 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Britain’s Defence Cuts : Australia Offers Hands To Axed British Sailors Truth Dive, December 29
Two of South Korea's submarines will be tasked with attempting to penetrate the screen that has been stepped up off the coast of the southern part of the peninsula since a North Korean torpedo sank the South Korea warship Cheonan in March 2009, with the deaths of 46 sailors. To make the "surprise" drills more realistic, South Korean surface forces will not be informed of when the exercise will take place, a navy official told the Yonhap news agency. "We will simulate enemy infiltration using our own submarines for 'surprise' exercises starting early next year," the official said. "These have been designed to enhance our navy's capability to detect infiltrating North Korean submarines. "Next year, our drills will be more intense and will closely resemble actual battles," he said. International concern has been focused on North Korea's nuclear programme and the development of missiles to deliver atomic warheads, but Seoul has good cause to fear Pyongyang's conventional forces. As well as a regular standing army of 1.2 million troops, the North has 250 long-range artillery pieces along the border between the two nations Canberra, Dec 29 (TruthDive): The Australian navy is planning to recruit up to 1,000 Royal Navy sailors facing redundancy under the latest defence cuts. Recruiting foreigners accommodates to the UK defense budget shrink resulting in 17,000 layoffs through 2015. The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) already sent a delegation to London to study the potential recruitment of Royal Navy soldiers. Australia’s jobs-aplenty economy has prompted the staff-strapped Defence Force to look abroad for soldiers, sailors and pilots. The Australian Defence Force, which is facing competition for personnel – particularly engineers – due to the nation’s lucrative mining boom, confirmed that talks had taken place with British officials. Commandos, intelligence officers and submariners are being offered instant jobs and fast-tracked citizenship to fight for a new country, the Defence Force website said Tuesday. ‘We are looking for serving or ex-serving foreign military personnel, who can directly transfer their job and life skills to whichever Service they join, with limited training and preparation,’ it said. Recruitment programmes at home have proved insufficient to bring the Defence Force staff up to the target of 55,000. The navy is unable to put all six of its submarines in service at the same time because of staff shortages. A report on maintenance in Australia’s navy suggested that as many as 200 engineers are needed to rebuild lost expertise. The paper reports the department is also looking for defence specialists, such as fighter pilots, submarine crews and officers and is offering fast-tracked Australian citizenship as an incentive. The Australian navy chief Ray Griggs has told his British counterpart, First Sea Lord Admiral Mark Stanhope that they will not poach any people that they need. The Australian Defence Force was also looking to other western countries, including the United States, Canada and New Zealand, to build up personnel, particularly for its submarine crews. Since it doesn’t have nuclear weapons yet, Iran is playing the lone trump card in its hand: threatening to shut down the Strait of Hormuz through which Persian Gulf oil flows to fuel much of the world’s economy. Iranian navy chief Admiral Habibollah Sayyari told state television Wednesday that it would be “very easy” for his forces to shut down the chokepoint. “Iran has comprehensive control over the strategic waterway,” he said as his vessels continued a 10-day exercise near the strait. But just how good a trump card is it? Iran has constructed a navy with considerable asymmetric and other capabilities designed specifically to be used in an integrated way to conduct area denial operations in the Persian Gulf and SoH, and they routinely exercise these capabilities and issue statements of intent to use them,” Jonathan Schroden writes in a recent report for the Pentagon-funded Center for Naval Analyses. “This combination of capabilities and expressed intent does present a credible threat to international shipping in the Strait.” Not so fast, other experts maintain. “We believe that we would be able to maintain the strait,” Marine General James Cartwright, then-vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Congress last year. “But it would be a question of time and impact and the implications from a global standpoint on the flow of energy, et cetera, [that] would have ramifications probably beyond the military actions that would go on.” International maritime law guarantees unimpeded transit through straits, and any deliberate military disruption is an act of war. “Anyone who threatens to disrupt freedom of navigation in an international strait is clearly outside the community of nations,” the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet said from its headquarters in Bahrain. “Any disruption will not be tolerated.” Of course, brandishing a threat and carrying it out are two different things. “By presuming that Iran can easily close the strait, Western diplomats concede leverage, and the current U.S. habit of reacting immediately and aggressively to Iranian provocations risks unnecessary escalation,” Eugene Gholz, a professor at the University of Texas, wrote in Foreign Policy in 2009. “Iran would find it so difficult, if not impossible, to close the strait that the world can afford to relax from its current hair-trigger alert.” Most U.S. military thinkers, speaking privately, seem to agree. There are two linked issues at play here: military and monetary. While it might be challenging for the Iranian navy to shut down commerce flowing through the strait, Iranian moves to carry out that threat could have much the same effect. Oil companies, and the shippers that transport their product by water, are