Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
picpus

Il Programma Dei Futuri Sottomarini Australiani

Recommended Posts

Sul programma per i futuri 12 nuovi sottomarini australiani, per chi può essere interessato, ecco i link a due articoli in francese:

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article16673.html

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article16732.html

 

 

ed i link a due articoli in inglese:

 

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0...27-2682,00.html

 

http://www.skynews.com.au/national/article.aspx?id=390366

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

articoli interessanti, quelli inglesi (il francese non è il mio forte...).

 

parlando dei sostituti dei collins non esitano a dire che costano un patrimonio in piu di quanto costarono i battelli costruiti a Kockums (però non è chiaro se hanno tenuto conto dell'aumento del costo della vita). però mettno anche in evdenz ai nuovi posti di lavoro ed il salto tecnologico ce questa sclta potrebbe portare all'australia.

 

circa le caratteristiche che cercano, mi sembra che bbiano descritto molto bene i nuovi battelli giapponesi, chissa se acquisteranno da loro la tecnologia o saranno davvero home made! sarebbe una scelta coraggiosa dopo il flop del vecchio sistema di combattimento

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... o saranno davvero home made! sarebbe una scelta coraggiosa dopo il flop del vecchio sistema di combattimento

Ciò è proprio quello che stanno cercando di capire se sia possibile!

 

 

Il link ad un articolo in francese:

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article16735.html

 

 

ed il link ad un articolo in inglese:

 

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-natio...91103-hukv.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Sul programma per i futuri 12 nuovi sottomarini australiani, per chi può essere interessato, ecco i link a due articoli in francese...

La Marina Militare Australiana schiera 0 (zero) portaerei, 0 (zero) caccia lanciamissili, otto fregate Meko-200, quattro fregate Perry (ormai vetuste) e SEI sommergibili. Giustamente, sta ben pensando di costruire DODICI nuovi sommergibili. Meditate, gente, meditate... :s12:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
La Marina Militare Australiana schiera ... SEI sommergibili ...

Dagli articoli linkati al post n° 1, http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?show...st&p=293108 , riporto, in francese:

 

" ... The Australian croit savoir que, ces derniers temps, un seul sous-marin de la classe Collins était disponible pour des missions opérationnelles. Mais il n’est pas certain que cela implique autre chose que des missions d’entraînement prolongées. ... "

 

ed in inglese:

 

" ... The Australian understands that in recent times only a single Collins-class boat has been available for operational duties but it is unclear whether this involves more than extended training missions.

 

 

Se tanto mi dà tanto, allora, forse, su 12, sempre che il programma veda la luce nei termini e nei numeri (compresi quelli dei costi!) indicati, riusciranno ad esserne operativi 2, ammesso che siano superati gli attuali problemi di reclutamento del personale sommergibilistico (in un paese di poco più di 21 milioni di abitanti e che non conosce crisi economica che, PURTROPPO, quasi ovunque, è l'unico efficace stimolo ad arruolarsi!)!

 

 

 

La Marina Militare Australiana schiera 0 (zero) portaerei, 0 (zero) caccia lanciamissili ... sta ben pensando di costruire ...

... 2 (DUE) quasi portaerei, vedasi link: http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?showtopic=31383 e 3 (TRE) caccia lanciamissili, vedasi link: http://www.navy.gov.au/Hobart_Class .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quindi, tra qualche anno...

l'Australia disporrà di:

  • 2 portaerei low cost derivate dalle BPE Spagnola (ottima cosa)
  • 3 DDG
  • 12 sommergibili

l'Italia (con il triplo della popolazione Australiana) disporrà di:

  • 2 portaerei che più diverse non si poteva (linee di volo in primis) di cui una vecchissima, e l'altra nata vecchia oltre che costata uno sproposito
  • 4 DDG di cui 2 vecchi
  • 4 sommergibili

Meditate, gente, meditate (e 2)... :s12:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quindi, tra qualche anno...

l'Australia disporrà di:

...

12 sommergibili

...

... privi di equipaggio (e 2 ...)!!! :s20: :s20: :s20:

 

 

Eccovi i link ad alcuni articoli in francese:

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article10307.html

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article10313.html

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article13493.html

 

http://www.corlobe.tk/article14209.html

 

 

ed i link ad alcuni articoli in inglese:

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/anoth...0-1111117450573

 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/navy-...0-1111117460839

 

http://www.australia.to/index.php?option=c...6:breaking-news

 

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0...5006301,00.html

 

 

Buona e ... meditata lettura!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Non so leggere in anglofrancese... :s06:

Il succo dei vari articoli è che la Marina australiana soffre di una carenza esasperata di sommergibilisti e ciò, in aggiunta ai vari problemi tecnici di cui hanno sempre sofferto e tuttora soffrono i "Collins", porta, in certi periodi, a poter disporre di un solo sottomarino operativo (su sei, teoricamente, a disposizione)!

 

Dunque, rebus sic stantibus (così stando le cose) cosa si fa per affrontare e risolvere il problema? Si pensa di raddoppiare il numero dei sottomarini!!!

 

A mio parere, ogni altro commento è superfluo!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... per chi può essere interessato...

 

in effetti quello della lingua è un limite per molti frequentatori del forum! se potessi fare un sunto, picpus, di quanto linki ci sarebbe probabilmente una maggiore partecipazione.

 

per gli australiani ... credo che dovremmo approfondire ulteriormente le problematiche, senza fermarci al raccoto dei giornali, che peraltro parlano di battelli con personale maggiore rispettto ai collins e in decisa controtendenza rispetto al resto del mondo.

 

mi sono vneute in mente diverse considerazioni, valutazioni che sono strettamente personali vorrei precisare.

 

se i battelli sono spesso in avaria il personale non avrà il migliore dei morali e spargera voci negative ai 4 venti. a questo si aggiunga che (se ben ricordo) gli equipaggi sono in 4 e 4 ovvero un ritmo piu spossante rispetto alle navi di superficie.

 

Un battello nuovo con promesse di fantascienza (che magari verranno anche mantenute...) puo indurre il personale a chiedere di arruolarsi sui battelli. inoltre prima che i collins siano sostituiti passeranno non meno di 10 anni e quindi un tempo sufficiente a formare gli equipaggi. in teoria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in effetti quello della lingua è un limite per molti frequentatori del forum! se potessi fare un sunto, picpus, di quanto linki ci sarebbe probabilmente una maggiore partecipazione.

...

Comandante Totiano, quando posso inserisco i link ad articoli in francese ed in inglese (lingua, quest'ultima, che, formalmente, non conosco ma, nonostante ciò, anche se a fatica, riesco lo stesso a capire il senso del testo).

