Swedish Submarines

[gf0012-aust]

Australia should have bought Kockums instead of HDW with all the help you provided to fix their mess

One of the tragedies of ASC is that the AustGovt was not in a position to greenlight the sale to another company as AustGov was midstride in cleaning up its reputation. It was quite apparent that Kockums would be kept out - and we certainly weren't going to give them the IP rights to those things we developed to fix up their mistakes.

The Singaporeans had some similar problems but it was buried from their public - they actually came straight to Oz and asked for access to our solutions. Kockums were kept away from some of the tech that was licensed to them (Singapore).

 

[Tiny]

SILENT KILLERS IN SHALLOW WATERS:
SINGAPORE’S DEADLY SUBMARINE FLEET
by
Mokhzani Zubir, MIMA

By the end of this decade, Singapore’s deterrent capabilities will be multiplied with the coming into service of two refurbished Type A 17 Vastergotland-class attack submarines. The Vastergotland-class submarines are expected to enter the Republic of Singapore Navy service from 2010 and will replace some of the Republic of Singapore Navy’s Challenger-class submarines. The submarines, Vastergotland and Halsingland, are being purchased at a cost of USD128 million from Sweden’s Kockums AB, the same company that sold five Sjoormen-class submarines to Singapore in the mid-1990s. The sales agreement includes a logistics package, comprehensive training for the crews by the Swedish Navy in Karlskrona, weapon systems and sensor upgrades, and modifications for operation in tropical waters. The procurement of the submarines from Sweden is a result of the close relationship Singapore has with Sweden on submarine training and operations. In a statement, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) Singapore said that “we have a long co-operative relationship with Sweden in the area of submarines. We had purchased the Challenger-class submarines from Sweden for training and experience in operating submarines”.
Now thats what i call a bargain. USD128 million for a pair of refurbish AIP subs! read that the malaysians are paying close to USD1 billion for their pair of new scorpene.

 

[Ding]

news

the 128m is (most probably) for the subs only, since the Singaporeans have the capability and history and experience of having a submarine arm. The 1Bil the Malaysians paid is for 2 new scorpenes and 1 agosta 70(?) second hand, plus all other training programmes with the French, since Malaysians had never have a submarine arm and we have no experience in it whatsoever. you can't compare the 2 figures.

 

[Awang se]

plus scorpene is the latest design compare to the A17. in truth i prefer HDW U212/214 over the scorpene.

 

[Rich]

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2001-02/02RP04.pdf

I must say there were a lot of surprised people around the world when the Swedes were chosen. And as painful and expensive as the Collins evolution has been there is the small payoff that overall the Aussie submarine community is stronger then its ever been.

Those boats are a force to be reckoned with in that neck of the woods, as Ive said in other posts.

 

[gf0012-aust]

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2001-02/02RP04.pdf

I must say there were a lot of surprised people around the world when the Swedes were chosen. And as painful and expensive as the Collins evolution has been there is the small payoff that overall the Aussie submarine community is stronger then its ever been.

Those boats are a force to be reckoned with in that neck of the woods, as Ive said in other posts.

Thats the unclassified woolner document. As far as information goes its pretty vaccuous.

Collins became a completely different weapons system after 2002 - its almost like comparing apples with oranges.

 

[Rich]

Thats the unclassified woolner document. As far as information goes its pretty vaccuous.

Collins became a completely different weapons system after 2002 - its almost like comparing apples with oranges.

You meant vac-u-ous right? And I agree they are totally different boats after all the upgrades. Unfortunately most of the info we are able to glean about them is from unclassified sources. Which is kinda frustrating because many have taken a keen interest in these boats since the get go. Despite their head-aches they are, now in 2007, remarkable boats with very capable crews.

But all I am is a former grunt and a video maker who occasionally poses as a street cop. I have to hash thru numerous reports of others in order to get any kind of picture of military matters.

 

[gf0012-aust]

You meant vac-u-ous right?

No, I meant vakuous. Every now and then the phat fingerz win out and one slips through to the keeper....

And I agree they are totally different boats after all the upgrades. Unfortunately most of the info we are able to glean about them is from unclassified sources.

which is how it should be!

Which is kinda frustrating because many have taken a keen interest in these boats since the get go. Despite their head-aches they are, now in 2007, remarkable boats with very capable crews.

