The Collins submarine replacement requirement as I see it.
1. A repeat of Collins...as much as practical. But it won't be an exact match.
2. See the previous post for some additional thoughts. Everything subject to change.
3. Four Torpedo tubes. Weapons: a.) Prototype- Mk48. b.) Only other things when the prototype shows us what we can realistically provide in production submarines. Production subs will probably be SSG's but be patient.
4. No air-independent-propulsion (AIP). Reason: space, weight and one more thing to maintain.
5. It isn't new. It isn't unmanageable. It has benefits. Fuel compensating will be used (fuel riding on salt water in tanks as a form of ballast-management as fuel is burned).
6. Diesel engines, power-train, prop, electric motors and batteries will be designed and built in Australia. We can do this.
7. The combat requirement will be tricky. Do we built enough boats with the rule of thirds (2 of every 3 boats is in work-up or maintenance) to do targeted intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) with limited ability or do we build enough to have 4-5 avenues of approach to our waters covered?
8. Surprise! The combat system and sensors are tricky. The prototype should be all Australian made. Hardware, software, sensors. If we can't do it on the prototype, that is OK, we at least tried. This is worth trying.
9. Years of working with the prototype, while we still have the existing Collins-class submarines in-service will determine what we are able to do. Hint: we may surprise ourselves.
10. A reasonably capable, acceptably quiet, long-range submarine prototype, that leads to non-stop building to support commissioning a new sub every three years could be worth doing as a true confidence-builder for national self-defense, and self-reliance.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment