This Topic was moved here from Technically Speaking by freediver.

Do we have the technical ability to build 12 new top subs?

Yes, i think we do after all we are one of the most developed and educated countries in the world, its all down to practice really. Maybe first we should of build foreign designed subs so our engineers and designers get experience working and building subs.

Bobby. wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 6:16pm:


As of 2013 3 are Active, the subs have experience over its life time a lack of interest, neglect as well as technical problems and improper handling of design changes during construction (in other words lack of experience).

As i said before we should first build foreign tested subs so we can get more experience in handling the design and solving minor technical problems. Also we should build subs for other counties because it will again gain us more experience.

Also if we want a sub force (which is critical to the defence of Australia) there should be NO MORE DEFENCE CUTS. Cutting defence does so much damage to the capability for our defence force to defend Australia and maintain a experience, well man and funned military.

SEA 1000 as outlined by the Rudd Government was to build 12 Submarines. The design successor to Collins will not see 12 submarines built at once rather by the time that number 12 is built the first of the twelve will be retiring and the build process will start again. This permits incremental changes and developments to be incorporated in each successive boat (iron out the bugs and any design flaws, avoid block obsolesce) and to also sustain a submarine building industry within Australia. One of the biggest issues with Collins is that many of the companies that built things such as the engines or other components no longer exist. The RAN struggles to acquire replacement parts and has will ASC to get very creative at times. In the case of the engines they make every part from scratch because the company that produced them no longer exists.
There is no comparative design that can even be modified to suit the requirements of Australia. The Spanish S-80 was promoted as a possible MOTS however it has now been found to be a tonne over maximum weight and likely to be able to surface once submerged. It is expected it will take up to 2 years to resolve this problem. Australia subs have a large area of responsibility, when they work they are awesome weapons and intelligence gathering assets and those who have played war games against them respect their capabilities and lethality. The energy being put into SEA 1000 and the quality of people with a great deal of experiences and passion is extremely exciting! Lots of lessons have been learned and hopefully the project decision regarding a modern and highly capable design is made soon. The biggest issue with design will be if all systems such as UUV amongst others are added that a sufficient power source is available to operate these and any future additions - the current power generating system demands is something Collins struggles with.

Old Codger wrote on Oct 7^th, 2013 at 1:57pm:


I don't thinks so.
No one with half a brain would want to work in an underwater coffin
which is all subs are.

Bobby. wrote on Oct 7^th, 2013 at 2:02pm:



Luckily there are still men and women in the ADF willing to do the hard yards in dangerous conditions even if 'men' like yourself are willing to stand by and let them.

Don't judge everyone based on your limited capabilities.

Of the 6x 'Collins' subs,  we have about 2 full crews available.

I believe that the cook on one of them earns more than the Chief of Navy!

Such are the 'incentives'.


OC