Royal Australian Navy Discussions and Updates

[peterAustralia]

the two DSTO articles were very good, very interesting.

My question is, would a derived Collins Class, Collins 2 class if you like, what are the technical risks of building a unique design, versus something off the shelf. Based on previous threads it is as though the hard yards have been done, and technical hurdles faced and overcome, thus a modified Collins class (4 decks as opposed to 3 etc). would have significantly fewer design risks, as opposed to the Collins class first time around.

A personal point of view, there seems to be an arguement asserted that getting the American combat system was a good thing, as it gives commonality with what the US does. I feel it should be noted, that it took quite a long time to get right, what would have happened if there was a difficult situation in the timeframe between the retirement of the Oberon Class, and the time the Collins class conbat system was working well, would the same personal point of view still be held?

It was interesting that so much information in the DSTO reports was publically available, they were both a good read. The DSTO do not go into AIP, it seems that that a large size and good endurance of a conventional submarnine in some ways compensates for what an AIP can do. By that a large conventional sub, can go a lot more with batteries only.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It was interesting that so much information in the DSTO reports was publically available, they were both a good read. The DSTO do not go into AIP, it seems that that a large size and good endurance of a conventional submarnine in some ways compensates for what an AIP can do. By that a large conventional sub, can go a lot more with batteries only.

DSTO were part of the decision making process for not getting AIP.
On all critical projects, weapons, systems and platforms they have review input on the technical merits of a solution.

 

[Chris White]

RFA Largs Bay / HMAS Choules

On You Tube the RANMedia people have reported that she will be arriving at Fleet Base West on 10 December and will be commissioned as HMAS Choules 13 December 2011


Chris

 

[Volkodav]

the two DSTO articles were very good, very interesting.

My question is, would a derived Collins Class, Collins 2 class if you like, what are the technical risks of building a unique design, versus something off the shelf. Based on previous threads it is as though the hard yards have been done, and technical hurdles faced and overcome, thus a modified Collins class (4 decks as opposed to 3 etc). would have significantly fewer design risks, as opposed to the Collins class first time around.

Whatever replaces the Collins will not be a modified Collins, Kockums and the previous government ensured that would be the case when they came up with the ridiculously onerous IP agreement the project has to operate within. Besides that technology has moved on a long way since the Type 471 was designed and Australia has learnt many lessons on what and what not to do on a submarine that is required to meet Australian requirements.

A personal point of view, there seems to be an arguement asserted that getting the American combat system was a good thing, as it gives commonality with what the US does. I feel it should be noted, that it took quite a long time to get right, what would have happened if there was a difficult situation in the timeframe between the retirement of the Oberon Class, and the time the Collins class conbat system was working well, would the same personal point of view still be held?

The original American combat system was from Rockwell was a big mistake, the follow on Replacement Combat System (RCS) was much much better. There were better (more suitable for DE subs and cheaper) options but when examined holistically the Raytheon option delivered other advantages that the euro systems just couldn’t match.

It was interesting that so much information in the DSTO reports was publically available, they were both a good read. The DSTO do not go into AIP, it seems that that a large size and good endurance of a conventional submarnine in some ways compensates for what an AIP can do. By that a large conventional sub, can go a lot more with batteries only.

AIP is good when you don’t need to cover huge distances to where you aim to conduct your missions. i.e. it is dead weight and wasted volume until you are operating at patrol speeds.

 

[Kirkzzy]

Oh lawwwwd! Some of those comments man. Obviously as I post here, I am very pro defence. But I get really disheartened at some of the redneck comments that get thrown around. All part of being a "tree hugging AJ" I guess.

RE 3RAR, I think they just got their info a bit muddled up. They mean 3 Bde I am pretty sure.

It is the West Australian as well don't forget

As for the subs... I really don't think we will get 12, I know it is possible but as has already been said it is way too politicised. Just look at the Coalition defence policy anyway, unless they get a really good "power point" briefing I wouldn't bet on 12 subs, probably around 8 if were lucky. I say this because we originally wanted 8 Oberons but this turned out to be 6 as we went for extra Skyhawks. And I believe there was an option for 2 more Collins, although I don't think it was seriously considered.

