RAN's Collins class replacement

[Monash]

What about manning the boats? I remember reading the RAN had dificulties even finding enoug crews for the 2-3 Collins...

That is definitively going to be the number one problem! The Collins class apparently have a nominal crew of 58. The Virginia Class? 158!

Initially I think we'll see large numbers of the crew for the first boasts being 'borrowed from the UK and US while we cross train and build up expertise. But as more come on line there's no escaping the fact we'll have to massively boost submariner numbers. In the long term I suspect the Government is going to have to throw dollars at submariners, making their career stream the most well paid in the navy. For that matter if we do get 12 boats we may not have all of them in service at once considering the whole of life robustness of their power plants. One things for certain the RAN can crunch the numbers as well as anyone else and they know this problem is coming.

Anyway we'll see what their thinking is in due course. Once there's more certainty on order size and timelines that question will almost certainly be one of the first ones asked by defense academics and reporters.

[Officer of Engineers]

I can see the Colonels and the Generals now. "Why don't you just put us out of our miseries and disand the Air Force and Army?"

[Monash]

I can see the Colonels and the Generals now. "Why don't you just put us out of our miseries and disband the Air Force and Army?"

Yes and I can see the response from the Air Force and Navy. "What your still here? We thought you had gone already." Followed by " Just go away and play with your special forces in the sand box. In the unlikely event we ever come across a problem we can't handle we'll call you. In the meantime just leave the heavy lifting to the professionals."

All very collegiate.

[Chunder]

I'm trying to wrap my head around this buy. For deterrence to work, any military option has to be visible and viable. There is absolutely zero doubt how viable these SSNs are. There is also absolutely zero doubt how invisible these SSNs are, meaning they're not meant to deter Chinese peacetime antics. A single Australian destroyer sitting 12 miles off a Chinese sandcastle would do wonders more than all 12 boats underwater. And you don't want those SSNs to surface. That would give hints to the Chinese where and what they're doing wrong.

My understanding of it is that in Australia's context - surface ships are only flag wavers of diplomacy & FONOPS, I look at things like the AWD and the reality is we all know 3 of them simply isn't good enough, regardless of our intent in new purchases.

The reality of it to me is the PLAN faces the same issues as the Germans did. Or the RN in the Med.

When I think of it this way it enables me to justify committing our presence with very few assets backed up by a persistent credibility. When I think of it this way, I think that SSNs enable us to have LESS surface combatants than would appear needed (a saving). I need to flesh out this thought though with people that know what the hell they're talking about - not me.

What I am struggling on is what form of SSN Credibility? Just one that can shut down trade and movement, or one with a club as well? Is the club needed?

[zraver]

No, they're not. Not unless you want to ring every bell on a Chinese sonar.

30 knots is the homing beacon for an incoming torpedo. If you require stealth, both SSP and SSN are restricted to the same speeds (4 knots). If stealth is not required, send a destroyer.

Sir, when patrolling you are right. But transiting is a different subject. Nuke boats can make high speed transits and get from Perth and into theater in half the time. Conventional boats are fuel limited, nuke boats are food limited.

The RN did something similar during the Falklands. They surged SSN's south and got them on station ahead of the main RN fleet set up an exclusion zone and then started patrolling. The Belgrano was doomed....

[Gun Grape]

For that matter if we do get 12 boats we may not have all of them in service at once considering the whole of life robustness of their power plants. One things for certain the RAN can crunch the numbers as well as anyone else and they know this problem is coming.
.

12 boats in service gets you :

4 in pre-yard limited availability then in maint. These are the boats that just completed their deployment phase
4 doing post maint shakedown then train up of crew, post maint availability
4 that are deployment ready/on patrol

Post deployment, crew members go to Schools, transfer to other commands, leave service. In the yard the boat will have a skeleton crew.
Last month or so before she leaves the yard, crew will be filled, she will get back in the water, make sure everything is working/fixed, crew starts training together, get her certified to conduct ops.
During the latter part of that phase she can stand in for /replace a boat that has problems in the deployment phase for a short time. This is also where your surge capability comes from

[Gun Grape]

Sir, when patrolling you are right. But transiting is a different subject. Nuke boats can make high speed transits and get from Perth and into theater in half the time. Conventional boats are fuel limited, nuke boats are food limited.

The RN did something similar during the Falklands. They surged SSN's south and got them on station ahead of the main RN fleet set up an exclusion zone and then started patrolling. The Belgrano was doomed....

The Argentina Navy didn't have detection capability mid Atlantic. You can bet the Chinese will have their ears on. Boats/assets in blocking position before the party starts. The best a sub could hope for is to hug a merchant ship to try to mask the sound. But then they lose SA.

But they will want to go slow and listen

[Monash]

You can bet the Chinese will have their ears on. Boats/assets in blocking position before the party starts. The best a sub could hope for is to hug a merchant ship to try to mask the sound. But then they lose SA.

But they will want to go slow and listen

Hmm... a lot would depend on what and where the 'problem' was. Taiwan itself or some development at the opposite end of the South China Sea? I've always been under the impression that initially at least the US navy would or rather could 'let' the Chinese 'have' the South China Sea and simply 'bottle them up' inside it while the US deploys its forces in blue water to the East and North and chooses when and where it wants to engage.

China could for instance invade Taiwan but if they do? Then until the US and their allies decide to let them they're not getting so much as a row boat's worth of cargo tonnage in or out of the country. Or am I completely off base here?