 

Spesso gli articoli in francese non sono altro che la traduzione di quelli in inglese e, comunque, metto quelli in inglese perché sembrerebbe ( :s43: ) che, scandalosamente ( :s05: ), la conoscenza di tale specie di parlata, sia più diffusa di quella del nobile e raffinato idioma di Molière e quindi possa essere più facilmente comprensibile dalla pluralità dei forumisti.

 

Per quanto riguarda il sunto, sinceramente, non mi va di rendermi interprete del pensiero di chi scrive un articolo, potendo dare un senso diverso alle sue parole: ritengo corretto che ciascuno prenda conoscenza della versione autentica del testo cui faccio riferimento e non della mia, più o meno corretta, in particolare dal punto di vista tecnico, interpretazione.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Per quanto riguarda il sunto, sinceramente, non mi va di rendermi interprete del pensiero di chi scrive un articolo, potendo dare un senso diverso alle sue parole: ritengo corretto che ciascuno prenda conoscenza della versione autentica del testo cui faccio riferimento e non della mia, più o meno corretta, in particolare dal punto di vista tecnico, interpretazione.

 

sono sentimenti nobili, che ti rendono onore. ma forse, dando i dati essenziali, potrebbe esserci la maggiore partecipazioni che in altri post hai lamentato. non credo ci sian alternative se non uncorso massivo di lingue per tuttii frequentatori della base...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimamente mi sono occupato un pò della Marina Australiana, dal momento che sto cercando di realizzare un data base su tutte le marine mondiale dal dopoguerra ed ahimè, dopo l'Argentina sono appena all'Australia, avendo iniziato ovviamente dalla "A".

In effetti hanno da parecchi anni, già dai tempi della Classe di sommergibili Oberon questo problema di mancanza di personale, che non mi spiegavo in toto, dato anche l'incentivo economico che hanno messo sopra e che se non ricordo male si aggirà su una cifra di oltre 20/25.000 dollari australiani al mese, che sono pur sempre una cifretta anche tradotti in euro (circa 12.000 euro).

Bartom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ultimamente mi sono occupato un pò della Marina Australiana, dal momento che sto cercando di realizzare un data base su tutte le marine mondiale dal dopoguerra ed ahimè, dopo l'Argentina sono appena all'Australia, avendo iniziato ovviamente dalla "A".

In effetti hanno da parecchi anni, già dai tempi della Classe di sommergibili Oberon questo problema di mancanza di personale, che non mi spiegavo in toto, dato anche l'incentivo economico che hanno messo sopra e che se non ricordo male si aggirà su una cifra di oltre 20/25.000 dollari australiani al mese, che sono pur sempre una cifretta anche tradotti in euro (circa 12.000 euro).

Bartom

Non sapevo di questo incentivo di cui parli, sempre che non sia quello cui si fa riferimento nell'articolo al link (già inserito in un post precedente): http://www.corlobe.tk/article10313.html , dal quale riporto:

 

" ... Comme mesure à court-terme, la marine a offert des primes substantielles aux sous-mariniers qualifiés pour rester sous l’uniforme.

Une prime a été approuvée en avril dernier avec effet immédiat. D’un montant de 60.000 $, elle est attribuée aux sous-mariniers acceptant de prolonger leur contrat de 18 mois supplémentaires. ... " (Un premio di 60.000 $, concesso ai sommergibilisti qualificati, che accettano di prolungare il loro contratto di 18 mesi).

 

Vedasi anche dal link (pure questo inserito nel medesimo precedente post cui mi riferivo prima): http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/navy-...0-1111117460839

 

" ... As a short-term measure, the navy has offered substantive bonuses for qualified submariners to stay in uniform.

The Navy Capability Allowance, worth $112.6million over five years, was approved in April with immediate effect and pays submariners $60,000 for an extra 18-month extension of service. ... ".

 

Comunque, nei predetti articoli, si fa notare anche quanto risulti improbabile, che la Marina riesca a competere con il settore privato, sul piano dei salari corrisposti ai suoi membri (come mettevo in evidenza in un passo del mio post n° 5).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sembra non siano proprio rose e fiori per il nuovo pragramma dei futuri battelli. forti pressioni vorrebbero cancellare tutto. ecco l'articolo da defencetalk reperibile anche al link: http://www.defencetalk.com/pressure-on-new...nes-plan-28738/

 

Pressure on New Australian Minister to Scrap Submarines Plan

 

New defence minister Stephen Smith will come under pressure to scrap Australia's most expensive defence project - the plan to build 12 submarines at a potential cost of $36 billion.

 

Defence sources have told The Age that the change in the leadership of the Labor Party and the new government's reliance on the Greens and independents have given some within Defence hope that the controversial submarine plan could be dropped and replaced with a more modest version.

 

The sources say there is likely to be a stringent review of the most recent defence white paper, in which the submarine plan was first announced, and a new white paper could be drawn up ahead of schedule.

 

Current Defence Minister John Faulkner has said he will step down from the role, and is set to be succeeded by Foreign Minister Stephen Smith in a reshuffle being announced by Prime Minister Julia Gillard today.

 

The plan to build 12 submarines is considered to have been former prime minister Kevin Rudd's ''baby'', to the extent that some in the defence community refer to them as ''Rudd's subs''.

 

There were initial suggestions Mr Rudd might be given the defence portfolio in the imminent reshuffle. But he has now been confirmed as the next foreign minister, removing one potential obstacle to the ditching of the submarine plan.

 

One of the new independent MPs Labor has relied on to form government, Andrew Wilkie, a former army lieutenant-colonel and intelligence analyst, said he needed to study the case for the submarines before commenting on whether he believed they were affordable. But he said he fully supported a review of the white paper, because ''there were clearly some elements of it that needed addressing''.

 

''There does need to be a fresh look at the white paper, there are clearly question marks over the document. For example, we can't even crew the submarines we've got, so it is arguable that we can double the fleet from the current six Collins Class submarines.''

 

Greens leader Bob Brown said his party did not have a concrete position on the submarines, but was keen to see large projects reviewed. ''I think this will be a matter for the whole of Parliament to discuss, including the Opposition.''

 

Sources say there is a growing belief within the Defence Force - including the navy and the government-owned Australian Submarine Corporation - that the 12 submarines are unlikely to be built and that the money could be better spent.

 

The 2009 white paper was heavily criticised for focusing on large defence projects, particularly ships and submarines, without a clear explanation of why they were needed and how they would be paid for.

 

The Australian Strategic Policy Institute's Andrew Davies put out a paper last year estimating the submarines could cost $36 billion. He concluded that a fleet of 12 European off-the-shelf submarines would cost only $8.8 billion.

