The Sub That Sank Morale
The Sunday Age
Sunday February 7, 1999
To its critics, Australia's six new $5.3billion Collins Class submarines, are known variously as "dud subs" and "sub-standard".
Apocryphal stories about one of the world's most ambitious submarine projects are legion; it was recently reported - incorrectly - that the boats are as noisy as an underwater rock concert and - again incorrectly - that during a recent ocean trial, a computer failure nearly sent one of the boats the way of the Titanic.
A Royal Australian Navy report into the contractual and technical problems that have beset the project (which began when Mr Kim Beazley was the minister) is soon due to be delivered to the Defence Minister, Mr John Moore, prompting talk among senior defence figures that the submarines could be politicised to apportion blame to the former Labor Government.
Problems aside, the navy and the subs' builders at the Australian Submarine Corporation's headquarters in South Australia are proud of their achievements. They argue it is remarkable that the project is only 19 months behind schedule and is on cost; that the Collins is potentially the most capable boat of its type in the world and that the problems - including noise, engine reliability, hitches with the periscopes and glitches in the integrated combat system - are being rectified.
MORALE
The navy concedes that morale among submariners and the subs' builders is suffering because of the criticisms.
"It's very difficult to maintain morale within our group when you get this adverse stuff that doesn't have a lot of foundation. It might have a smell of truth about it, but that tends to be exaggerated out of all proportion. Perhaps (it is) more damaging to the people who are putting the submarines together, who work for the ASC," says Commodore Eoin Asker, the navy's director general of undersea warfare systems.
"They (submariners) become confused. What do they believe? You know, (reports of) 'hull cracks' and such and such. They think 'are we safe or not?' But they know that in terms of manoeuvrability, control systems and accommodation and the creature comforts, they are a damned sight better off than they were in an Oberon."
Those who work for the Submarine Planning Office acknowledge many problems in building six conventional (non-nuclear) submarines to replace Australia's ageing Oberons. But they are also tired of seeing all the attention being given to the hiccups.
In an extensive interview, the project's planning manager, Commander Andy Millar, gave a blow-by-blow account of what is being done to fix the problems.
NOISE
Noise levels, like the top speed of the Collins Class, is classified information. That said, the two submarines so far delivered to the navy, HMAS Collins and HMAS Farncomb, do not meet the noise specifications given to the contractor, the ASC.
While the noise emitted by any submarine is monitored throughout its life and rapidly evolving technology is used to do so, the Collins Class subs are still too noisy for the navy's specifications. While they are quieter than the Oberons (this is to be expected; the Oberon was designed 50 years ago) and some nuclear subs, every decibel counts in combat.
"The Oberon was widely regarded as the quietest submarine in the world, nuclear or conventional. It was an extremely quiet submarine. The Collins right now, on the only side-by-side trial we've done on the same range on the same day, is quieter than the Oberon," says Commander Millar.
"But what we want is something that is quieter than an Oberon, considerably. And in some areas, some areas only, the Collins has not met the noise standards met by the contract. It's still quieter than the Oberon, but it's not what we contracted for."
What is at stake is a 1 or 2 per cent improvement in the noise levels.
"If we can even reduce detection ranges by 50, 100, 200 yards, it can make a big difference in an operational environment," Commander Millar says.
The noise "problem" stems largely from two elements of the submarines: the conventional, external propeller and the shape of the existing fibreglass casing - a pod that covers the upper-hull of the craft so that bollards, external machinery and other attachments can be fitted.
It is not true, as some reports have suggested, that a "special" fibreglass casing needed to be fitted to modify the shape of an existing, somehow defective, metal hull. All submarines have an upper fibreglass casing. What is at question is the shape of the ones fitted to the Collins Class.
THE HULL
The upper fibreglass pods on the two operational subs need modification to facilitate a smoother water-flow and thus reduce noise.
"Because you want an even water flow you've got to cover all that machinery, even the periscopes, with a streamlined pod, if you like, and it's called a submarine's casing. It's made out of fibreglass and it covers all the external paraphernalia that sits on the submarine's hull, to give you that streamline," says Commander Millar.
"It's relatively easy to reshape and put new pieces in. So by doing electronic modelling, flow tests, actual trials at sea, you can develop better shapes. But to a large degree it's a trial and error. We do the modelling, we test it in real life, we improve, we go back and do some more test modelling based on the results of the test and so it goes on."
THE PROPELLER
The propeller is contributing to excessive noise at higher speeds. In the medium term, the navy is considering changes its type, size and shape.
"Or, the way technology is going now, we might do away with the propeller altogether and use some sort of a pump jet or water jet," Commander Millar says.
"It is possible - we are not going to do it right now, but perhaps as we progress, maybe at a half-life refit or whatever. But these technologies are coming along and we are always looking at how to apply them to submarines in service."
