''His senior, Coalition defence spokesman, David Johnston, agrees. Except for the Dutch navy, which sends its four ageing Walrus subs across the Atlantic to Caribbean possessions (and, since Britain went all-nuclear, trains our sub captains), the European fleets are designed to ''lurk'' close to their homelands. Already both extremes are looking doubtful: the European MOTS option because of inadequate capability; a new all-Australian sub because, as a Rand Corp study for Defence concluded, it would take 15 years just to design.Almost certainly, the process will zero down to an ''enhanced'' version of an existing European MOTS submarine such as HDW's projected 3800-tonne Type 216; an enhanced Collins class; and just possibly, an Australianised version of Japan's Soryu, if Tokyo would release its design, probably fitted with the US Navy combat system and weapons.With a commonly accepted price of $36 billion for 12 large submarines - albeit over 20 years but about the cost of the National Broadband Network, with no direct economic payback beyond the ''existential'' insurance - a repeat of the Collins saga terrifies many politicians. ''No other navy uses that combat system than the United States and us, or the weapon,'' Moffitt says. Peter Yule came to speak at DSTO and he was a reasonable speaker even though I snoozed through the latter part of the talk. ''Widely seen as ''dud subs'' after well publicised problems - unreliable diesels of a unique design from a now-defunct manufacturer, faulty electrical trains, vibrating telescopes, noisy hull flows, cavitating propellers and a combat system that wouldn't talk to the rest of the sub - the Collins class may bely that reputation.The vessels even have some of the capabilities seen for the fleet of 12 ''future submarines'' envisaged in the 2009 Defence white paper. ''They can make very fast underwater transits, but their wash is like a jet stream you can see from a satellite in calm water for hundreds of kilometres, and you can see it way down,'' Ohff said.The military off-the-shelf (MOTS) option has more proponents - mostly because of their relative cheapness and proven technology. ''When we step off, partners tend to reel back. We are in a perfect place to build subs again with an enormous amount of knowledge as to how to do it. ''With the improved reliability and possible extended life of the Collins class, plus the eagerness of foreign designers to join Australia's submarine program, the feared ''capability gap'' in Australia's defences might not be too wide - and Collins may not go down as just technological hubris in the history books.At ASC - introducing staff like apprentice mechanic and part-time engineering student Sonya McClellan, who was working on the torpedo tubes of HMAS Sheean - Ludlam says it would be sad to close the book on submarine-building. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. In theory this could mean a new fabrication yard. PM. A few analysts like the ANU strategist Hugh White believe the MOTS option would allow many more submarines to be acquired and spread out for the same money.But the navy is adamantly against it, though it's been dutifully studying those available and seeing if the Raytheon-Mark 48 combination can be installed.
Recognizing the importance of past experiences for successful program management, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Commonwealth of Australia asked the RAND Corporation to develop a set of lessons learned from previous submarine programs that could help inform future program managers. ''The nuclear option is ruled out by navy and industry alike, even if the US Navy were ready to transfer a nuclear sub like its Virginia class.
''We have gone through so much pain, such a long journey, the nation has spent an enormous amount of money working out how to build subs and what not do to. Drawing upon decades of experience, RAND provides research services, systematic analysis, and innovative thinking to a global clientele that includes government agencies, foundations, and private-sector firms.Assistant Policy Researcher; Ph.D.
Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. ''On the one hand, just buy it off the shelf - because the nation made such a Horlicks of Collins, we should never do that again; on the other, we've just got to have nuclear submarines - it's obvious. ''All these nations are ferociously after Australia's business because they have to be,'' Moffitt said. Also available in print form.Schank, John F., Frank W. Lacroix, Robert Murphy, Mark V. Arena, and Gordon T. Lee, ''Nuclear subs are a fantastic device if you want to blow up the world,'' says Hans Ohff, the former ASC chief who oversaw building of the Collins class. The Collins was the first submarine built in Australia. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.Permission is given to duplicate this electronic document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete.