Collins class boat
Posted on 05/06/2007 5:16:35 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
'Arms race' leaving our subs all at sea
Tom Hyland
May 6, 2007
AUSTRALIA'S most lethal, most secret and most expensive spies are black, 78 metres long, 3350-tonne cigar-shaped tubes.
Chances are, one of them is currently prowling under the seas north of Australia, playing blind man's buff with foreign ships. Maybe it's loitering, watching offshore from a terrorist training area, or sucking sensitive radio signals out of the atmosphere.
Whatever the Collins class submarines are up to, most of what they do is so secret we won't be told for decades. Even now, the silent and highly dangerous Cold War spying operations carried out by an earlier generation of Australian submarines remain shrouded in secrecy.
That's the thing with submarines: you never really know where they are or what they're doing. Uncertainty is part of their potency. In Australia's case, they've given governments a strategic advantage and priceless intelligence, cloaked in deniability.
For more than three decades, Australia has had the most capable submarine fleet in our immediate neighbourhood and into South-East Asia. But that lead is now under challenge, on multiple fronts.
Regional navies are competing in an arms race to build and expand their own submarine fleets. Our navy's ability to hunt submarines has been degraded by years of neglect, and its anti-submarine weapons are barely adequate.
At the same time, Australia's ability to keep its six submarines at sea is eroding as highly skilled crews head for shore for well-paid, family-friendly civilian jobs.
"There is an element of an arms race at work here," says a report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a Government-backed think tank, referring to the proliferation of modern submarines in the Asia-Pacific region.
The emerging great powers of China and India are leading the way. By 2016, China's fleet of nuclear and conventional submarines will challenge the US navy's regional supremacy.
India's fleet includes 10 modern Russian subs. It is buying six new French boats (in naval parlance, submarines are always "boats"), with an option for nine more. By 2016, it will have up to three nuclear-powered submarines, capable of firing nuclear missiles.
Others are joining the race. Indonesia currently has two ageing German-built submarines, but wants to buy four Russian boats, with more to follow. Japan has 16 submarines, and may be compelled to get more as China's strength grows.
Malaysia has ordered two French boats to enter service in 2009, probably in response to Singapore, which has four Swedish boats with two more to come. South Korea has nine, and plans to develop a submarine comparable in size to the Collins class.
The think tank's warnings are reinforced by a separate report by the Kokoda Foundation, a defence think tank. In a report that says Australia has to start thinking now about a replacement for the Collins boats, the foundation warns that by 2025, Australia is likely to be overtaken by regional navies with submarines superior to Australia's.
The submarine scramble brings with it a significant "potential for miscalculation", according to the ASPI report.
Submarine operations are inherently sensitive and potentially provocative, especially where secret intelligence gathering is involved. A botched operation could lead to a "serious international incident" or "accidents or escalation of response".
That potential was exposed last October, when a Chinese attack submarine shadowed, undetected, the US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk in the East China Sea near Okinawa. The Chinese sub then effectively declared "Gotcha!" by surfacing eight kilometres from the carrier. For a modern submarine, eight kilometres is as good as point blank range.
Apart from embarrassing the US Navy, the incident shows two of the key capabilities of submarines, says Mick Dunne, a former submarine captain who was Australia's most senior submariner when he retired with the rank of commodore in 1998.
"You can use subs in a very discreet way to first of all find out what's going on and secondly, if you wish, demonstrate a presence," Mr Dunne says.
The impact of "demonstrating a presence" is psychological and practical. If you know your adversary has submarines, you have to take expensive precautions, regardless of whether one of his submarines is in your area or not.
Following the incident with the Chinese submarine, Mr Dunne says life is now more complicated for a captain of a US ship.
"He'll be thinking maybe he shouldn't gridlock himself into a certain area. Maybe he should be using more speed; maybe he should have more protection; maybe his intelligence service should be telling him more about the capability of Chinese submarines. It all adds to the bill of operating costs and complicates methods of operating," he says.
Closer to home, the mischief-making potential of submarines was highlighted in a little-reported incident during the Interfet operation to East Timor in September 1999, when Australia was just one miscalculation away from war with Indonesia.
As an Australian-led convoy made its way to Dili, two New Zealand frigates went to action stations after detecting an Indonesian submarine aggressively challenging the convoy.
Urgent signals went back to Canberra. In turn, a flurry of diplomatic and political messages went to Jakarta, warning against any threat to the allied ships.
The issue was resolved when the Indonesians withdrew the submarine, but not before it caused "enormous consternation here in Canberra", says Andrew Davies, the author of the ASPI report.
If that encounter is not widely known, nor is the role of Australian submarines in the Interfet operation. Two of the new Collins boats took part, even though at the time press reports suggested the Collins boats were barely operational due to their noise and ineffective combat computer systems.
