PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

Airey Belvoir 12th Dec 2013 06:51

Don't knock the Collins and diesel-electric submarines too much. They are very much quieter than nukes. This is a quote from the American National Defense magazine:



Hard-to-detect submarines — such as quiet, diesel-electric boats — are particularly vexing, Navy officials say. They contend that an undersea arms race already has begun in the western Pacific.


Nations there in recent years have begun to acquire stealthy diesel-electric submarines. Some of those nations, say Navy officials, could one day threaten U.S. access to strategic coastal areas of the world or interrupt the flow of commerce around the globe.


Although the Navy has the world’s most technologically advanced fleet — including state-of-the-art nuclear attack submarines — officials acknowledge that these comparatively low-tech diesel-electric boats could give an enemy an asymmetric advantage.


“The beauty about a diesel submarine is that it has the potential to be far quieter than a nuclear submarine,” says Guy Stitt, president of AMI International, a Bremerton, Wash.-based company specializing in naval market analysis. Diesel boats are propelled by batteries when submerged and move through the water by diesel engines when on the surface.

But to counteract that advantage Aussies subs need range and endurance.


With the plans to upgrade Stirling Naval Base in WA to create a facility for the USN - including their submarines - then Australia may well acquire the ability to maintain nuclear subs. We just need to get it past the greenie nutters in Fremantle!

500N 12th Dec 2013 06:53

I missed that.

Our subs are very quiet.

We just need to get it past the greenie nutters in Fremantle!"

That is what filler in the foundations is for ;) :O

Worrals in the wilds 12th Dec 2013 06:58


Our subs are very quiet.
Particularly when they're not working. :suspect::}
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Solid Rust Twotter 12th Dec 2013 07:10

Thought the diesel electrics ran quieter submerged than the nukes. It's the limited working time and necessity for recharging the batteries on the surface that makes them a liability.

LordGrumpy 12th Dec 2013 07:13

Diesel Electric Submersibles.
Probably don't work in SRT's backyard.

chuboy 12th Dec 2013 07:31

In other news
Malcolm Turnbull dumps promises as NBN costs blow out by $29 billion

Strictly speaking I'm sure this goes against TA's no surprises policy. Though I knew from the outset their promise was unachievable - too bad this was only obvious to those who did their own research.

Now we have an 'independent report' telling us that, shock horror, the Coalition's hodgepodge solution is superior to the gold standard for comms (fibre to the premises) because of inherently arbitrary costings. And still no sooner than before. So it's not faster and it's not sooner. It might not even be cheaper. This government could have done the right thing and gone with the future proof solution. Instead it has attempted to save face and broken promises anyway while betraying Australians of the future. :(

Airey Belvoir 12th Dec 2013 07:52

And who created the problem in the first place?


That's what you get when you combine an egotist, a Neanderthal and a fag-packet.

Solid Rust Twotter 12th Dec 2013 09:04

Too true, yer Grumpship. Doesn't matter how many cases of fish you pile up around them, submarines still stick out like a sore thumb here in the kangene.:}

Andu 12th Dec 2013 09:28


The Aussie subs have consistently managed to get close to US Fleets
and I think they even took a photo of a US Aircraft carrier through the
periscope !
500N, I think you'll find that that was an O Boat. Oberon Class - now that was a quiet boat. The Navy used to put a steel rod against the hull, the other end against the electric motor to give the P2/P3 guys a fighting chance of finding them.

A Brit O Boat doing a 'meet and greet' visit to the USN was late turning up to meet the escort ship that would take it into harbour. It surfaced a 100 metres or so from the dock in the USN's main Atlantic submarine base. The Yanks went ballistic, saying "What would have happened if we'd detected you? We'd have sunk you." The Brit captain replied "But you didn't detect me, did you?". That was quite a feat, on par, if not well beyond, with the U Boat that got into Scapa Flow.

