of some sort in order for them to stay (become?) relevant for future service. At present with the service certifications they have received, they have been available to participate in some exercises I believe, but have yet to be cleared for deployment and operational use. Between getting everything which still needs certification certified, and then the standard work/upgrades to keep kit working, the per machine cost for the Tiger ARH's met or perhaps exceeded the cost of new AH-1Z and AH-64 (not sure if D or E) Apaches, which already are certified.

Hence the question.

As for what a battalion commander would prefer... If the Tiger could be relied upon to provide the needed scouting/fire support when and where needed, I am sure a battalion commander would be delighted. OTOH, if the Tiger was or became a 'hangar queen' and unable to provide support when and where needed, or even worse, occupying limited available facilities in place of other needed kit like transport helicopters... I could see a battalion commander saying, "no thanks."
Thanks for the reply.

All good considerations.
I like the "hangar queen" reference. Not sure if anyone wants one of those.

Will be interesting to see which helicopters and in what quantities are taken aboard Canberra to RIMPAC this year.

Regards S
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Well the tiger ARH seem to clock up a few flying hours around my way, I see them on a dailynbasis, and they doma lot of night work as well, surely they must be certified by now?
 
Well the tiger ARH seem to clock up a few flying hours around my way, I see them on a dailynbasis, and they doma lot of night work as well, surely they must be certified by now?
Not quite.

There does seem to be an awful lot of effort being put into a helicopter that some would have written off by the early 2020's though.

Defence Newspapers | Army News

I'm not as convinced as some that the Tiger ARH's time is limited in ADF service.
 

chargerRT

New Member
I have friends that live 20kms SE of Wangaratta who had a Tiger fly over them at low level a month ago(it was a helicopter with a big gun on the front). possibly transiting to pucka?? so theyre alteast doing 'something' with them.

cheers
RT
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
There doing something but there is still a difference between flying around in friendly airspace and in a hostile environment, between maintaining the aircraft at home with a great industrial capability to support them and maintaining them abroad.

Like it or not, Understand it or not if the ADF has gone and said it will cost the same or less just to replace them then they have looked at it in depth. With purse string's being as tight as they are and the risk that programs could be cut by a follow on government they wouldn't be asking for them if they didn't need them.

With our regular contact with the USN if we go for the AH-1Z then we can easily get support from them to make them work and quite possibly get some work maintaining there aircraft.

If we go for the AH-64 then we are well situated as one very close regional ally already operates them (Singapore), two more regional partners are acquiring them (30 between India and Indonesia) while Taiwan, Japan and Korea operate or have on order a combined 79 aircraft, Providing quite a useful regional support network that could be tapped into if the various nations could work together.
 

phreeky

Active Member
The only negative things I've read about the Tigers is that we went for a Aus specific edition which makes upgrades difficult, that parts supply/maintenance times are poor, and the inability to share data with other Aus assets. Can anyone expand on the problems?

It primarily sounds like a poor procurement decision, not an inability of the manufacturer to deliver. Either way the pilots mustn't be happy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top