ON OUR NEW SUBMARINES-SO IMPORTANT TO GET ON WITH IT.

[ramblingboy42]

This article makes very good reading and I hope its political bend does not send it to current affairs where most won't see it.

Please read it with an open mind and without political argument, the content talks about the necessity to get on with it.
Address to the Submarine Institute of Australia (https://www.facebook.com/notes/richard-marles-mp/address-to-the-submarine-institute-of-australia/1895997960513779/?qid=6622045501038009060&mf_story_key=4361599213037672599&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBE6R3YZSCq0yE1dk-tz9lnKmQ2frWvS369j0Ismqw5ZarQ0vDwUSjRMB_f8qISqARTS-v26YCs-I_1jyn-teTkVa18G9tXDeyouFV9snsn82O0dX2Wbq46lBatL-pE1clxWG1w2sSvwk5iHcstvpQBZUfMYCfzkMURVPhSAGfTgKxa 6eOqX1ollvdoRVF80l0XfOkDxMO85QlWwFuhBy33_0nnERLabQ JQzsaOlbuLT6BEXWIigSRw3Mm9sJHSgRtKMpt8Jzpitji7JkRo qIol0onTt7W8M3Dbw7meFar2wQfavzUggaJbHYsdIpktavTrkE kGAu6QBSEmHXN_NKExumNU43Lb_p5ooQthrLlxbovZPcvKZw&__tn__=HH-R)

[weeds]

I believe the Navy cannot man the current fleet....well if all the fleet was available.

My son is at Navy Officer school right now and becoming a submariner isn’t that popular. I believe 90% got the allocation of which stream they will go into.

My young fella is one of three out 120 ish that don’t have an allocation, don’t believe any of the three will be considering submariner as first choice.

Big risk Australia designing and building the biggest sub on our limited funds....another failed mission.

[ramblingboy42]

Yeah Weeds, the article points to that too , that they should have crews trained and inducted onto these new vessels as they role out.

Most training these days can be done by a simulator.

A young guy I know who recently left the Navy did nearly all his training on simulators and his actual experience was no better as he spent most of his time on board inboard in a small room surrounded by electronics. His comment...."I may as well have been in a sub because I rarely got outside the room or my quarters and rarely saw the ocean I was sailing on"

He now suffers a lot of problems.

So submarine manning is going to take some special effort by the Defense Dept.

They have more potential Submarine Officers than seamen.

[weeds]

The defence force is still behind the times in respect to training......

[Tote]

I can't even conceive how you would begin to design a platform the needs to be usable in 2080......

Regards
Tote

[biggin]

Not to worry. The subs, if any are actually delivered, will be just another in a long line of white elephants.

[NavyDiver]

A ship mate of mine thinks it is a bit of a mess. Future Submarine program facing multi-billion-dollar blowout, Senator Rex Patrick says - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-17/submarine-delays-could-lead-to-cost-blowout-senator-says/9334240)

[Bigbjorn]

[QUOTE=weeds;2855915]I believe the Navy cannot man the current fleet....well if all the fleet was available.

The high command might have to winkle all the old depot stanchions out of their comfortable berths and sinecures and send them to sea.

The few times they have done this it caused tearing of hair, gnashing of teeth, rending of garments etc. "Sending me to sea? I didn't join the navy to go to sea."

Are not a couple of ships aground on their empty bottles?

[lyonsy]

Just ask a submariner what a navel force is and they will say submarines and target's (anything on the surface is a target)

subs offer a much greater defense then ships can as a single sub can stop an entire task force a single frigate or destroyer can not, hell even a single american aircraft carrier by its self could not.

why have we gone for conventional over nuke its simple really the area's we operate subs are shallow and nuke subs are louder then conventional subs running electric

disadvantage of subs is they can not project power or transport large forces, nothing says i think you should change for mind then a carrier fleet turning up and going are you really sure you want to do that AKA gun boat diplomacy

why does Australia need this ability, we need to be able to project a soft power to keep shipping lanes clear and free for Australian good's, this is why Australia latches onto the dominate navel force and supports it with out question so as to protect Australia's shipping lane's (prior to ww2 this was the united kingdom and by 1943 it was america )

btw if i had to go into the military and be in the front lines it would be in a sub

[whitey56]

I asked my local federal member about these new subs, I asked “ seeing we usually have only 2 Collins class operational out of the 6 at any one time will the 12 new subs only have 4 operational with the rest in dry dock or hard stand” to which he had no reply.
If they are talking to 2080 life we probably won’t have 12 at once anyhow, I hope the new subs don’t require over 100 million each per year to maintain like the Collins, that will be a big slice of the defence budget .
I have read that the new subs had to be re-engineered from nuclear back to diesel electric for our contract , that’s good old Aussie logic for you consider the US nuclear subs only require 40 million each for maintenance.