 

''Given the potential price tags and the timeframes on these things, it would be surprising if they weren't reviewing it,'' Dr Davies said yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prescindendo dall'eventuale diverso orientamento del nuovo governo australiano, rispetto ai programmi in materia di quello uscente, autorevoli esponenti del mondo sommergibilistico australiano, considerando irrealistico il faraonico e lontano (orizzonte temporale 2025) progetto dei previsti 12 sofisticatissimi sottomarini convenzionali di nuova concezione ed alla luce della situazione disastrosa dei 6 "Collins" attualmente in servizio ( di cui si parla anche nella discussione "Gravi problemi per la componente sottomarina australiana" al link: http://www.betasom.it/forum/index.php?showtopic=31528 ), propongono di disarmare immediatamente i battelli HMAS "Rankin" e HMAS "Collins" e di acquistare 4 sottomarini, tra quelli più evoluti in atto prodotti dall'industria europea (tedeschi o francesi), il cui primo esemplare potrebbe entrare in servizio entro 5 anni e gli altri 3, entro 8 anni.

 

Per maggiori particolari, potete dare uno sguardo all'articolo in francese al link: http://www.corlobe.tk/article21345.html

 

e/o a quello in inglese al link: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-a...x-1225935119752 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

l'allarme per la ricerca di fondi per la progettazione di nuovi battelli è sempre piu pressante in Australia. interessante questo articolo di defencetalk al link

http://www.defencetalk.com/call-for-budget...ne-design-33540

dove quasi si "supplica" di non ripetere gli errori del passaggio tra gli Oberon e i Collins, quando l'Australia è rimasta per quasi un decennio senza battelli operativi. solo un lieve accenno alle difficoltà tecnich dei nuovi battelli, e anche questo puo avere un significato. ecco l'articolo

 

 

Call for Budget to Fund Next Australian Submarine Design

 

 

Funds must be allocated in the May budget for early design work on Australia's next submarine if a serious capability gap is to be avoided, Defence experts have said. Time is running out if new submarines are to be in operation by 2025 the date proposed in the latest Defence Capability Plan update.

 

That plan and the 2009 Defence White Paper calls for the construction of 12 new submarines at a cost of at least $36 billion. They would replace the six Collins class submarines currently in service.

 

Experts from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute have said that given this will be Australia's most expensive ever weapons program and a similar spend to the National Broadband Network pressure from the Government and voters for sound planning and effective delivery would be intense.

 

Defence insiders have already said, off-the-record, the Navy is dreaming if it expects the Government to sign off on the 12-boat plan this year.

 

Mark Thomson, the director of budget and maintenance at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said the Government needed to use the budget to get the project moving.

 

A failure to do so would likely result in the existing boats reaching the end of their effective lives before their replacements were ready to put to sea.

 

This had happened in the transition from the old Oberon class boats to the Collins class between 1992 and 2003.

 

While Defence had started winding back the use of the outdated O-boats in the early 1990s, the Collins class boats were not fully operational until 2003.

 

Andrew Davies, ASPI's operations and capability director, said this created a decade-long capability gap that had seen many experienced submariners lost to the fleet.

 

The Collins class boats have been plagued by crew shortages ever since.

 

Mr Thomson, who worked with Mr Davies on a discussion paper on the submarine replacement issue that was released late yesterday, said the Government was due to make a ''first pass decision on the shape and size of the next submarine fleet in the next two years''.

 

Once that was done, the initial design work expected to cost between $500 million and $1 billion could begin.

 

The problem is that at the moment Defence does not have the information it needs to make informed recommendations to Government he said.

 

Mr Davies agrees. ''You need to understand the true costs and benefits if you are to do an informed cost benefit analysis,'' Mr Davies said. He said Defence had a history of playing down costs while playing up benefits.

 

At this point, despite the White Paper recommendations, the only certainties surrounding the next generation of submarines is that they will be conventionally powered and they will be built in Adelaide.

 

Political factors have at least partly driven those parameters.

 

The size of the boats, the numbers to be built and the tasks they should be required to perform are yet to be determined, Mr Davies said.

 

He described the White Paper recommendation as an ''ambit claim'' and questioned the need for the submarines to be able to deploy special forces units.

 

Mr Davies said it was difficult to conceive of a circumstance under which the need to land a small group of men on a beach would justify placing a $3 billion submarine at risk. Meanwhile, others haven't given up the fight for the nuclear option. Graham Harris, the president of The Navy League, has called for nuclear power to remain under consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Da quello che ho capito, hanno stanziato gli aussie$ e quanto deve costare un sub..

 

...

Mr Davies said it was difficult to conceive of a circumstance under which the need to land a small group of men on a beach would justify placing a $3 billion submarine at risk. Meanwhile, others haven't given up the fight for the nuclear option. Graham Harris, the president of The Navy League, has called for nuclear power to remain under consideration.

 

ma le caratteristiche non sanno neanche loro quali devono essere, AIP /nucleare/all'antica... beh almeno il primo passo l'hanno fatto i Collins fanno piangere cambiamoli.... staremo a vedere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

un interessante intervendo del ministero della difesa australiano, che minimizza circa lo stato di efficienza dei propri battelli. difficile capire se cercano di difendere il loro operato, quello del governo o una eventuale nuova intesa con Kokums...

 

da defencetal al link http://www.defencetalk.com/australian-dod-...lability-34855/

 

Australian DoD Denies Report on Submarine Availability

 

 

The article in The Australian, 10 June 2011, by Cameron Stewart – “Not a single submarine seaworthy” – appears to misunderstand how Navy and Defence maintain and operate the submarine fleet to meet operational requirements.

 

As part of the regular ongoing management of the submarine fleet, all submarines are in various stages of their docking, maintenance and operational cycles.

 

Two submarines are currently in their operational cycle, and it is incorrect that there are no seaworthy submarines.

 

Navy is presently able to meet the Government’s standing requirement for submarine availability to respond to operational needs.

 

Maintaining the Collins Class is one of the most challenging tasks Defence has. It is one of the most complex and important capabilities operated by the Australian Defence Force.

 

Navy, the Defence Materiel Organization and industry continue to work closely on a program to improve reliability across the entire submarine fleet.

 

Navy remains committed to maintaining a submarine capability that is operated effectively and safely to protect Australia’s national interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sembra stiano facendo sul serio in Australia. la scottatura dei Collins deve proprio bruciare...

sono stati stanziati i fondi per la prossima fase della progettazione dei prossimi 12 battelli attraverso un programma impegnativo e, almeno sulla carta, estremamente approfondito. ecco l'articolo da defencetalk al link http://www.defencetalk.com/next-stage-of-f...nnounced-42257/ da leggere con molta calma....