As has been mentioned already, the main reason the RAN needs nukes is range. Everywhere they are likely to be deployed is a very long way from any available refuelling port - and every time they are forced to refuel, (even if they were able to do so at sea as the Germans did with their 'milch cow' boats in mid Atlantic), they are forced to throw away their primary advantage, that of not letting the other side know where they are. A nuke also allows a tactical advantage over a diesel of not needing to snort every three of four days. If the other side knows you're in the area, snorting again puts the boat at enormous risk.

Worrals, the only proscription on the RAN getting a nuclear powered boat is the Greens and Labor luvvies who would all get an attack of the vapours at the very thought of it that would put Sarah Hanson-Young at her best to shame.

SOPS 12th Dec 2013 09:35

I would love seeing SHY having a vapour attack over nuke subs. Perhaps throw in a rumour that they will be used to sink AS boats on their way to Christmas. The end result would be priceless.:E

500N 12th Dec 2013 09:36

I think it has also occurred with the Collins class subs.
I had read it before but it was on a TV Show I watched about
Aussie subs.

"The Diesel-Electric Submarine Threat To put it simply, if naval exercises in the last two decades involving foreign diesel-electric submarines had been actual combat, most if not all, U.S. aircraft carriers would be at the bottom of the ocean: as many as 10 U.S. aircraft carriers have been reported “sunk” in these exercises.

The analytically conservative Congressional Budget Office was alarmed enough to officially report that “some analysts argue that the Navy is not very good at locating diesel-electric submarines, especially in noisy, shallower waters near coastal areas. Exercises with allied navies that use diesel-electric submarines confirm that problem…[For example,] Israeli diesel-electric submarines, which until recently were relatively old, are said to always ‘sink’ some of the large and powerful warships of the U.S. Sixth Fleet in exercises. And most recently, an Australian Collins-class submarine penetrated a U.S. carrier battlegroup and was in a position to sink an aircraft carrier during exercises off Hawaii in May 2000.”

There have been many such exercise “sinkings” since then, including aircraft carriers Reagan and Lincoln.


Worrals in the wilds 12th Dec 2013 09:37


Worrals, the only proscription on the RAN getting a nuclear powered boat is the Greens and Labor luvvies who would all get an attack of the vapours at the very thought of it that would put Sarah Hanson-Young at her best to shame.
Okay, ta. I must have mis-remembered it. :\

Deaf 12th Dec 2013 13:13


Wasn't the F-111 Nuclear capable ?

Pretty sure it was.
In ~1987 CINPAC said some stuff about pig targets in WWIII Petropavlovsk etc.

So one way missions with iron bombs - a big ask for the crew!!!

500N 12th Dec 2013 13:18

I looked it up earlier, it was Nuclear capable.


Didn't the Aussies think about flying a couple down main street Indonesia
as well around that time ;)

John Eacott 12th Dec 2013 19:23

The Sea King was also delivered to the RAN with the wiring loom for the 600lb bomb.

Which the squadrons thought to be the wiring for the heated gloves/socks for the airframe driver, and wanted removed as surplus to requirements ;)

Diesel electric boats are generally much quieter than nukes: something about having a largish cooling system having to run around the glow-in-the-dark stuff that the nukes have, which is a bit difficult to keep as quiet as would be liked.

7x7 12th Dec 2013 20:59

Every now and again, I stumble upon someone else's comments and find myself saying "He's said exactly what I feel - but he's put it far better than I could." And so it was this morning while I was trolling the Piers Ackerman blog.


Bwana Neusi replied to Boambee John
Thu 12 Dec 13 (10:24pm)
Management 101 states that to change the culture of an organisation is difficult and extremely prone for it to revert to type.

Typically it can take seven to ten years to breed out the dominant culture (whether it be lack of productivity, quality, ethical behaviour or political bias etc etc) and within our federal political calendar that is a major challenge.

The alternative is the radical snap restructuring followed by a ‘freeze’ period to have a chance of sustaining those changes.

Our ABC ( and our education system) suffer from systematic manipulation from the left over a long period (option 1 above). The culture is now so well established that it would require a harsh, even brutal, readjustment to have any chance of success.

It remains to be seen whether the Coalition are prepared to try the ‘softly, softly’ approach with its inherent risk of failure or take the less politically acceptable but radical approach
Re nukes versus diesels: with the very long distances involved in any deployment of an Australian submarine, refuelling becomes an overriding problem that limits the effectiveness of any such deployment. When it gets 'on station' (for want of a better term), if it has to break contact every couple of days to snort, it doesn't matter how quiet it is. It will be located and destroyed.

But hey, how important is that when building a new series of diesels will provide jobs in marginal electorates in Adelaide? Maybe even for some laid off Holden "workers"? Gotta get our priorities right everyone...

7x7 12th Dec 2013 21:08

John Eacott, when the Navy got its token couple of 'Bravo' model Iroquois helicopters, all its other aircraft were of British origin, with radios incompatible with the American kit in the new Hueys.

So the Navy retrofitted the Hueys with Brit radios.

How did they remove the American radios? Did they undo the really easy to use canon plugs, leaving the 'attached to aircraft' half of the canon plugs in place? Nahhh, they took to the looms - on the 'aircraft' side of each canon plug - with bloody great wire snippers, leaving raw cabling, to which they jury-rigged the old Brit radios.

That small story is almost the Australian Defence 'posture', led by DMO, to this day, in microcosm.

dat581 12th Dec 2013 22:12

Don't know about the F111s but I suspect refitting RAAF F/A-18As for US nuclear weapons would be a very quick job. I was told by a former RAAF fitter that the only parts missing from Australian Hornets are the nuclear encoders which render the weapons useless lumps when carried. Don't know if the wiring is in place but I'm sure the software in the weapons system is there. Why take it out and possibly mess up the program. The story may be similar for the Super Hornets. He also said they quite liked having the nuclear enable switch still in place to annoy the lefties even though it's not connected to anything.

7x7 13th Dec 2013 09:43

This one's been around for a while, but that doesn't make it any less alarming.


Here’s how a doctor explains it:

A woman in her late 20's came to the hospital today with her 8th pregnancy.
She said to me "My mum told me that I am the breadwinner for the family."
I asked her to explain.

She said that she can make babies and babies get money from the Government for the family.

It goes like this:

The Grandma calls the Department of child services and Centrelink, and states that the unemployed daughter is not capable of caring for
all of her kids. And they agree, then tells her the children will need to go into foster care.

The Grandma then volunteers to be the foster parent, and receives a cheque for $400 per child each month.

Total yearly income: $72000pa and soon to be more when the 8th one is born, tax-free and nobody has to go to work!

In fact, they get more if there is no husband/father/man in the home! The brother does not count.

Not to mention free dental treatment, free housing, free school dinners, free tuition fees at college or Uni, free eye care and glasses,free prescriptions and various other benefits...

Total value of all benefits combined probably approaching $120,000 per annum.

That's about my salary as a senior consultant with years of experience and surgical skills in a Melbourne teaching hospital.

Indeed, Grandma was correct that her fertile daughter is the "breadwinner" for the family.

This is how the politicians spend our taxes.

When this generous programme was invented in the '60s, the Great Society architects forgot to craft an end date... and now we are hopelessly over run with people who vote only for those who will continue to keep them on the dole.....

No wonder our country is broke!

Worse, our Muslim brothers have been paying attention, and by mandating that each Muslim family have eleven children.

They will soon replace the voting bloc above and can be running this country in around 12 years.

Are we alarmed yet, is anybody listening?

Please know I am not racist nor am I against Immigration, I just worry where this uncontrolled sort of immigration is going to take this wonderful country. There must be limits and controls in place or in around 12 years or less we will be going to midday prayers at the local mosque.

That's a simple fact of life my friends. They clearly intend to force that upon us.

Sincerely,
Sebastian J. Ciancino - Obstetrician,
Melbourne Vic

Don't forget to pay your taxes!!

There are a lot of “breadwinners” depending on you!

Well? Is anybody listening??

Andu 13th Dec 2013 10:17

One thing we probably won't hear or see on the ABC: Scott Morrison's weekly briefing on illegal boat arrivals. For the last seven days, one boat containing two crew and three passengers.


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:39.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.