Posted on 07/25/2011 4:45:24 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Smith seeking US help to build 12 subs
Brendan Nicholson
From:The Australian
July 25, 201112:00AM
DEFENCE Minister Stephen Smith will seek US help with Australia's plan to build 12 big conventional submarines to replace the navy's six troubled Collins-class boats.
Mr Smith arrives in Washington today with Defence Department secretary Ian Watt, and the new chief of the Australian Defence Force, General David Hurley, for their first face-to-face talks with new US Secretary of Defence Leon Panetta and other senior officials.
While the US Navy operates only nuclear-powered submarines and some defence analysts have suggested that Australia should buy or lease a nuclear fleet from the Americans, Mr Smith told The Australian before he left on Friday that nuclear submarines were not an option for Australia.
The answer for Australia was a conventional fleet to be built in South Australia, he said.
After initial problems with the Collins fleet a decade ago, the US provided a state-of-the-art combat system and the latest technology to improve the subs' propulsion systems and make them less noisy.
The building of the so-called Future Submarine will be Australia's biggest-ever defence project. The 12 big, long-range boats are expected to cost about $36 billion.
Talks will include progress in Afghanistan, the transition to Afghan-led security responsibility and prospects for reconciliation and political settlement.
Mr Smith will also seek an up-to-date report on the Joint Strike Fighter, which is being developed in the US and which is intended to replace the RAAF's F/A-18 Hornet fighter bombers and the recently
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
Hey.. lookey here...
Even the pseudo communist Labor party in Oz wants to SPEND money on their military
Honestly, I am so tired of the Democrats and President Obama trying to gut our military.
Now, they are using this debt ceiling excuse
Good for Australia that they are going to get these dozen submarines.
Double good for Oz that they are asking us for help. As they are building Air Breathers, they could have easily gone to the Germans, French or Russians. Those three countries are world beaters when it comes to conventional submarines.
The U.Navy has a number of barely used L.A.Class boats that they are decommissioning.Why not off them to the Aussie’s.They would surely be better than any diesel-Electric sub.
I think the Swedes make a super DE boat also....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2626808/posts
What you will see in this video is a report about the HMS Gotland, a Swedish submarine that the US Navy says, “This could be the most dangerous submarine in the world”. That’s because naval ships cannot detected it until they are so close they would already have been sunk.....
..................
The US should look real close into building these. Very stealthy and waaaay cheaper than nuke powered.
The L.A class boats are pretty big for a medium-sized navy with more than twice the complement of the existing Collins class submarines. The Aussies are already having trouble retaining enough personnel for the Collins class. Not to mention other issues like need to expand maintenance facilities.
Vinnie,
Actually my bro, you are very right. I forgot about this “incident”
It scared the beejusus out of the Navy captain when the boat “sank” him in a war game. It may have even been a US Carrier
Yes, it is a fact that diesel submarines are not our forte. WE abandoned them completely. The Soviets still kept their hands on that variant with their Kilo class
The Collins class is Swedish designed. Submarines like the Gotland are not primarily intended for the long-range oceanic role and have lower fuel, provisions and crew complements. The RAN needs bigger vessels-the only realistic model is the Japanese Soryu class.
Funny. I kept hearing that the Collins class was a super DE boat.
Go to the website and watch the video. Scary.
It ‘sank’ the Ronald Reagan numerous times.
Can stay submerged 1 month.
They are quiet, which makes them hard to find with passive sonar. But we can use active sonar now that it has been detached from the ships via helicopter.
Good reply Sukhoi.
Also, the huge negative on Nuclear boats is their upkeep and maintenance costs.
Effectively only the USSR and the USA were able to “afford” a large nuclear submarine fleet.
Even today, the US has a 71 strong all nuclear fleet. OTOH, China has 56 conventional submarines and only 11 Nuclear boats of which many are very old (like the Han class) and really should have been retired
Now, in the coming decades, certainly China will up their nuclear component but it will be many decades before China fields 6 dozen state of the art Nuclear subs like the US does today
Most open sources put the maximum endurance of the Stirling AIP system on board the Gotland class at about two weeks-20 days. The catch is that it can be accomplished only at speeds of 5 knots or less. So you would need to sacrifice speed for endurance and that’s not acceptable for an oceanic navy.
It is. It's just never reached its full potential. But even at 80% capability, it's one of the best in the world.
We've just never been able to get them to their theoretical peak performance.
They are also getting older at this time, and they will need to be replaced. That can't happen overnight - so we need to start doing it now. And the US has experience we don't.
Next time, we don't want an excellent sub that only operates at 80% of its potential. We want an excellent sub that operates at 95-100% of its potential.
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.