 

 

Next Stage of Future Australian Submarine Project Announced

 

 

Prime Minister Julia Gillard, Minister for Defence Stephen Smith and Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare today announced the Government would provide $214 million for the next stage of the Future Submarine Project.

 

This funding will go towards further detailed studies and analysis to inform the Government’s decision on the design of Australia’s next submarine.

 

The 2009 White Paper outlined the Government’s commitment to acquire 12 new Future Submarines to be assembled in South Australia over the next three decades.

 

The Future Submarine project will be the largest and most complex Defence project ever undertaken byAustralia.

 

With this complexity comes risk.

 

That is why it is essential to continue to take a measured and careful approach to the early stages of planning and design.

 

It is also essential to learn from experience with the Collins Class to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past and minimise risks. This includes the maintenance and sustainment of the Future Submarines.

 

This is why the Government is conducting a Review into the Sustainment of Australia’s Collins Class submarines, led by Mr John Coles.

 

The Coles Review involves a detailed examination of complex engineering issues associated with submarine sustainment and support from international experts and companies in this field.

 

The Government is considering four broad options for the Future Submarines:

 

An existing submarine design available off-the-shelf, modified only to meet Australia’s regulatory requirements;

An existing off-the-shelf design modified to incorporate Australia’s specific requirements, including in relation to combat systems and weapons;

An evolved design that enhances the capabilities of existing off-the-shelf designs, including the Collins Class; and

An entirely new developmental submarine.

The Government has ruled out the option of a nuclear submarine.

 

Indicative Timeline for the Future Submarines

 

2012: The Government will make a decision on design and test facilities including the Land Based Test Site and will receive the Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan.

2013: The Government will receive the results of the work announced today and will make a decision on the combat systems, torpedos, sensors and other weapons systems.

2013/2014: On current planning First Pass approval is scheduled for late 2013/early 2014.

2017: On current planning Second Pass approval is scheduled for around 2017 with construction expected to begin following Second Pass.

The funding announced today will inform the Government’s final decision on the design and workforce requirements for the Future Submarine, and identify and address risks in this complex project.

 

These studies are in addition to the Government’s announcement in December that it had approved the release of Requests for Information to three overseas submarine designers (DCNS, HDW and Navantia), and that Defence had entered into a contract with Babcock for a study into a land-based propulsion site.

 

The studies announced today will be conducted across three broad areas:

 

Design studies;

Scientific and technological studies; and

Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan.

These are important steps in ensuring that the Future Submarines are delivered.

 

Design studies

 

Options for the Future Submarine range from a proven fully Military Off The Shelf design through to a completely new submarine.

 

All options are being considered, other than nuclear propulsion, which the Government has ruled out.

 

These studies will be undertaken across four areas:

 

Military off the shelf design studies

 

These studies will be undertaken with three European ship building companies:

 

DCNS (France), designer of the Scorpene

HDW (Germany), designer of the Type 212 and Type 214 submarines

Navantia (Spain), designer of the S-80 submarine

These studies will help inform the Government on the viability of a military off the shelf design and what modifications would be required to meet specific Australian conditions.

 

Initial design studies for an updated Collins Class submarine

 

The Government will engage Swedish ship designer and builder Kockums to undertake initial design studies for an updated Collins Class submarine.

 

The updated design will build on the high level of capabilities of the existing Collins Class submarine design, address challenges and obsolescence issues and provide capability enhancements.

 

Kockums is the original designer of the Collins Class submarine.

 

Analysis of options

 

An expert submarine design firm will be engaged to conduct cost and capability trade-off analysis of all options.

 

These studies will model the technical and performance characteristics of different submarine designs against capability and cost considerations.

 

Capability modelling by the United States

 

At the Australia-United States Ministerial (AUSMIN) consultations in Melbourne in November 2010, Australia and the United States agreed that Australian-United States cooperation on submarine systems was strategically important for both countries.

 

The high level of submarine interoperability between Australia and the United States and our technical cooperation will extend into Future Submarine acquisition program.

 

United States submarine companies Systems Performance and Analysis and Electric Boat will undertake capability modelling under a Foreign Military Sales case.

 

These companies will investigate the capability of an off the shelf option as well as an evolved Collins option.

 

Scientific and technological studies

 

In addition to these deign studies, scientific and technological studies will be conducted primarily by the Defence Science and Technology Organisation.

 

They will assist the development of requirements and provide technical advice to Government aimed at reducing risk in critical areas for the project.

 

These studies will cover areas including:

 

Propulsion and Energy Storage;

Signatures and stealth performance;

Combat systems; and

Hydrodynamics, propellers and pumpjets.

The scientific studies undertaken will deliver a range of reports and recommendations on the development of Future Submarine helping to provide better options to the Government for decision.

 

Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan

 

In December the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Defence Materiel announced that the Defence Materiel Organisation would develop a Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan.

 

Today, we are releasing details of how that work will be undertaken.

 

The Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan will identify what is required to build and sustain the skills required to successfully deliver Australia’s Future Submarine capability.

 

The plan will be developed by a team be led by the Chief Executive Officer of the Defence Materiel Organisation, Mr Warren King.

 

It will be supported by an Expert Industry Panel headed by Mr David Mortimer, AO.

 

The Expert Industry Panel will include representatives of DMO, Navy, the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education, Skills Australia, unions, the CEOs of the four principal Australian naval shipbuilding companies; ASC, Austal, BAE Systems and Forgacs Engineering and the CEOs of the principal naval systems integration companies: Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Boeing, Thales, Saab Systems and BAE Systems.

 

This group will consult widely with State Governments, Australian industry, industry associations, universities and other academic organisations to develop this plan.

 

Submarine Project Management

Given the central role of submarines in Australia’s national security, the Secretary of the Department of Defence, Duncan Lewis, has recommended that a senior Defence position be dedicated to focusing exclusively on the oversight of all existing and future materiel-related submarine activities in the Department of Defence.

 

The Government has agreed to this course of action and is announcing today the appointment by the Secretary of Mr David Gould as the General Manager of Submarines in the Department of Defence.

 

Mr Gould will work in the Defence Materiel Organisation and will take responsibility for all materiel-related aspects of submarine support across Defence. Mr Gould will report to Mr Warren King, Chief Executive Officer.

 

In addition to working closely with the Chief of Navy, Mr Gould will work across Government and industry as a project integrator to pull together the remediation and support of our existing submarine fleet and the project to replace our existing Collins Class submarines.

