Undersea Technology: Wanted - 12 future submarines | ADM Aug 2010
Apart from the broad detail provided in the 2009 White Paper, there has been little said (on the record) about what the Future Submarine will look like, nor much guidance on what the acquisition model will be.
Granted, there has been much speculation, but what do we actually know and what educated guesses can we make?
Katherine Ziesing | Canberra
As many of you have probably read, chapter nine in the White Paper Force 2030 has comparatively little to say on what the Future Submarine will look like, but rather an outline of the roles that the government would like it to fulfil.
The section below is more telling for what it doesn’t say.
“The Government has decided to acquire 12 new Future Submarines, to be assembled in South Australia.
“This will be a major design and construction program spanning three decades, and will be Australia’s largest ever single defence project.
“The Future Submarine will have greater range, longer endurance on patrol, and expanded capabilities compared to the current Collins class submarine.
“It will also be equipped with very secure real-time communications and be able to carry different mission payloads such as uninhabited underwater vehicles.
“The Future Submarine will be capable of a range of tasks such as anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare; strategic strike; mine detection and mine-laying operations; intelligence collection; supporting special forces (including infiltration and exfiltration missions); and gathering battlespace data in support of operations.
“Long transits and potentially short-notice contingencies in our primary operational environment demand high levels of mobility and endurance in the Future Submarine.
“The boats need to be able to undertake prolonged covert patrols over the full distance of our strategic approaches and in operational areas.
“They require low signatures across all spectrums, including at higher speeds.
“The Government has ruled out nuclear propulsion for these submarines.
“For this project to succeed, we need to engage with a number of overseas partners during the design and development phase.
“In particular, the Government intends to continue the very close level of Australia-US collaboration in undersea warfare capability.
“This will be crucial in the development and through life management of the Future Submarine.
“The Government has also agreed to further incremental upgrades to the Collins class submarines throughout the next decade, including new sonars, to ensure they remain highly effective through to their retirement.
“The construction program for the Future Submarines will be designed to provide the Government with the option to continue building additional submarines in the 2030s and beyond, should strategic circumstances require it.”
So from this section, we can make some educated guesses.
1. ASC has not been designated the heir apparent despite their experience with the Collins class, leaving the door open for other players in Adelaide.
2. It’s an understatement that it will be the largest project ever undertaken by Defence.
Given the infrastructure, education and workplace demands this project will produce for the nation as a whole, arguing that the project will be the Snowy Mountains scheme of this century is not too farfetched in terms of cost and timelines.
3. As noted by anyone who has seen a map of the region, the operational area of the Future Submarine is unique given the distances, temperatures and crew issues faced by the Collins successor.
Operating in waters above 30 degrees is very different to waters that barely reach over 20 degrees (conditions that European submarines face), and nuclear submarines have been expressly ruled out of consideration.
4. While the statement outlines that Australia will not be alone in the project, more emphasis is placed on the US relationship than any other.
It would be easy for the project office to build around the Replacement Combat System as a risk mitigation measure from the outset.
5. Given that the Collins class took about 9.5 years to build after a significant design phase (though construction work began with only 30 per cent of drawings complete, a move that perhaps would not happen today in the wake of new management and construction approaches), if Australia wants a submarine capability in the water by 2030, work has to start sooner rather than later.
A rough timeline
ADM understands that the project needs at least seven to eight years of design work including the extensive use of land-based development, test and engineering sites for systems integration work for both software and hardware elements, followed by another seven to eight years of construction for the first of class with further time being dedicated to an operational test and evaluation period, which will be at least an optimistic two to three years.
During this same time, design work will continue on future batches to fight obsolescence while the training of crews, workers and engineers will need to increase accordingly.
With even these rough calculations in mind, design work needs to begin next year if the Future Submarine is to be part of the Force 2030 vision.
Yet Force 2030 also outlines the continuous improvement program for the Collins class.
Their retirement date of 2025 for first of class HMAS Collins at least is nominally based on the fatigue of the hulls, the technology available for insertion, military capability and a host of related metrics.
These are boats that have not operated at depth (or even at sea, some would argue) for most of their service life.
It would be naïve to think that they could not be extended beyond the 2025 point.
The program office commissioned a domestic design study by the RAND Corporation to examine what Australia has in terms of design capability and capacity on hand.
While minister for defence materiel and science Greg Combet has said that the report will be announced, the timing of this has yet to be confirmed.
ADM has assumed that it won’t be any time soon in the wake of the news that defence minister Senator John Faulkner will step down from the post after the federal election this month.
This is a project that will span the length and breadth of at least 10 changes of government, regardless of ideology, into the future and beyond.
Champion?
The challenge for any government will be to see the project as an opportunity for nation building rather than a cheap point-scoring exercise when issues arise – and arise they will.
The Collins class had former defence minister Kym Beazley firmly behind it when issues arose.
The need for a ‘change champion’ for the Future Submarine is sorely needed to steer it through the inevitable shoals.
This is a program that will need a whole of government, indeed a whole of nation, approach in order to be successful, not unlike the Snowy River scheme.
Has the education department looked at how to push more science and maths and future engineers through the system?
Has the immigration department examined their migrant intake to reflect future workforce needs?
Have the states looked at their maritime infrastructure, as basing all 12 submarines in Western Australia is not realistic for a variety of reasons?
And what of crewing demands? Demographers have pointed out often enough that 85 per cent of the Australian population lives on the east coast and this is unlikely to change any time soon.
At the moment, there are more questions than answers when it comes to the Future Submarine and what it will look like, what technology it will utilise and when it will be built.
The technical issues will require a small army of engineers to analyse, the relationship building between suppliers in different nations will be monumental and the demographic challenge inherent in the workforce is daunting.
The greater opportunity to build a sovereign capability in design, construction and through life support across the nation and economy based on the lessons learned from the Collins class is available now – but only if the government and Defence can mobilise the will to grasp the opportunity.