[rick130]

why have we gone for conventional over nuke its simple really the area's we operate subs are shallow and nuke subs are louder then conventional subs running electric


I know 2/10's of bugger all about naval stuff but I do remember back in the Oberon Class days that our conventional subs had a reputation for being bloody quiet, much to the consternation of US commanders when their flagship, usually one of their big carriers, would be taken out in joint fleet exercises.

[NavyDiver]

Seems subs are a issue in Spain as well. Planning and execution often over looks simple things (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22249/oops-the-spanish-navy-is-constructing-new-submarines-that-are-too-big-for-their-pens) [biggrin] My bet is well before 2050 all subs will be autonomous vessels like these which are already being built (https://singularityhub.com/2018/08/15/china-is-building-a-fleet-of-autonomous-ai-powered-submarines-here-are-the-details/)or these which will be very soon (https://www.iotworldtoday.com/2018/06/08/qa-when-will-autonomous-ships-rule-seas/)

[lyonsy]

I asked my local federal member about these new subs, I asked “ seeing we usually have only 2 Collins class operational out of the 6 at any one time will the 12 new subs only have 4 operational with the rest in dry dock or hard stand” to which he had no reply.
If they are talking to 2080 life we probably won’t have 12 at once anyhow, I hope the new subs don’t require over 100 million each per year to maintain like the Collins, that will be a big slice of the defence budget .
I have read that the new subs had to be re-engineered from nuclear back to diesel electric for our contract , that’s good old Aussie logic for you consider the US nuclear subs only require 40 million each for maintenance.


Nuke is great if your operating in deep waters with multiple reflection layers due to temp difference's allowing them to hide there machinery noise as no matter what you do with nuke reactor they will not be as quite as a chemical reaction making electricity.
The water's Australian subs operate in are what is classed as shallow and generally warm there ends up being no reflection layers to hide below so you have have extremely quite subs this can only be done with a conventional sub running in electric with chemical reaction 's generating electricity that require no pumps or fans.
Btw this is why conventional subs are able to infiltrate carrier task forces and sink flag ships even when the war game is stacked against them with the fleet knowing they are under submarine attack and actively hunting them even before they games officially start to save face and make them selfs look better.

america can also bring cost's down just on sheer volume with essentially being to mass produce submarine parts
Composition of the current force[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php'title=Submarines_in_the_United_States_Na vy&action=edit&section=11)]


Los Angeles class (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles-class_submarine) (32 in commission, 2 in reserve) – attack submarines
Ohio class (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio-class_submarine) (18 in commission) – 14 ballistic missile submarines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballistic_missile_submarine) (SSBNs), 4 guided missile submarines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile_submarine) (SSGNs)
Seawolf class (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawolf-class_submarine) (3 in commission) – attack submarines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_submarine)
Virginia class (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_submarine) (15 in commission, 1 delivered, 1 fitting out, 9 under construction, 2 on order) – fast attack submarines (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_attack_submarine)


also do not forget when the colins class was built and designed was in a hot phase of the cold war and the equivalent american sub is the Seawolf which america only built 3 due to there cost to build and maintain in a post ussr world cause they had the option of keeping there current fleet going we had to replace ours and to change the designs would of led to more issues and delays,
The colins class biggest issue was it was too ambitious for a company that had never built a sub before, and they under estimated how quickly computer tech and speeds would grow and built custom non upgradeable super computers that where slower then house hold pc buy time of lunch esp the last ones
and a prop that was ether sabotaged or had non picked up design flaw until the usn reprofiled them and balanced getting rid of cavatation and and balance issues causing machinery noise

[bob10]

Air independent propulsion is an option, especially combined with new battery technology. The weight saving with Lithium batteries alone would be an attractive option.

Air Independent Propulsion is a must for Australia’s next submarines | The Strategist (https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/air-independent-propulsion-is-a-must-for-australias-next-submarines/)

[NavyDiver]

Air independent propulsion is an option, especially combined with new battery technology. The weight saving with Lithium batteries alone would be an attractive option.

Air Independent Propulsion is a must for Australia’s next submarines | The Strategist (https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/air-independent-propulsion-is-a-must-for-australias-next-submarines/)

Interesting Bob. The Fuel Cell version of AIP (https://defencyclopedia.com/2016/07/06/explained-how-air-independent-propulsion-aip-works/) if combined with the CSIRO recent break though on storing hydrogen as ammonia (https://blog.csiro.au/hyper-for-hydrogen-our-world-first-carbon-free-fuel/) could make a very interesting sub. The fires on the Russian boats makes liquid oxygen a big no thanks.

The fuel cell technology and more importantly Solar or renewable to hydrogen stored as Ammonia for storage and transport changed back to hydrogen for fuel cells is one of my predictions as both coal and battery killers. It would make a butt kicker in fuel cell boat. Hydrogen-powered fuel cells are far more energy efficient than traditional combustion technologies. No need to surface would mean our crews do not need to sit on the bottom for weeks with only basic life support to massively extent battery life by not using any power for the sneaky stuff they do or used to with our O boats :)

[Grumbles]

A very interesting thread. Onyas.... [thumbsupbig]

[bob10]

Interesting Bob. The Fuel Cell version of AIP (https://defencyclopedia.com/2016/07/06/explained-how-air-independent-propulsion-aip-works/) if combined with the CSIRO recent break though on storing hydrogen as ammonia (https://blog.csiro.au/hyper-for-hydrogen-our-world-first-carbon-free-fuel/) could make a very interesting sub. The fires on the Russian boats makes liquid oxygen a big no thanks.