Considering the hammering that these boats got from the idiotic broadsheet journalists and armchair admirals, these boats are one of australias great unsung and underappreciated success stories.

They're a singularly spectacular example of how an ill informed press can tarnish a platform to the exact opposite direction of their actual capability. Its why I get wound up on the RAAF F-111 and JSF issue as its history being played out again.

 

[Grand Danois]

An update on the Visby's (there is no Visby thread, so its posted here).

According to this Swedish article, the Swedish defmin has submitted a proposal to parliament to spend 4.1 Billion Swedish Kroner on modernising the Gripen and "a number of hundred millions" [up to a billion?] on Umkhonto missiles for the Visby's.

 

[Systems Adict]

To go WAY off Topic, but within the realms of the thread

Earlier in the thread, you mentioned the Singaporean's buying "spare/2nd hand subs" from Sweden.

Can you think of any reason why no-one (Malaysia/Singapore or even Oz), thought of acquiring the 4 Upholders from the UK (pre-2001)?

I appreciate that they had "some issues" (which IMHO had nothing to do with the accident that the renamed HMS Upholder subsequently had on her voyage across the pond), but did these issues limit their sale to A N Other?

Finally, how would you rate them as operational assets in comparrison to the Kilo's & the Collins's ?

Systems Adict

 

[riksavage]

Once had a beer with a former Oz submariner who served on Oberon’s and an Oz Cop who was assigned to the Royal Commission into the Collins fiasco. Both were equally perplexed why the Aussies didn’t buy the Upholders, cheap as chips, very capable (once upgraded).

Apparently politics came into the equation!

Regardless the Collins are now the top of the food-chain in convensional submarine terms. I would be good to hear if they have been tested against modern ASW or UK/US attack submarines?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Once had a beer with a former Oz submariner who served on Oberon’s and an Oz Cop who was assigned to the Royal Commission into the Collins fiasco. Both were equally perplexed why the Aussies didn’t buy the Upholders, cheap as chips, very capable (once upgraded).

Apparently politics came into the equation!

good god. the upholders were absolute rubbish. we had a briefing that lasted 4-5 hours on why we never purchased them as a second interim squadron.

if your mate was assigned to the Hearing then he should have told you more. He's left out some critical bits.

Regardless the Collins are now the top of the food-chain in convensional submarine terms. I would be good to hear if they have been tested against modern ASW or UK/US attack submarines?

They're regularly "tested". Look up RIMPAC for the last 4 years. Even prior to the signature mods they were doing better than the Oberons, and the O's were considered to be the acoustic benchmark for conventionals for a loooonngg time.

 

[riksavage]

Who gave you the briefing on the Upholders. the Swedish?

Wonder why the Canadians bought them.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Who gave you the briefing on the Upholders. the Swedish?

Rear Adm Barrie RAN. Apr 2001. In fact the briefing was video taped. somewhere, one day that briefing will become declass.

Wonder why the Canadians bought them.

Because the RN was very good at on-selling them.

The cost to refurb the Upholders was regarded as more expensive than persevering with Collins - plus the Upholders were regarded as having a tighter upgrade path.

 

[Todjaeger]

To go WAY off Topic, but within the realms of the thread

Earlier in the thread, you mentioned the Singaporean's buying "spare/2nd hand subs" from Sweden.

Can you think of any reason why no-one (Malaysia/Singapore or even Oz), thought of acquiring the 4 Upholders from the UK (pre-2001)?

I appreciate that they had "some issues" (which IMHO had nothing to do with the accident that the renamed HMS Upholder subsequently had on her voyage across the pond), but did these issues limit their sale to A N Other?

Finally, how would you rate them as operational assets in comparrison to the Kilo's & the Collins's ?

Systems Adict

As I understand it, the Canadian Victoria-class (ex-Upholder) SSKs haven't entered service with full kit yet, in some respects like the initial service issues the Collins had when entering service. There have also been some questions on the actual condition of the SSKs at the time of sale. One thing I question is the planned removal of the Sub-Harpoon in Improved Warfighting refit.

I'm not sure at present how, equipment-wise, a Victoria SSK compares to a properly maintained Kilo SSK, but I believe the Collins SSK (fitted with the Virginia SSN combat data system) is superior to either vessel.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

Can you think of any reason why no-one (Malaysia/Singapore or even Oz), thought of acquiring the 4 Upholders from the UK (pre-2001)?

