Senior members of the Australian government are “extremely” concerned about the availability of their nation's AU$6 billion ($5.5 billion) Collins-class submarines, which face serious operational restrictions because of chronic mechanical problems, notably the state of the diesel engines, and maintenance issues. The ship's original combat system never worked and has already been changed at a cost of nearly AU$1 billion.
The problems are so serious that Australia's procurement agency, the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO), has put the subs at the top of its list of “projects of concern.” And as if that wasn't trouble enough, defense leaders in Australia are “vitally concerned about the productivity and efficiency of ASC (formerly Australian Submarine Corp.), the Adelaide-based wholly government-owned builder and maintainer of the Collins class,” which has a contract worth nearly AU$3 billion to provide through-life support for the subs, The Australian reports in its Oct. 21 issue.
This contract is being re-negotiated. "We are concerned with the amount of availability of the boats and the cost of doing the maintenance, as well as some of the technical outcomes being achieved," DMO chief Stephen Gumley told The Australian. "We are working with the company to improve in each of those areas. We hope to have a new through-life support contract for the Collins by Easter next year, which would commence in the financial year starting on July 1, 2010," Gumley said.
The daily writes that “some senior engineering experts now contend that the Swedish-supplied Hedemora diesel engines may have to be replaced - a major design and engineering job that could cost hundreds of millions of dollars and take years to complete.” The engines are not due for replacement before the Collins-class is progressively replaced by the planned next-generation sub starting in 2025. ASC believes they can still last the expected life-of-type but has called in a Swiss consultant to advise on a long-term remediation plan. Others, however, believe there may be no option but to start planning for their eventual replacement, the paper reports.
Photo: DSTO
ASC remains confident that four "operational" boats will be available to the navy early in 2010 while HMAS Rankin and HMAS Sheean enter ASC's Adelaide yard to undergo a "full-cycle docking" - a major refit and overhaul.
Defense Minister John Faulkner and Defense Materiel Minister Greg Combet have demanded monthly updates from the navy and Defense Dep. about the operational state of the Collins-class vessels.
A quick reminder for those not entirely familiar with the Collins class: this is a class of six Australian-built diesel-electric submarines operated by the Royal Australian Navy. It takes its name from Australian Vice Adm. John Augustine Collins, with the other five submarines named after significant RAN personnel who distinguished themselves in action during World War II. The boats were the first submarines to be constructed in Australia. The first one was commissioned on July 27, 1996.
This program has never been right. Of interesting history also is that Gumley of the DMO is ASC alumni.
Hopefully, given the way the taxpayer was taken to the cleaners on this one, it will be the last submarine built in Australia.
The idea that Australia needs some special custom requirement for a sub is just a convenient nonsense/justification for industry and Defence to get together again and royally goof up another attempt at making subs for the Collins replacement. No track record of responsible performance.
The poor product known as the recent defence white paper asks the Australian tax payer to invest in 12 subs to replace the Collins when their time comes. Given the management history of Defence and industry on this one, this means that if they are built at home, the biggest logistical support item they will need are 12 docks to tie them up at because they either don't work right, can't be crewed or both.
Off the shelf Euro AIP boats with a low number of crew would be incredibly lethal and bring some respect back to the RAN sub service.
Risky project, indeed.
With the new (to be?) revised export law, Japan subs could be a valid exportable design.
Referring to the seaweed-bio-fuel, plugin Stirling hybrid 'Soryu class'? ;)
Don't give up hope yet however.. it's sometimes when peak negative frustration over a particular sea-going platform is experienced, that a reasonable fix is finally achieved and the story becomes just a bad joke 5 yrs down the line.
And as alternative to the full replacement view: Perhaps bite the bullet w/ integration of an AIP unit incorporated into a slightly stretched Collins? I.E. exploit the crisis and convert it into an unplanned force-multiplication?
Hockums could owe some customer service too and assist?
Australia is capable of building hi-tech subs to its own unique specification, albeit with some help from other international partners in areas like AIP. Strangely, they see the US as a key technology transfer partner despite the US having almost no knowledge on diesel-electric subs.
Upgrading the Collins seems necessary(especially the engine), but it is likely they will only do the minimum upgrades required to see Australia through to the introduction of the planned subs because of budget restrictions.
May i note that the Collins class remains a highly capable sub when it is working (according to numerous American and Australian sources).