COMBAT SYSTEM
Perhaps the greatest controversy has come from the glitches in the integrated combat systems ordered from Rockwell (now Boeing) soon after the subs were designed.
A fully integrated combat system was considered state-of-the art and, indeed, had never been achieved, when the project began in 1987. The integrated system aims to coordinate all of the submarines' senses, such as the periscopes, radar, electronic surveillance equipment and sonars.
Under an integrated system, the information gleaned by the "senses" travels to a central system which transfers it to the weapons and their controllers. But the software has not coped with evolving technology. So if, for example, the navy wants to instal a new periscope or state-of-the-art sonar, it will not easily integrate into the existing system.So the navy has given up on a fully integrated system and is instead installing more stand-alone equipment.
Commander Millar says: "We're not going to get to the totally integrated system that we asked for and that we thought we could achieve ... but what we've got is a very good and a capable combat system, in most areas, and it will certainly do the job."
LATENESS
Problems of reliability with the Hedemora-designed diesel engines - due in part to salt water mixing with the fuel and subsequent engine corosion - and vibration of the periscopes are, the navy remains confident, fixable. These problems have made the project run 20 months late. The navy now estimates that it will take possession of the last sub in May 2001.
"It was an extremely ambitious project, but not overly ambitious. I believe it was achievable and still do. I think 95 per cent of it has already been achieved and the proof is out there in the submarines that we've got at sea ... I wouldn't say it was overly ambitious - we could have had a far less capable submarine but we'd have been left behind the rest of the world," Commander Millar says.
THE POSITIVES
The first staggering success of the project, says Commander Millar, is "the fact that we've done it at all".
"If you consider that Australia had never previously built a submarine, and we've turned out submarines which are equal to any conventional submarines in the world, we've done that within budget and we're only running less than two years late, it is really a staggering achievement," he said.
The project boasts several world's best practice elements, not least the Integrated Ship Management and Monitoring System - a type of "auto-pilot" - is the only known one of its type.
The welding used in the Collins' production - whereby a number of metal "cans" (1200 tonnes of metal and seven kilometres of weld in each sub) are joined together to make a near-perfect cylinder for the hulls - has an error rate 30 times lower than the international industry average.
Perhaps most importantly, sailors like the new subs. The subs need fewer submariners, spend more time under the surface, have roomier sleeping quarters and reverse osmosis distilling units make a daily shower possible - Oberon sailors could expect a short shower once a week.
THE POLITICS
The Defence Minister, Mr John Moore, is about to receive the navy's report into the history of Collins Class - a report he commissioned a few months ago when he said of the project: "It's become ... the most talked about submarine adventure of all time. Even my newsagent tells me how to fix it."
Labor held power throughout much of the project's life and the Opposition Leader, Mr Kim Beazley, was the Defence Minister who - perhaps more enthusiastically than any of his successors - backed the project.
Privately, defence force figures are acutely aware that the project could become a big political issue - and there are signs the navy has sniffed the political wind. The most obvious sign came in December, when the navy refused to take delivery of the third submarine, Waller, because it contained the same faults as those in the two subs the navy had already accepted.
It was a clear sign that the builders would have to rectify the problems in the remaining four subs - and accept public responsibility for them - before the navy would take them.
Nonetheless, the navy is poised to ask the Federal Government to approve $100million more to make improvements to the submarines - such as a modification to allow the rapid exit of special forces troops.
But government sources have indicated their unwillingness to spend any more.
"Defence spending is never popular ... justifiying that sort (of extra) spending on the submarines (to the public) is impossible," a government figure says.
Commodore Asker says the six submarines will be continuously improved throughout their lives. "Quite frankly, we have done a good job, but we can do better," he says.
Propeller/noise
Noise requirements are classified, but the Collins Class do not meet them. The propeller could be modified/replaced or, at some point in the subs' life, be replaced with another propulsion system.
Fibreglass hull/noise
The fibreglass hull on top of the submarines may be modified to change the water flow over the subs and make the subs quieter when diving.
Integrated ship control management system
The only known fully automated ship control system in operation; an effective autopilot.
Diesel engines
There are reliabilty problems with the engines which are being rectified by the designers.
Periscope
Design problems, affecting performance, are being addressed by the designers, Pilkington Optronics, UK.
Manoeuvrability
Collins has exceeded specifications on overall manoeuvrability.
Upper and lower accommodation and gallery
The habitability of the Collins Class is equal to, or better than, any other conventionally powered sub. Morale has lifted as a result.
Integrated combat system
Due to rapidly evolving technology, the combat system has not been able to fully integrate. Some capabilities may end up outside the integrated system. In the longer term, a new "brain" may be needed for the system.
Welding
World's best practice in the error rate of welding the "cans" together to make the steel hulls of the subs.
© 1999 The Sunday Age