I can (from an Oz perpsective), but its not something that can be discussed in an open forum.

I appreciate that they had "some issues" (which IMHO had nothing to do with the accident that the renamed HMS Upholder subsequently had on her voyage across the pond), but did these issues limit their sale to A N Other?

No, the Upholders were disregarded 2 years before the canucks decided to buy them

Finally, how would you rate them as operational assets in comparrison to the Kilo's & the Collins's ?

Well, its always about crews before toys. The canadians played in the atlantic in the ugly days of the cold war and were a good outfit.

I'd take a canadian crew in an oberon over a kilo.

I don't think that it's possible to do a direct comparo with Collins post 2002. Its a different beast. Adding BYG-1 changes it to another level again.

 

[StingrayOZ]

How is Canada going with the Upholders?

I suppose after the Oberons, which ended up as superfantastic boats there would have been a fair bit of pressure to buy simular again. I think Oberons today would still be a fairly good sub (although I hear the design dates back to a captured german design, I think, WWI era). Atleast thats my old mans claim (served on onslow from commissioning till the 70's).

But the upholders were never really finished, well 2nd hand, built in the 80's, and in a poor state of affairs (atleast by the time Canada got them). Australia would have been looking when they were newer. UK killed them effectively in the development stage (think collins class before all the upgrades!).

Sounded like a bag o trouble. Atleast with collins, we could fix most of them before they ever hit the water, or because we knew everything thing about them.

I still think Canadians should have bought into collins. Another 4 or 6 collins would have made things a whole lot more interesting.

With the victorias they have to reinvent the whole wheel again, for only 4 old boats.

 

[gf0012-aust]

How is Canada going with the Upholders?

As I said before, the canadians are a solid outfit, stick their sailors in an upturned bathtub and they'll still manage to hurt someone. In rough terms, technology is fine, but training is better.

I suppose after the Oberons, which ended up as superfantastic boats there would have been a fair bit of pressure to buy simular again. I think Oberons today would still be a fairly good sub (although I hear the design dates back to a captured german design, I think, WWI era). Atleast thats my old mans claim (served on onslow from commissioning till the 70's).

But the upholders were never really finished, well 2nd hand, built in the 80's, and in a poor state of affairs (atleast by the time Canada got them). Australia would have been looking when they were newer. UK killed them effectively in the development stage (think collins class before all the upgrades!).

There's nothing wrong with the core design, but like early Collins they were found wanting in some areas. I've got no doubt that they'll get sorted.

Sounded like a bag o trouble. Atleast with collins, we could fix most of them before they ever hit the water, or because we knew everything thing about them.

Collins was basically a guinea pig for the gotland (hence why gotland is nicknamed "mini-me"). Collins after 2002 is a different beast.

I still think Canadians should have bought into collins. Another 4 or 6 collins would have made things a whole lot more interesting.

With the victorias they have to reinvent the whole wheel again, for only 4 old boats.

it would have made sense to have a combined build, but at the time what was proposed for collins was pretty left of field. not many wanted to touch it.

 

[StingrayOZ]

Seems like Canada is taking the hard road.

Do you think its in perhaps preparation for a "collins" type project with perhaps with HDW? Supersized 214? Using lessons learned from the Victorias?

Canadians were always a well trained bunch. But from what I hear they need a top notch sub service more than ever. Now they are trying to secure areas around the melting ice caps etc.

 

[Systems Adict]

Wonder why the Canadians bought them.

I believe that as part of a gov't to gov't "payment", in leiu for the services, facilities, training & personell that the Canukes supplied during WWII, they were sold the 4 uholders for an undisclosed sum.
(allegedly meaning that they were given away for a token "shilling" each, but this sum didn't take into account any costs of their refurb!)

All I can say is that about 6-8 months before HMS Upholder, (the final boat to be refurb'd) left for her sail across the pond, I was onboard during a visit to BAE, @ Barrow-in-Furness. During the brief tour, it was obvious that they had ripped out a serious amount of equipment & had ensured that the pressure Hull was 100% fit for purpose.

I've always been around the "targets" of these fine vessels, but had no major knowledge/experience of them, other than the dross that hollywood shows the world, until that time.

My hat was & is most definately taken off in honour of ANY man, living or dead, who has taken it upon himself to endure the cramped conditions of a sub, to travel undetected upholding the soverign rights of his country.


Systems Adict