conservative business types, not given to putting their costly tankers and crews in harm’s way. But they’d get over it pretty quickly, and commerce would resume, with higher insurance rates. One point worth noting: analyses of possible Iranian military action to plug the strait generally note that Iran gets about half of its national budget from oil exports that transit the strait. But if the next round of sanctions keeps Iranian oil off the world market, that brake on Iranian military action will be gone. Iran has been practicing such saber-rattling for decades, and it always sends a nervous twitch through the world oil markets, spiking prices upward. It has done so this week, and oil’s per-barrel price has flirted with the $100 mark. That’s a drag on the world economic powers seeking to punish Iran for its nuclear-development efforts, and Tehran plainly views it as a net-positive for itself. That’s especially true in the year leading up to a U.S. presidential election, where the incumbent is seeking a second term. About a fifth of the world’s oil flows through the strait, which is only 34 miles wide at its narrowest point. But the navigable part of the strait is 20 miles across, although shipping is supposed to use a pair of two-mile wide channels, one inbound and the other outbound. Iran borders the strait to the north and east, and it has a major naval base – and its key submarine base – close by. “While closing the Strait may be possible for Iran for a short period of time, the U.S. military would prevail in a conflict with Iran in order to re-open the Strait at a great cost to the Iranian armed forces,” Brenna Schnars wrote in a 2010 study at the Naval Postgraduate School. “With international mistrust concerning the Iranian nuclear program already at the height of world concerns, an Iranian closure of the Strait would only enrage the majority of the international community, as their economies would severely suffer without its oil imports from the Persian Gulf.” U.S. Navy Commander Rodney Mills examined the military implications of an Iranian move to shut the strait in a 2008 study at the Naval War College. His bottom line: There is consensus among the analysts that the U.S. military would ultimately prevail over Iranian forces if Iran sought to close the strait. The various scenarios and assumptions used in the analyses produce a range of potential timelines for this action, from the optimistic assessment that the straits would be open in a few days to the more pessimistic assessment that it would take five weeks to three months to restore the full flow of maritime traffic. But fighting an Iranian effort to close the strait may not be easy. Iran in recent years has acquired “thousands of sea mines, wake homing torpedoes, hundreds of advanced cruise missiles and possibly more than one thousand small Fast Attack Craft and Fast Inshore Attack Craft,” U.S. Navy Commander Daniel Dolan wrote in a report last year at the Naval War College. “…The majority of these A2/AD [anti-access, area-denial] forces are concentrated astride the vital Strait of Hormuz…” He urged the U.S. and its allies to fight any Iranian effort to shut the strait from the relative safely of the Arabian Sea, that broad body of water between the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean. “It will allow the [allied commander] to concentrate fires on attriting the enemy forces,” he said, “while denying the enemy an equal opportunity to return fires.” History offers some guidance. In the 1980s, the “tanker wars” between Iran and Iraq in the Persian Gulf – which led to 544 attacks and 400 civilians killed over eight years – the oil flow dropped by 25% before returning to normal levels. Insurances rates also would rise – perhaps from a penny to $6 a barrel, Mills estimates – a steep hike in insurance premiums, but not that much when tacked on to a $100 barrel of oil. “Despite the increased risk,” Mills notes, “history shows us that insurance will remain available at a reasonable rate for the value of the cargo shipped.” Iran has scant chance of covertly mining the strait, U.S. military officers say. Small boats or anti-ship missiles would make more military sense. But Iran’s trio of Russian-built Kilo-class submarines, as well as a dozen smaller subs, would be vulnerable to U.S. anti-submarine warfare. “The (U.S.) Navy,” Mills wrote, “would be eager to permanently eliminate the Iranian submarine threat in a naval conflict.” And attacks Iran launched against tankers aren’t guaranteed to work. “Most tankers today are of newer, double-hulled designs; coupled with internal compartmentalization, this tends to limit damage from an explosion,” Mills’ study said. “There are relatively few areas of vital machinery that could disable the vessel if damaged, and much of the vital machinery is underwater.” But what about all that oil? “The crude oil they carry tends to absorb and dissipate the shock caused by an explosion, reducing the effectiveness of the warhead,” Mills wrote. “And the crude oil is not very flammable, reducing the chance of fire or secondary explosion.” All this is not to say any battle over the strait would be a cakewalk, as some U.S. officials erroneously predicted the Iraq war would be. If war were to break out, Iran would throw everything it has into the fight. “It’s clear that the Iranians have taken an approach in which they are going to attempt to use small boats, swarms, cruise missiles, mines, perhaps suicide boats, small submarines,” Vice Admiral Mark Fox, the top U.S. commander in the region, said earlier this year. “We watch them very carefully and understand where they are, what they’re doing.” Fox’s 5th Fleet, which patrols the region, recommends its officers read Immortal: A Military History of Iran and Its Armed Forces, by CIA analyst Steven R. Ward. “Iran’s soldiers, from the famed `Immortals’ of ancient Persia to today’s Revolutionary Guard, have demonstrated through the centuries that they should not be underestimated,” a summary of the book on the fleet’s