 

As a result of Mr Gould’s appointment, and on advice from the Secretary, the previously announced position of Associate Secretary Capability will not be progressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gli spazi dell'Oceano Pacifico sono sempre più affollati e gli Australiani si premuniscono da qualche assenza della US Navy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gli spazi dell'Oceano Pacifico sono sempre più affollati e gli Australiani si premuniscono da qualche assenza della US Navy.

 

 

Guardi Sire che una parte dei 9.000 marines ritirati da Okinawa andranno a Guam, e una parte nell'Australia nord-orientale ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guardi Sire che una parte dei 9.000 marines ritirati da Okinawa andranno a Guam, e una parte nell'Australia nord-orientale ....

Si, avevo visto qualcosa, ma la mia impressione è che gli Australiani non si fidino dell'impegno "eterno" degli Americani: il vuoto lasciato dalla Royal Navy è stato colmato dalla US Navy, ma il numero di unità disponibili diminuisce, l'idea di poter combattere due guerre e mezza svanisce, a nord dell'Australia ci sono grandi tratti di mare contesi ed essenziali per il commercio mondiale ... tutti parlano di BRIC, ma molti dimenticano il Giappone e l'Australia.

12 sottomarini AIP, le nuove LHA, i nuovi caccia, si stanno preparando.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sono convinto anch'io che si stiano preparando e l'integrazione con i sistemi statunitensi credo sia strategico in questo fatto (e non solo nell'ambto del risparmio).

 

sono un po meno convinto dell'arrivo dei 214, anche se ci sono alcune note a favore: questi battelli hanno avuto seri problemi (ufficilamente solo in Grecia ma corrono voci anche per altre nazioni che li hanno acquistati/costruiti). però hanno l'unico sistema affidabile a celle combustibili e, oltre a questo, c'è il fatto che i cantieri svedesi che a suo tempo costruirono i Collins sono controllati dai tedeschi e quindi potrebbero garantire assistenza nell'update e nel passaggio dai vecchi a nuovi battelli.

 

in ogni modo per un battello che entrerà in servizio nel 2020 servirà un salto generazionale, per cui sarà sicuramente l'evoluzione di quanto è oggi in servizio

Edited by Totiano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forse il salto generazionale non coinvolgerà solo la tecnologia ma, come si è accennato in altre discussioni, anche gli equipaggi e la manodopera specializzata.

 

Questi ultimi due punti sono probabilmente difficili da analizzare, ora come ora, sbaglio? Le scuole sommergibili avranno bisogno di adeguati simulatori, di collaborazione da istruttori esterni e quant'altro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sicuramente Simone, anche se in genere sono compresi nel pacchetto di acquisto dell'unità
Ecco un'altra cosa che non sapevo :s68:

 

E riguardo ai tempi di addestramento? In quanto tempo l'equipaggio di un battello può essere considerato pronto all'impiego?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

andiamo decisamente OT su questo argomento. non è semplice dare un dato definitivo, specie su nuove unità. in genere ci sono almeno 6 mesi di addestramento ai simulatori, preceduti da corsi teorici e a cui seguono un addestramento in mare. ma questo è vero quando un battello è consolidato, come i 209 tedeschi ad esempio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
andiamo decisamente OT su questo argomento. non è semplice dare un dato definitivo, specie su nuove unità. in genere ci sono almeno 6 mesi di addestramento ai simulatori, preceduti da corsi teorici e a cui seguono un addestramento in mare. ma questo è vero quando un battello è consolidato, come i 209 tedeschi ad esempio.

 

Scusa, non volevo divagare troppo, però credo sarebbe interessante approfondire la cosa, magari in una nuova discussione.

 

Personalmente credo che l'aspetto umano della faccenda sia veramente interessante!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

con una punta di invidia riporto questa notizia da defencetalk al link http://www.defencetalk.com/japan-australia-eye-submarine-deal-and-closer-military-ties-59822/#ixzz35GgDGQ6Q

i contatti sembrano promettenti per un trasferimento della tecnologia giapponese alla componente sommergibilistica australiana. non ho mai nascosto la mia simpatia per i mezzi subacquei del sol levante, con prestazioni decisamente elevate. credo, peraltro, che sia la prima volta che cio accade al di fuori del profondo legame con gli USA

Japan, Australia eye submarine deal and closer military ties


A huge submarine deal is on the table this week when Japan and Australia meet to shore up their military relationship, as the security architecture of the Asia-Pacific shifts to meet the challenge of a rising China.
Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida and Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera will play hosts in Tokyo on Wednesday to Julie Bishop and David Johnston, their respective opposite numbers, for the fifth round of so-called “2+2″ talks.
High on the agenda will be discussions on the transfer of Japanese submarine technology to Australia, with Canberra needing to replace its fleet of stealth subs over the coming years at a reported cost of up to US$37 billion.
This could see Tokyo’s technology — or even entire Japanese-built vessels — used in the fleet, in a deal that would yoke the two nations together for several decades, binding their militaries with shared know-how.
The expected step comes as China’s relentless rise alters the balance of power in a region long dominated by the United States, with Beijing ever-more willing to use its might to push territorial and maritime claims.
A rash of confrontations in the South China Sea has set off ripples of disquiet in the region, as has the festering stand-off with Japan over islands in the East China Sea.
The worries have encouraged a relationship-building drive across Asia, with Australia and Japan — both key US allies — a notable pairing.
Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Japanese counterpart Shinzo Abe signed a free trade pact and a security deal in April.
Following an Australian request, Tokyo will let Johnston see Japanese submarines during his stay, Onodera said.
The Japanese defence chief also stressed that various “frameworks” — military pacts — grouping Australia, Japan, South Korea, and the United States are vital in ensuring security in East Asia.
Abe’s military push
Abe looks to nudge long-pacifist Japan towards a more active role on the global stage, including loosening restrictions on when its well-equipped armed forces can act.
He has also relaxed a self-imposed ban on weapons exports, giving its high-tech weapons makers a leg-up in the global marketplace.
Japan Inc. has hailed Abe’s promotion of the nation’s military industry, which some see as just another plank in his economic push to boost the nation’s heavy manufacturers and exporters.
However, some analysts suggest it is more nuanced.
Koichi Nakano, political science professor at Sophia University in Tokyo, says Abe’s beefing up of military industry shows the prime minister marrying his twin aims of economic and diplomatic rejuvenation.
“The Abe government may be hoping that they can have a tacit understanding with the Abbott government which is also a conservative regime,” and raise pressure on China, he said.
Observers point out that a more competitive arms industry would be more able to meet future domestic demand in the event that Japan’s military finds itself in need of more firepower.
China’s military has received double-digit budget increases for several years and analysts say its capacity is building towards its ambition of having a blue-seas Navy — one that is able to push the US out of the western Pacific.
The US, in response, has looked to bolster its military capacity in the Asia-Pacific, placing or realigning troops in Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Hawaii and Guam, and trying to thread its friends together.
Abe, for his part, has courted members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), offering coastguard vessels to Vietnam and the Philippines. Both have proved willing to push back against Chinese claims in the South China Sea.
Increasingly, the outlines of a nascent coalition are becoming visible, says Takehiko Yamamoto, a security expert and emeritus professor at Waseda University.
“Naturally, Australia finds Japanese technology attractive,” he said, adding that the nation’s prowess in precision-manufacturing for the highly sophisticated submarine kit was enviable.
Tighter ties between the two US allies, both with vast coastlines, are a part of a greater “security complex”, also involving New Zealand and India, that serves to create a counterbalance to China, said Yamamoto.
“It is a part of a long-term trend,” he said.