 

[rossfrb_1]

Whilst it may seem harmless to post such information, it is against the rules and for people with clearances posting what may already be publicly available it is still fraut with risk. Sorry

No worries.
Didn't realise the minefield I had created.
Was merely hoping to find out when to ready my camera and lenses and organise a jaunt to Mrs Macquarie's chair.

cheers
rb

 

[t68]

No worries.
Didn't realise the minefield I had created.
Was merely hoping to find out when to ready my camera and lenses and organise a jaunt to Mrs Macquarie's chair.

cheers
rb

Those dates will be for WA not sure when will come to Sydney would imagine a week or 2 for BRL

 

[uuname]

Defence Minister Stephen Smith said the ANZAC Anti-Ship Missile Defence (ASMD) system had been trialled on HMAS Perth and proved so successful that the government had now given the go-ahead for the other seven Anzac frigates to be upgraded.

Missile defence upgrade for Anzac frigates

This seems like very good news for both the ANZACs and future opportunities for Australian industry.

I'd really like to see some independent verification of capabilities, though... it's easy to get caught up thinking about a cutting edge local solution without making sure that it is actually good value...

 

[StevoJH]

Missile defence upgrade for Anzac frigates

This seems like very good news for both the ANZACs and future opportunities for Australian industry.

I'd really like to see some independent verification of capabilities, though... it's easy to get caught up thinking about a cutting edge local solution without making sure that it is actually good value...

Unlikely to occur as that would require releasing (at least to a certain extent) the full capabilities of the system to outside parties.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I'd really like to see some independent verification of capabilities, though... it's easy to get caught up thinking about a cutting edge local solution without making sure that it is actually good value...

2 chances of that happening, buckleys and..............

 

[justsomeaussie]

Missile defence upgrade for Anzac frigates

This seems like very good news for both the ANZACs and future opportunities for Australian industry.

I'd really like to see some independent verification of capabilities, though... it's easy to get caught up thinking about a cutting edge local solution without making sure that it is actually good value...

The tests were conducted at the Pacific Missile Range Facility. Probably a hard stunt to stage. Great to see CEA finally hitting the big time.

 

[l0cKd0wn-UnIt]

whenever I went to UDT Conferences, as soon as USN staff found out who I was contracted to I used to get free beer.

The general public is clueless about the capability of these subs, but it pi$$es me right off that its become politicised.

Its impossible to get intelligent debate on subs and Collins in the general mainstream media.

Hmm, i believe what you state, but in what sense do you make about the capability of these subs? Are they competitors against say for example Indonesia or even Chinese submarines? And, if possible, since the media are so unreliable for defence information, do you know when the rest of the collins class will be out of maintenance and back into operational state?

Thanks

 

[gf0012-aust]

Hmm, i believe what you state, but in what sense do you make about the capability of these subs? Are they competitors against say for example Indonesia or even Chinese submarines? And, if possible, since the media are so unreliable for defence information, do you know when the rest of the collins class will be out of maintenance and back into operational state?

Thanks

Geez, when I worked in signal management in 99 they were a golden mile ahead of anything the chinese had - when we were approached by intermediaries in 2007 they were still a golden mile ahead in acoustic management and capability.

if the media had a clue then you'd see discussions about the govt putting boats into deep maint early and crews being pulled accordingly.

jesus might be able to pull a trick with 5 loaves of bread and 5000 people, but navy can't do the same.

there's a vast difference in the media telling the public the real issues or them making mileage out of convenient dross.

and according to CMDR sub squadron we're crewed and ready for 4 (which is the general availability for 6 of class). if you want all the boats up and running (or half of them, then get the govt to front up money for taking them out of deep cycle and then get them to apply resouces to fast track that maint so they come on line early)

none of that is sexy info, so don't expect journos to be beating a path to the printing presses to hilight that news.


we used to knickname Kilo's "kelvinators" - I trust you get the gist of why that was so.

 

[StevoJH]

we used to knickname Kilo's "kelvinators" - I trust you get the gist of why that was so.

Shh, don't tell Patrick Robinson that!

If he is to be believed in his Novels, small SSK's (I believe he uses the Tango class, Kilo class and Upholder class) are better than everything except a Los Angeles or Sea Wolf class sub. :hitwall

 

[gf0012-aust]

Shh, don't tell Patrick Robinson that!