[Bigfella]

I can see the Colonels and the Generals now. "Why don't you just put us out of our miseries and disand the Air Force and Army?"

That is why every service gets its toys, whether they can really be justified or not.

The Air Force is getting the newest, coolest combat plane the US has to offer. Assuming it does what it is supposed to it will make the RAAF one of the major airforces in the region.

The Army got 59 M1 Abrams tanks a while back and they are currently getting over 200 Boxer APCs & 30 Apache gunships. To all intents & purposes the tanks are useless and were purchased to make the Generals happy. Fortunately the plan to purchase self propelled artilery was nixed in favour of guns we are actually capable of deploying in a timely fashion. The Army has also deployed around 30,000 troops to Afghanistan over the past 20 years, sucking up the bulk of publicity for our services and a fair bit of coin.

The other services will suck it up and use these Navy purchases as leverage to get their own shiny new kit.

[jlvfr]

That is definitively going to be the number one problem! The Collins class apparently have a nominal crew of 58. The Virginia Class? 158!

I was doing math closer to the Astute's 100, but even then...

[zraver]

The Argentina Navy didn't have detection capability mid Atlantic. You can bet the Chinese will have their ears on. Boats/assets in blocking position before the party starts. The best a sub could hope for is to hug a merchant ship to try to mask the sound. But then they lose SA.

But they will want to go slow and listen

Modern subs are much much quieter at speed too. The Virginias are as quiet at 20 knots as a 688 at 5. Subs have become so quiet that active may be making a comeback. The Astute class already shows signs of stealthing against surfaced active sonar and Lockheed Martin has a history of a skunkworks active sonar stealthed sub. So a high transit speed is still a viable way to get from its home port to its deployment area quickly.

SSN-774 Virginia-class NSSN New Attack Submarine (globalsecurity.org)

Lockheed Skunk Works Active Sonar Stealth Submarine - YouTube

[Albany Rifles]

The mistake here is to assume that the EU is a bloc. It is not. French world wide naval requirements do not take into counter German nor any other European country's desires. You're not going to see an Italian carrier doing a French patrol.

That is a fair point, Colonel. Of course, if you look at the results in the German elections, there is a concerted push away from individual national military planning and more a Eurocentric approach. I won't pretend to know what is going to happen by 2030, let alone in 2050 which is midlife for the lifecycle of the Aussie SSNs.

[Albany Rifles]

The Army got 59 M1 Abrams tanks a while back and they are currently getting over 200 Boxer APCs & 30 Apache gunships. To all intents & purposes the tanks are useless and were purchased to make the Generals happy.

Pete, we can have an argument over this. I think a lesson of modern combat is tanks will still be relevant. The amount of No Go terrain for armor is less than a lot of people think. I was able to take my attached M1s through much of the swamps of FT Stewart, aka Camp Swampy, with nor problem.

24 hours after Blackhawk Down there tank/mech company team on the ground...

Folks have been saying tanks are irrelevant for years...until they discover a tank is very handy to have around.

But that is an argument for a different thread!

[jlvfr]

The Army got 59 M1 Abrams tanks a while back and they are currently getting over 200 Boxer APCs & 30 Apache gunships. To all intents & purposes the tanks are useless and were purchased to make the Generals happy.

Pete, we can have an argument over this. I think a lesson of modern combat is tanks will still be relevant. The amount of No Go terrain for armor is less than a lot of people think. I was able to take my attached M1s through much of the swamps of FT Stewart, aka Camp Swampy, with nor problem.

24 hours after Blackhawk Down there tank/mech company team on the ground...

Folks have been saying tanks are irrelevant for years...until they discover a tank is very handy to have around.

But that is an argument for a different thread!

Just a quickie: Canada said "no more tanks"; Canada went to Afganistan; Canada screamed "gimme tanks!"

[Officer of Engineers]

The Army got 59 M1 Abrams tanks a while back and they are currently getting over 200 Boxer APCs & 30 Apache gunships. To all intents & purposes the tanks are useless and were purchased to make the Generals happy. Fortunately the plan to purchase self propelled artilery was nixed in favour of guns we are actually capable of deploying in a timely fashion. The Army has also deployed around 30,000 troops to Afghanistan over the past 20 years, sucking up the bulk of publicity for our services and a fair bit of coin.

Strongly disagree with this assessement. Like it or not, Australia depends on Coalition warfare for its defence. Given the size of the China Navy, there is zero ways for Australia to prevent a Chinese landing on at least Australian spheres of influence.

As such, Australia must be able to insert itself into Coalition, translation American, battle plans. It does the Americans zero good if the Australians cannot support an armoured thrust and worst, requiging American protection against enemy armour during that thrust. Your engineers must learn how to dig anti-tank trenches and your zipperheads got to show your latrine diggers what tanks can and cannot do, ie is your minefield or AT defences are good enough.

Even if you restrict yourselves to the light infantry role, you need to know how to call in artillery/air support .... and how to do anti-tank. And most importantly, how to support tanks.

We, in Canada, had this debate, at one time opting for a LAV-105 as a replacement for our tank squadrons. The result? We bought LEOPARD II tanks from Germany. The LAV-105 simply cannot do the job of a tank, cannot even act as a tank for training purposes. Quite simply put - the best tank killer in the world is another tank.