 

Edited by Totiano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sul sito di ASC, i cantieri che si occupano della manutenzione delle unità militari australiane, ho rinvenuto un paio di notizie interessanti. la prima risale ad agosto 2014 e conferma (smentendo alcune voci) di avere vinto il nuovo appalto per la manutenzione dei "Collins". è disponibile al link http://www.asc.com.au/en/News-Media/Latest-News/ISSC/ assieme a questa nella foto del HMAS Farncomb

sub%20maintenance_new.jpg

 

Il scondo è la sintetica descrizione del nuovo progetto di sottomarino australiano secondo gli stessi cantieri. Sembra gia datato prima ancora di essere progettato, ma probabilmente mi sbaglio. Le caratteristiche sono disponibili al link http://www.asc.com.au/en/Programs/Submarines/Future-Submarine-Project/ assieme a una interessante impressione pittorica

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anche in Australia ci sono, evidentemente, "problemi di comunicazione". Confesso di aver gioito per loro alla notizia dell'acquisto dell'evoluzione dei Soryu, ma n questo articolo del 9/9/15 del Sidney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/jobs-alarm-over-plan-to-buy-japanese-submarines-20140909-10ekcu.html sembra che le cose non stiano proprio cosi. E, confesso di rimanerne perplesso, sembra che la preoccupazione più grande sia di non irritare i cinesi...

 

ecco l'articolo, assieme a un bel paragone tra i Collins e i Dragoni giapponesi

 

 


 

Jobs alarm over plan to buy Japanese submarines

The federal government is likely to soften a political backlash over plans to buy Japanese submarines – which breaks an election commitment – by sending work on a new "super frigate" to Adelaide shipyards.
With cabinet's National Security Committee set within weeks to make a decision on submarines to replace the Collins class fleet, government sources say the preference is now firmly for an off-the-shelf Japanese boat.
The new submarines, based on the existing Soryu class design, would be built in Japan – a major blow for manufacturing in Adelaide on top of the planned Holden closure. The construction of up to 12 submarines in Adelaide would have created thousands of jobs.
Labor leader Bill Shorten hammered the government over the backflip, which comes despite Defence Minister David Johnston promising before the election that the submarines would be built in Adelaide.
Advertisement
"Labor, if elected, will build submarines in Australia – unequivocally," he said. "Why on earth is the Abbott government exposing ... an island nation like Australia, a proud nation, in uncertain times of international security, to not having the best possible submarines with the best possible security and jobs for Aussies?"
But Mr Johnston accused Labor of neglecting shipbuilding in Australia while it was in office. He said the government had not yet made a decision on submarines and that any decision would be made on the "advice of Australia's defence chiefs".
Fairfax Media understands that instead of the submarine-building work, the government is looking at fast-tracking work on the next generation of Navy frigates at Australian shipyards, including Adelaide. This would be done by building them on the existing 6500-tonne Air Warfare Destroyer hull design, effectively creating super-frigates.
The new submarines would also be maintained in Adelaide, meaning some work would continue there.
Experts have questioned the strategic implications of buying Japanese submarines given it will bind Australia to Japan militarily and is likely to raise hackles in Beijing.
Mark Thomson of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute told ABC radio: "That would alarm [the Chinese] … It would be seen in the context of a closing of US allies in the region, which would heighten [beijing's] already substantial fears of containment," he said.
Critics point out that the range of the Soryu is just 11,000 kilometres – half that of the Collins class. But it is understood the government is considering using Darwin, Broome, or even ports in friendly regional countries such as Singapore, as stop-off points to replenish the boats and extend their range.
One former senior defence official with close knowledge of the submarine program called the decision "just insanity".
"We're going substantially backwards in terms of capability – that's what they're doing," he said.
Terry Roach, a retired Navy commodore now with the Submarine Institute of Australia, said the Japan proposal was "a bad idea", and that there was "uncertainty about the performance of the Soryu".
Rowan Moffitt a retired Navy rear admiral who headed the navy's future submarine program, agreed, saying that too little was known about the Japanese boat.
"We don't know what the mission is that the Soryu is designed to do," he said.
1410327872220.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anche in Australia ci sono, evidentemente, "problemi di comunicazione". Confesso di aver gioito per loro alla notizia dell'acquisto dell'evoluzione dei Soryu, ma n questo articolo del 9/9/15 del Sidney Morning Herald http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/jobs-alarm-over-plan-to-buy-japanese-submarines-20140909-10ekcu.html sembra che le cose non stiano proprio cosi. E, confesso di rimanerne perplesso, sembra che la preoccupazione più grande sia di non irritare i cinesi...

 

ecco l'articolo, assieme a un bel paragone tra i Collins e i Dragoni giapponesi

 

 

 

 

 

 

La questione di irritare i cinesi non è troppo strana quando si parla dell'Australia.

Da molti anni a questa parte l'Australia ha stabilito tantissimi accordi commerciali con la Cina, addirittura per i cittadini cinesi non è necessario nemmeno il visto di lavoro per lavorare in Australia (riservato ai giovani cinesi ovvio), infatti quando sono stato da quelle parti c'erano molti cinesi o di origine cinese come lavoratori nei negozi e nei supermercati.

Inoltre anche le esportazioni e le importazioni tra Australia e Cina sono molto intensificate, in pratica la Cina è un forte partner economico per l'Australia e giustamente il governo aussie non vuole irretire il partner facendo un accordo con i Giapponesi soprattutto con le questioni aperte ancora tra quei due stati.

 

Interessante anche il paragone tra Collins e Soryu, quanto è attendibile come paragone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interessante anche il paragone tra Collins e Soryu, quanto è attendibile come paragone?

 

Hai ragione riguardo alle collaborazione commerciali, non credevo fosse cosi intenso il traffico!

 

E' un paragone fatto con i dati ufficiali, che sono sempre differenti rispetto a quelli effettivi, anche se non si sa di quanto.

Personalmente ho l'impressione (parere personalissimo!) che il problema dei Collins siano anche i suoi uomini e non solo le apparecchiature poco affidabili. Gli svedesi sembra riescano a farli funzionar molto bene i loro apparati.. e anchelo Stirling è un sistema svedese (anche se costruito da Mitsubishi).

 

Circa le problematiche proposte dal giornalista, mi sembrano un po artificiose ma ne possiamo discutere: l'addestramento è sempre e comunque da mettere in conto, mi sembra un non problema e, anzi, una risorsa e un arricchimento; per l'autonomia ridotta, ammesso che i dati siano attendibili, ipotizzo che si possa rimediare in fase di progettazione/adeguamento a requisiti australiani (ma può essere più difficile)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

un articolo molto promozionale di Thyssen, che non lascia nulla di intentato per portare a casa il contratto dei futuri sottomarini australiani. E' una notizia interessante per le novità che porta alla cantieristica e, da perfetto ignorante, mi chiedo come possano avere criptato i dati...

ecco l'articolo reperibile al link http://www.defencetalk.com/new-era-of-digital-shipbuilding-here-with-joint-design-and-build-project-66097/

 

New Era of Digital Shipbuilding Here with Joint Design and Build Project
PERTH, Western Australia: A big step forward was taken today in the future of digital shipbuilding with the unveiling of a submarine hull section designed in Germany with the plans digitally transmitted to a factory in Western Australia and constructed by a local engineering company.
ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems is one of several leading naval ship designer builders to embrace Integrated Product Design Environment (IPDE) for submarine development. This technology has been validated in the most challenging automotive and aerospace environments. It offers a “new way of doing business” and replaces the first or second generation systems used for the current naval shipbuilding program in Australia.
It effectively eliminates geography as a risk factor and allows full collaborative involvement with the customer at every step of the submarine’s life. A number of world class submarine builders use this German system and support ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems’ claim that substantial savings are possible in terms of cost and schedule. The risk associated with transferring information from one country to another is all but eliminated.
Chairman of ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems Australia, Dr John White, said that ThyssenKrupp was able to design the hull section at its Kiel, Germany shipyard for well-known West Australian shipbuilding and engineering company Civmec to use the latest technology to complete the build last Friday in Henderson, WA. This was an exercise to validate the company’s estimates with regard to production cost, quality and production schedules.
“Today’s revealing of the hull section at the Australian Marine Complex (AMC), Henderson is a perfect example of how leaders in the global shipbuilding industry are changing the way they will do business in the future. ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems is at the forefront of integrated digital design, construction and sustainment and sees IPDE as an area of huge potential as Australian shipbuilding meets the challenges of the future. The spin-off impact on advanced manufacturing in Australia will be enormous,” Dr White said today.
ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems is participating in the Federal Government’s Competitive Evaluation Process to select the International Partner to build Australia’s next generation of submarines and sees advanced manufacturing, using digital design, construction techniques and data management, as a key part of its approach.
“The use of digital technologies in advanced manufacturing provides a generational opportunity for our country, as we can now design and build a submarine, being one of the most complex pieces of defence equipment, by bringing all required skills and capabilities together and maximising cost and resource efficiencies. Integrated digital production extends across all aspects of the build, including fit–out, then configuration management, monitoring and support through the operating life-cycle of each submarine.” he said.
“With the Federal Government’s stated commitment to advanced manufacturing and the future of the Australian naval shipbuilding industry, we believe local industry can benefit from an Australian submarine build. It also complements Prime Minister Turnbull’s Innovation Statement last week which set Australia on the path towards a much more innovative and competitive era, something we fully endorse.”
“Importantly, it means that having agreed on the final design of the new submarine fleet in accordance with the Department of Defence’s specific requirements, the process of building the fleet can be completed in Australia using local companies like Civmec, Austal and ASC among others. They will effectively have TKMS as a partner in their workshops and drawing offices, 24/7, as part of a seamless digital data link – effectively an industrial internet.”
“The TKMS ‘digital shipyard’ system, based on the Siemens PLM TeamCentre software, neutralises geographic separation and enables construction with much less errors, re-work, and associated delays and cost increases, than with traditional shipbuilding practices.”
AMC-based Civmec’s Executive Chairman, Mr James Fitzgerald said “The construction of this submarine hull section is testament to the high levels of productivity and quality achieved through the use of technology. Civmec has achieved the transfer of data and the dimensional accuracy required for the construction of a modern submarine. Interfacing our production management system, Civtrac, with the TKMS IPDE has allowed the design detail to be transferred seamlessly into our manufacturing process control system.” The construction of the submarine hull section was a self-funded Civmec initiative to demonstrate the capabilities resident within the company.
Dr White said that his company has engaged already with approximately 500 companies around Australia who could take part in a local submarine build:
“There is no doubt from our Industry roadshow held earlier in the year around Australia there are significant local engineering, technology and construction skills right here. It also means that by entering ThyssenKrupp’s global supply chain, as many companies have now done through the industry day process, local businesses can be part of a viable national shipbuilding industry with the potential to replicate if not exceed the mining and car manufacturing industries,” Dr White said.
“Today’s exciting event here at Henderson is a tangible example of what the future of shipbuilding in Australia looks like.” he concluded.
Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems is one of the leading system providers for non-nuclear submarines and high-end naval vessels. The company stands for marine competence, innovative technologies and comprehensive and reliable Service. Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems offers cutting-edge technology as well as state of the art engineering “Made in Germany”. The company has delivered over 160 submarines to its customers worldwide and has experience in building submarines in the customer’s country as well as in its own yard.
Thyssen Krupp Marine Systems is part of the Thyssen Krupp group, one of the world’s largest diversified industrial and engineering groups. With around 155,000 employees in nearly 80 countries, in fiscal year 2014/2015 Thyssen Krupp generated sales of around €43 billion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come noto saranno francesi a fornire i battelli all'Australia, trasformando i loro Barracuda Nucleari in battelli convenzionali. Personalmente la ritengo una trasformazione non facile e neanche indolore, che potrebbe creare quale mal di pancia al paese dei canguri proprio come i Collins. Comunque, per essere al passo coi tempi e possibilmente anticiparli (il primo battello sarà sugli scali nel 2022 e l'ultimo andrà in disarmo nel 2070) è stata ufficializzata la firma del contratto di 566 milioni di dollari con Lockheed Martin Australia per sviluppare il nuovo sistema di combattimento dei 12 SHORTFIN BARRACUDA. Questo il link all'articolo del The Medi Telegraph http://www.themeditelegraph.com/it/markets/finance-and-politics/2018/03/05/nuovi-sottomarini-della-marina-australiana-focus-CeyHBdbfF94hnRiFOm30AJ/index.html

 

questo è il Barracuda Nucleare, ormai noto come classe Suffren

1217512_shortfin-barracuda-le-nouveau-so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I francesi hanno il chiodo fisso con le trasformazioni.

