Page 74 - Australian Defence Magazine October 2019

PACIFIC
ATTACK CLASS
“One submarine is not converted to another. Rather, a design reference is selected and an iteration of a new design is developed to meet the requirement.”
However, the potential loss of marginal parliamentary seats in South Australia elic- ited early confirmation from the Turnbull government, subsequently re-elected in July 2016, that all 12 submarines would be built in Adelaide, the location of Commonwealth- owned Collins-class shipbuilder ASC.
Upward of 6,000 pages of data were received across the three CEP responses and subjected to detailed analysis across 12 criteria that were advised in advance to the participants.
These included capability, pre-concept design, options for overseas and domestic build, the ability to work with the even- tual combat system integrator (Lockheed Martin Australia later defeated Raytheon Australia for that role in a closed tender competition), sustainment, safety and commercial issues, as well as the strategic overlay that would be created by govern- ment-to-government agreements.
Indicative costs were also sought, al- though accurate figures could only be de- veloped during the design process where informed decisions would be made on cost and capability in relation to risk.
A French connection
In announcing the selection of DCNS as the program’s international partner in April 2016, Turnbull referred to the superior sen- sor performance and stealth characteris- tics offered by the Shortfin Barracuda 1A. Other considerations had included requisite range and endurance as well as cost, sched- ule, program execution, through-life sup- port, and Australian industry involvement.
This decision was widely accepted as one based on technical merit rather than on so-called strategic considerations. The likelihood of the latter had diminished following Abbott’s departure from the prime ministership during the CEP infor- mation-gathering phase.
According to unconfirmed but uncon- tested media reports, TKMS was subse- quently informed by a Defence debriefing team that its proposed Type 216 design would produce an unacceptable level of ra- diated noise at a specific frequency.
The Defence team also reportedly ex- pressed reservations about the safety of the lithium-ion batteries proposed by TKMS; also about the company’s ability to build
and power a submarine that would be al- most double the size of its largest boat to date, the 2,177 tonne Dolphin II class.
Japanese defence officials were told that the noise level and other stealth indicators of their proposed evolution of the Soryu- class did not meet Australian require- ments, the reports said.
Some Soryu attributes were assessed as less capable than those already deployed on Col- lins, while their country’s inexperience in designing and constructing a submarine for an overseas navy was seen as a disadvantage.
Pre-concept design
The pre-concept design for the Shortfin Barracuda 1A envisaged a boat 97 metres long equipped with four diesel alternators to generate electricity, a large permanent magnet motor, hydroplanes that could re- tract to reduce noise and drag, and a pump jet propulsor instead of a propeller to re- duce radiated noise and avoid cavitation, particularly at higher speeds.
The diesel-electric propulsion system would feature lead-acid batteries rather than the lithium-ion type that had been proposed by the German and Japanese contenders, although a later move to lith- ium-ion was acknowledged as an option.
Gerard Autret, chief naval architect of the Shortfin Barracuda, emphasised that the Future Submarine would not be a con- version of the nuclear-powered Barracuda, but a new design using the Barracuda as its design reference.
Known references would be utilised on matters such as hull diameter, length and
HMAS Collins conducts a passenger transfer serial with HMAS Canberra’s embarked MRH-90 helicopter during AUSINDEX 2019.
74 | October 2019 | www.australiandefence.com.au
DEFENCE