If he is to be believed in his Novels, small SSK's (I believe he uses the Tango class, Kilo class and Upholder class) are better than everything except a Los Angeles or Sea Wolf class sub. :hitwall

at the end of the day it gets down to the driver and the crew.

but, patrick robinson endorsing the upholders says more about what he actually knows than what he thinks he knows

when I contracted on sig management for an australian company (that onsold elements of collins capability to 3 other nvies) we had a low opinion of the Kilo. the geeks called them kelvinators for a reason.

acoustically we rated the pakistani modified agostas as better than the first indian kilos. if you have a doubt then look at bthe arse end of an indian kilo and ask why the russians sold them prop tech from a merchant ship. or look at the arse end of a russian kilo in comparison. the indians got dudded.

I'd put money on the singaporeans sinking a kilo with their modified greenies before I put money on the kilo even acquiring the sing sub.

"kelvinators" is an understatement

 

[ThePuss]

No worries.
Didn't realise the minefield I had created.
Was merely hoping to find out when to ready my camera and lenses and organise a jaunt to Mrs Macquarie's chair.

cheers
rb

No biggy mate, keep your eye on defence media alerts.Im sure they will want the TV filming her sail through the heads for the first time.

 

[rand0m]

at the end of the day it gets down to the driver and the crew.

but, patrick robinson endorsing the upholders says more about what he actually knows than what he thinks he knows

when I contracted on sig management for an australian company (that onsold elements of collins capability to 3 other nvies) we had a low opinion of the Kilo. the geeks called them kelvinators for a reason.

acoustically we rated the pakistani modified agostas as better than the first indian kilos. if you have a doubt then look at bthe arse end of an indian kilo and ask why the russians sold them prop tech from a merchant ship. or look at the arse end of a russian kilo in comparison. the indians got dudded.

I'd put money on the singaporeans sinking a kilo with their modified greenies before I put money on the kilo even acquiring the sing sub.

"kelvinators" is an understatement

I take it this is the same reason the RAN are not concerned about the TNI–AL acquiring Kilo's?

Cookies must be enabled | The Australian

 

[Tee_Centre_10]

we could have chosen other maritime engines and done better. Guascor and MTU being obvious contenders

If the book referred to several posts back ("The Collins Story...") is to be believed, the Hedemora engines were chosen because they were narrow and the required two main engines could be sited side-by-side and reducing the length of the machinery spaces.
The MTU diesels by contrast were wider and could not be sited side-by-side. If fitted they would have had to be sited consecutively, and would result in a lengthening of the hull.
A Collins 2 hull of 9.6m diameter might enable side-by-side MTUs again.

To be fair to the choice (and hindsight is always valuable), the Hedemora diesels seemed to be fine in two classes of Swedish submarines, at least from public information in English. From the outside, it seems that the significantly larger Collins (more drag and higher power requirements) was operationally harder (long transits at higher speeds) on the drive-train than the more leisurely Baltic/coastal duties.
I do note that the latest Swedish subs have MTU diesels.

GF: I'm quoting you for the comment, not necessarily directing reply at you.

 

[gf0012-aust]

GF: I'm quoting you for the comment, not necessarily directing reply at you.

I have the book as well.

I've also worked inside numbers 2,3,4 and worked on 5

I know how wide they are

 

[Sea Toby]

Hmm, i believe what you state, but in what sense do you make about the capability of these subs? Are they competitors against say for example Indonesia or even Chinese submarines? And, if possible, since the media are so unreliable for defence information, do you know when the rest of the collins class will be out of maintenance and back into operational state?

Thanks

At any given time in a navy a third of the ships and boats are out of service in a maintenance period, if not more. You should never ever get all six submarines underway at the same time. Submarines are an oxymoron in a way, all the generators and motors aboard make noise in the same fashion as your refrigerator makes noise. The only thing stealthy about a submarine is that they hide underwater, which means they use pumps, another noise maker. All of this noise has to reduced significantly if a submarine is going to be stealthy. Noise tolerances are tight, much more than the squeaky wheel of a shopping cart. And folks wonder why the navy can't keep all of the subs operational. What world do you live in? No one does. I wonder whether these journalists have ever seen or heard their printing presses operating or notice like the newspaper distributors they break down all the time.