Se non sbaglio pure i vecchi Rubis erano dei convenzionali nuclearizzati.

Qui invece hanno fatto il contrario.

 

Non mi convince molto questo tipodi trasformazioni, un reattore nucleare ha un numero enorme di dispositivi aggiuntivi e organizzazione degli spazi e delle misure di sicurezza differenti rispetto ad un Diesel/AIP.

Qui in pratica dovranno mettere un Diesel, un AIP (il MESMA francese, Fuel Cell o altro?), un motore elettrico, batterie e serbatoio per il Diesel al posto di un reattore nucleare.

Sicuramente sarà una bella sfida per i cantieri che li costruiranno e anche per i progettisti che dovranno calcolare tutto questo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Già, ma anche il motore elettrico e il propulsore saranno da riprogettare, perché meno potenti (per fare un esempio).

Al momento mi sembra id avere capito che hanno scelto il MESMA (Pessima idea) ma gli stessi francesi si stanno orientando per le FC e, visto che stanno ancora porgettando, non è esclusa qualche sorpresa...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I francesi hanno il chiodo fisso con le trasformazioni.

Se non sbaglio pure i vecchi Rubis erano dei convenzionali nuclearizzati.

Qui invece hanno fatto il contrario.

No, i RUBIS sono sottomarini 'autoctoni', nati da una richiesta canadese che portò poi all'acquisto degli Upholder...

 

Sulla propulsione, temo sarà a celle di combustibile: il MESMA pare sia poco efficiente, rispetto a queste, e non è così certo sia imbarcato.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondo il The Australian Financial Review, i vertici della marina australiana vogliono una estensione della vita operativa dei Collins. Motivo sarebbe una sorta di polizza assicurativa per non perdere le capacità sommergibilistiche australiane in considerazione dei recenti attriti con la Francia per i futuri battelli.

Per i 6 Collins ricordo che era inizialmente previsto l'inizio del disarmo dal 2026 e parliamo di battelli convenzionali  da 3100t. impostati nel 1990 con il primo consegnato nel 1996 (coevo, quindi, dei nostri Sauro IV Serie) costruiti su disegno svedese.

Vi riporto l'articolo  
 

Quote

 

All six Collins submarines set to have their lives extended

By: Andrew Tillett Political correspondent

Navy chiefs want all six of Australia's fleet of ageing Collins class submarines to have their life extended in a move that would act as an insurance policy to preserve capability in the event of further tensions and delays over the French-designed future submarine program. Confirmation of the navy's wishes – which could cost taxpayers as much as $15 billion under one estimate – came as Defence Minister Linda Reynolds was forced to scotch rumours the government was preparing to dump French shipbuilder Naval Group from the future submarine project. HMAS RANKIN is one of six Collins class submarines that will have its life extended. James Brickwood Speculation was rife through the defence industry on Monday that with a massive budget hit looming because of the coronavirus, the government was going to revisit the program and look to a cheaper off-the-shelf design. Senator Reynolds, who spoke to her French counterpart Florence Parly on the weekend about the program, insisted the government remained committed to Naval Group and the project was on track to meet its next major milestone, the Systems Functional Review, in January 2021. "The government is not cancelling the Future Submarine Program," she said.

 

A large submarine travelling on the surface of the ocean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Secondo diverse fonti un delegato dei cantieri francesi sarebbe volato in Australia, per fronteggiare lo scontento degli australiani per il contratto appena siglato. Purtroppo ancora nulla è trapelato da quanto discuso dopo che il delegato ha affrontato la quarantena e incontrato gli australiani che, evidentemente, non si sentono di ricoprire il ruolo di marina del terzo mondo. Ecco uno dei tanti articolo comparsi a fine gennaio, da ARES al link L'Australia starebbe cercando alternative ai nuovi sottomarini francesi da 50 miliardi di euro (aresdifesa.it)

 

Quote

 

L’Australia starebbe cercando alternative ai nuovi sottomarini francesi da 50 miliardi di euro

 

Il più costoso programma militare mai varato dall’Australia, passato da 6,36 miliardi di euro a ben 50,8 miliardi di euro, per la costruzione di 12 nuovi sottomarini potrebbe finire su un binario morto.

Secondo quanto riportato dal quotidiano australiano di finanza Financial Review il Primo Ministro Scott Morrison è sempre più esasperato in primo luogo dai crescenti costi ma anche dai continui litigi e tensioni tra il Dipartimento della Difesa e l’azienda francese Naval Group.

Per la sostituzione dei sei sottomarini classe Collins attualmente in servizio, costruiti a partire dagli anni 90′, l’Australia ha scelto una versione convenzionale dei Barracuda scartando la proposta giapponese (classe Sōryū), tedesca (Type 214), spagnola (S-80), svedese (A26) nonché quella riguardante dei Collins “aggiornati”.

La goccia che avrebbe fatto traboccare il vaso è la spesa per la fase di Critical Design Review stimata inizialmente dagli australiani a 1,5-1,9 miliardi di euro ma per Naval Group è il 50% in più.

Si apre dunque il piano “B” per Canberra con il Dipartimento della Difesa che, secondo diverse fonti, ha allacciato colloqui con la svedese Saab che aveva partecipato alla progettazione dei sottomarini classe Collins. L’idea sarebbe quella di esplorare la possibilità di sviluppare un versione aggiornata e più avanzata della classe Collins.

Altro punto dolente, sempre secondo Financial Review, è il mancato rispetto del paletto del 60% di spesa da parte di Naval Group verso fornitori australiani così come previsto nello Strategic Partnership Agreement.

 

Attack-Class.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Era meglio se prendevano i sub giapponesi e le fregate italiane, così ne hanno prese due di fregate una sotto e una sopra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concordo assolutamente Iscandar. (non ho mai negato il mio amore per quei battelli)

Anche se con SAAB, che ha ereditato il know how Kockums, potrebbero fare un buon affare mettendo sul tavolo alcune inaffidabilità dei Collins.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      44,337
    • Total Posts
      510,998
×