Details of what they did is still classified, but they escorted transport ships, monitored Indonesian communications, and landed special forces.
One of them, HMAS Waller, demonstrated its presence by tying up in public view at the Darwin wharf just days before Interfet landed in Dili. This sent a clear message, aimed at unsettling any in the Indonesian military who wanted to confront the international force.
While experts say early flaws in the Collins subs are being overcome, the ASPI report warns another Australian advantage — well-trained, experienced crews — is "rapidly diluting" due to the exodus of submariners from the navy.
This is not only reducing the number of boats that can go to sea at any one time; Dr Davies says the navy is losing the competence and technical knowledge of sailors trained over years in the "black arts" of submarine and anti-submarine operations.
Mr Dunne, the former submarine captain, says that if they were fully crewed, at least four of the Collins boats should be at sea or capable of going to sea at any one time. But he believes only two or three are available, due to crew shortages. This means that at best, only half the submarine fleet is fully operational.
Ross Babbage, author of the Kokoda Foundation's report, says crewing issues should be a clear focus of planning for a new submarine.
Staffing issues have been "one of the least successful aspects of the Collins class program", his report says.
There's an irony here. A fundamental purpose of having a navy and submarines is to protect sea trade routes. Our current economic boom is based on shipping raw materials to Asia. The West Australian mining sector is at the centre of that boom. Many submariners are quitting the navy to earn big money in that sector, and who can blame them?
Collins credentials
The navy has six Collins-class submarines, built in Australia based on an original Swedish design. The subs have been plagued with development problems, particularly with noise and the operation of the combat computer system, although the government says those have largely been overcome.
Collins-class supporters say they are the best non-nuclear submarines in the world. They are powered by diesel-electric motors and can stay at sea for more than two months.
■ Displacement: 3350 tonnes (submerged)
■ Length: 77.8 metres
■ Diving Depth: 180+ metres
■ Crew: 45
■ Speed: 20+ knots
■ Weapons: Six torpedo/anti-ship-missile tubes; mines.
Source: RAN
Collins class boat
Submarines at sea?
Where will it all end? With airplanes aloft? Soldiers in uniform? Democrats in prison?
Some things just seem so natural.
When down under, do submarines surface to dive and dive to surface?
Read the story. The Australian Navy is finding that they’re losing sub crews because of the amount of at sea time. Lose too many crew members and suddenly submarines aren’t at sea any more.
The Collins are D/E subs,while the 2 US subs are Nuclear boats.The N-boats carry far more weaponry,can stay underwater for months & can sustain speeds of 30+ knots.The Collins,are probably quieter underwater when running on their batteries,but they can do so only for upto 2 or 3 days before needing to surface & also at very low speeds(5 knots or so).
Ping.
Sorry, the headline fake me out.
It is my underingstanding that U.S. Submarines have two crews, since the ships are more tolerant of long deployments than sailors. Thunder boomers are almost continuously at sea, something like 90% availability. The sailors spend 55% of their time on shore-duty lite, (some training, maintenance and a lot of liberty) which makes submarining an attractive career path for people who are good at delayed gratification and can amuse themselves without getting into trouble.
sounds like it's gettin kinda crowed around there...
Boomers yes, but not fast attacks. The divorce rate among their crews is very high.
IIRC, there used to be a wealth of submarine knowledge on FR. I wonder what happened?
heard that...
I suspect that in the future, because of the proliferation of submarines, more efforts will be made on early detection and tracking.
The first of these, SOSUS, a Cold War relic, was instrumental in helping us detect new and quieter Soviet subs. And now, with the advent of very quiet diesel subs, we may need to do SOSUS one better.
In addition, there may be a need for other underwater assets, that could be unmanned and just sit on the bottom until needed. When given a signal, they release their ballast and float to the surface for whatever purpose.
btt
The US resolved that with two crews for most of it’s submarines. That way you get 6 months of training and at home time. Most US Merchant Marine sailors also have an enforced 6 months off a year too.
A few of the West Pack Widows were reputed to have had a hot bunk /”Paint Your Wagon” status with members of different crews of the same ship.
I withhold judgement on the practice. Mark Twain’s “Letters from the Earth” suggests that arrangement wouldn’t be much of a problem in a rational world, but Twain was a humorist.
Been operational over 20 years, it’s called SURTASS.
That potential was exposed last October, when a Chinese attack submarine shadowed, undetected, the US aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk in the East China Sea near Okinawa. The Chinese sub then effectively declared “Gotcha!” by surfacing eight kilometres from the carrier. For a modern submarine, eight kilometres is as good as point blank range.
I don’t suppose we will ever know the whole truth, but during some prior post it was suggested it surfaced because it WAS detected.
If it sufaced after it was detected, question is did it surface directly after being detected ?
If so, then it still got to within 8km of a carrier, far too close for comfort.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.