The fuel cell technology and more importantly Solar or renewable to hydrogen stored as Ammonia for storage and transport changed back to hydrogen for fuel cells is one of my predictions as both coal and battery killers. It would make a butt kicker in fuel cell boat. Hydrogen-powered fuel cells are far more energy efficient than traditional combustion technologies. No need to surface would mean our crews do not need to sit on the bottom for weeks with only basic life support to massively extent battery life by not using any power for the sneaky stuff they do or used to with our O boats :)


Yes, advances in fuel cell technology coupled with exciting new technology on the horizon definitely looks the way to go. Nuclear is not an option. It's a sad indictment on the human race that major advances in how we manage our day to day living , more often than not, stems from our efforts to more efficiently make war on one another. I'm naive enough to hope that the common enemy of climate change will accelerate efforts to find a solution in these new technologies, but the cynic in me suggests otherwise. In any case, it is exciting to think that we may be on the cusp of a new breakthrough in technology, comparable to wooden ships to steel, sail to steam, and so on.

[bob10]

The use of unmanned vehicles is another option. Here is an article from the Submarine Institute of Australia, from " Deep Thinker".


Deep Thinker: The importance of underwater robotics for undersea warfare in Australia (https://submarineinstitute.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-importance-of-underwater-robotics.html)

[bob10]

The proposed new submarines may be powered by new generation permanent magnet motors, with sealed lithium polymer battery packs for their torpedoes. At the end of the article, check out where this company is situated , in our area.

http://marinepropulsionsolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/MPS-Submarine-Electric-Drives.pdf

[lyonsy]

Dont we just run the american mark 47 torp

the biggest thing they would really need to work on is making the lunch of the torps much quieter as this is what gives a sub away,
if they can get it to where they can launch a torp undetected then having a near silent torp although operating slower then a regular one would of great importance.
as you could get into a fleet launch all your torps have them go to a different location then turn in to make it appear you are in a different location if detected then once they are have a full speed attack and the sub will then prob hold station while the fleet runs away or slowly slink away at a couple of knots.

unmanned long term stealth missions still a long way off operating from bases over great distances, but i can see them using them with a sub being used as a carrier and base of operations, it would just be an upgrade of the guide by wire torps they all ready use, change the wire to allow power to go through to keep the vehicle powered while there is little chance of detection as you are not sending radio signals its all hard wired and if you are detected you have an operator there ready to self destruct it so nothing is able to be gained from studying it if done correctly

[RANDLOVER]

.....
Btw this is why conventional subs are able to infiltrate carrier task forces and sink flag ships even when the war game is stacked against them with the fleet knowing they are under submarine attack and actively hunting them even before they games officially start to save face and make them selfs (sic) look better...............

I suspect a carrier group travels with at least one of their own sub's under them for protection, in the same way as they have the air cover envelope, a hemisphere of hundreds of miles, then a smaller surface envelope, with frigates, destroyers, etc as a bastion.

[lyonsy]

I suspect a carrier group travels with at least one of their own sub's under them for protection, in the same way as they have the air cover envelope, a hemisphere of hundreds of miles, then a smaller surface envelope, with frigates, destroyers, etc as a bastion.They do they have around 4 below each fleet but they are nuke so a conventional sub on electric will pick them up before they do and can get in there baffles. Or out of the direct passive sonar. Then let the fleet run over them

They also need to be nuke subs so they can keep up with the fleet when its moving

[lyonsy]

I suspect a carrier group travels with at least one of their own sub's under them for protection, in the same way as they have the air cover envelope, a hemisphere of hundreds of miles, then a smaller surface envelope, with frigates, destroyers, etc as a bastion.They do they have around 4 below each fleet but they are nuke so a conventional sub on electric will pick them up before they do and can get in there baffles. Or out of the direct passive sonar. Then let the fleet run over them

They also need to be nuke subs so they can keep up with the fleet when its moving

[DiscoMick]

French submarine boss summoned to Canberra for crisis talks

French submarine boss summoned to Canberra for crisis talks | Australia news | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/nov/22/french-submarine-boss-summoned-to-canberra-for-crisis-talks?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard)

[bob10]

Back in the day, I would have gone to sea for nothing more than I loved it. Probably stupid, but I did 21 years and put my family second, behind the Navy. I still have my family, and recognising the fact , I now spend as much time with them as I can. Probably annoys the hell out of them. Until you have people with that attitude, good luck with crewing the Submarines.

Crew shortage could leave Australia's new submarines high and dry – report | Australia news | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/oct/08/crew-shortage-could-leave-australias-new-submarines-high-and-dry-report)