Collins Class Sub restrictions?

**Glosters UK** · 17 May 07,, 08:47

Am i right in thinking that the Australian's new Collins class diesel subs although good are limited because they are not nuclear? I know that a major disadvantage in WW2 was that the diesel German subs had to surface to recharge the batteries?

**Tasman** · 19 May 07,, 06:28

Originally Posted by Glosters UK

Am i right in thinking that the Australian's new Collins class diesel subs although good are limited because they are not nuclear? I know that a major disadvantage in WW2 was that the diesel German subs had to surface to recharge the batteries?

The fact that a great navy like the USN has gone all nuclear with its submarines demonstrates the clear advantage that nuclear submarines possess in many areas. The fact that the USN is leasing a Swedish diesel powered submarine for training demonstrates that there are also some advantages enjoyed by modern diesel powered submarines.

Diesel submarines don't have to surface completely to recharge their batteries but they do have to come to snorkel depth. Some are now equipped with air independent propulsion (AIP) which enables them to stay submerged for longer periods. Interestingly, although the RAN acquired AIP for trials, it was not seen to offer sufficient benefit to fit it to the Collins class. The Collins class has demonstrated its capability in exercises with USN units in the Pacific.

An expert on the Collins class is gf0012-aust but I think he is on a business trip at present. Hopefully he might add information when he returns or correct errors in what I have said!

Cheers

**Glosters UK** · 19 May 07,, 06:37

Thanks buddy, i was looking at the new RN nuclear subs coming in to service but had heard good things about the Collins class and just wanted to know some people's opinions on them.

**wabpilot** · 19 May 07,, 21:09

Originally Posted by Glosters UK

Am i right in thinking that the Australian's new Collins class diesel subs although good are limited because they are not nuclear? I know that a major disadvantage in WW2 was that the diesel German subs had to surface to recharge the batteries?

A lot depends on where and how you are going to use your subs. In shallow waters, or confined waters, the silence of a D/E boat is a definite advantage over a nuke.

Let's say a distant neighbor has some high value surface ships with less than stellar ASW capabilities. Further let's say your neighbor wants to use said ships to move some troops to some islands whose ownership is in dispute. Finally, let's assume that despite the best efforts of your air force, land bases simply cannot be built in time to establish air superiority over those disputed islands. Your surface navy, having been denied a replacement for its small but useful CV cannot fill in the gap in air coverage.

But, you have six diesel electric subs that have the latest fire control systems, sonar, torpedos and submarine launched cruise missiles. You are in a position to make your distant neighbor's conquest very costly or even impossible at very low risk to you. For the price of some Mk48 ADCAPs you can bring your large and distant neighbor's military ambitions to a halt. Think of the power that gives your diplomats when it comes to discussing the ownership of those disputed islands.

**Glosters UK** · 20 May 07,, 03:15

So are Nuclear subs make a bigger acustic signiture than the Collins class?

**ArmchairGeneral** · 20 May 07,, 03:48

Originally Posted by Glosters UK

So are Nuclear subs make a bigger acustic signiture than the Collins class?

Depends on the nuke, and it depends on whether the Collins is on batteries or not. On batteries, a diesel is dang quiet. When recharging, it's anything but. Nuclear powerplants, OTOH, always make noises from the steam plant and from the cooling system. However, some modern nukes approach diesels in sound reduction. According to some things I have read, the conventional sub's edge in quietness has been greatly eroded by the latest American and British nukes.