web site says. “The Iranians’ ability to impose high costs on their enemies by exploiting Iran’s imposing geography bear careful consideration today by potential opponents.” Fox acknowledges that “imposing geography” cited by Ward as the admiral discussed how the Iranians would likely fight. “They have a long littoral there — it’s 1,300 nautical miles,” Fox said. “They’ve got a lot of places where they have an ability to set up, they have coves for small boats and cruise missiles that can potentially move around.” All this would complicate any conflict. But Mills sees all the Iranian rhetoric and war gaming as little more than Persian saber rattling. “Iran gains more from the existence of their threat,” he concludes, “than they would by actually carrying it out.” Back to Top NEW DELHI: Faced with a fast-depleting underwater combat arm even as both China and Pakistan rapidly bolster their fleets, India is planning a major rejig of its submarine production plans to ensure its operational readiness does not get further eroded in the years ahead. For starters, the case for equipping the last two of the six French Scorpene submarines being built at Mazagon Docks (MDL) with the crucial air-independent propulsion (AIP) systems is now being ``progressed'', say top defence ministry sources. The six diesel-electric Scorpenes are slated for delivery in the 2015-2020 timeframe under the ongoing Rs 23,562-crore `Project-75', three years behind schedule. AIP in the fifth and sixth vessels, costing an additional Rs 1,000 crore each, will give them a deadlier killer punch and stealth because they will be able to stay submerged for much longer periods before surfacing to get oxygen to recharge their batteries. Then, India is likely to go in for three additional Scorpenes after the first six. ``While no decision has yet been taken, it makes economic sense since six of them are already being built at MDL. The second submarine workshop at MDL, incidentally, will get operational soon,'' said a source. It will also be operationally expedient since, as was first reported by TOI earlier, the already long-delayed follow-on `Project-75 India' to acquire six new-generation stealth submarines will take at least another two to three years to be even finalized. It will take another seven years, if not more, after that for the first new submarine to toll out. ``Going in for three more Scorpenes is one way out of the logjam over P-75I, with Navy and MoD yet to agree on the shipyards to execute the project. The French companies will, of course, charge hefty amounts for the ToT (transfer of technology) packages for the three more Scorpenes,'' he said. Moreover, the P-75I programme may also be expanded to include nine submarines, all equipped with both tube-launched missiles for land-attack capabilities as well as AIP, instead of the six planned as of now for well over Rs 50,000 crore. ``Two submarine production lines with enhanced capacity, one on the west coast with MDL tying up with a private shipyard, and the other on east with Vizag-based Hindustan Shipyard Ltd doing the same, would be an optimal solution,'' said another source. But for all this to happen, the Indian defence establishment will have wake up from its slumber. First in formulating realistic long-term strategic plans to systematically build military capabilities, and then ensuring their timely execution with single-minded determination. Consider this. The 30-year submarine-building plan approved by Cabinet Committee on Security in 1999 envisaged induction of 12 new submarines by 2012, followed by another dozen by 2030. But a dozen years later, not a single new submarine has been inducted. Navy is making do with just 10 ageing Russian Kilo-class and four German HDW submarines, with just over half of them being fully operational at any given time. It will get worse. As per projections, only five of the existing 14 submarines will be operational by 2020. Even with six new Scorpenes by then, India will remain far short of the minimum of 18 conventional submarines required to deter Pakistan and China. Back to Top Australia's ''future submarine'' could be a super U-boat built by a German company that made many of the submarines that nearly brought Britain to its knees in World War II.
HDW has released details of a concept design, designated the Type 216, for a long-range conventional submarine. Experts say the design, based on the successful Type 214, is specifically targeted at Sea 1000 - Defence's future submarine program.
Rex Patrick, a former submariner and the director of Acoustic Force, said yesterday the information available indicated Type 216 would meet the requirements spelt out in the 2009 Defence white paper and there was no reason the submarines could not be built in Adelaide. ''I think they [HDW] have been working on the Type 216 for some time with candidates like Australia, India and Canada in mind,'' he said.
Another HDW design, the Type 209, is the basis for three submarines Indonesia is buying from Korea's Daewoo Shipbuilding Marine Engineering. The $1billion contract for the three, two of which will be built in South Korea and one in Indonesia, was signed on December 20. Defence has been considering a number of European submarines, including the HDW 214, the Spanish Navantia S-80 and French DCNS Scorpene, as replacements for the trouble-plagued Collins for some time. It has confirmed ''requests for information'' are to be sent to the three manufacturers. Defence has also signed a contract with Babcock to research a land-based submarine propulsion test facility and a ''Future Submarine Industry Skills Plan'' is being prepared. While Defence has acknowledged the European vessels offer proven designs and shorter delivery times than an Australian-designed submarine, the concern is they are too small to meet Australia's broad needs as outlined in the 2009 white paper. The ''supersized'' HDW Type 216 may change that. It is more than twice the size of the three submarines that have just been commissioned by Indonesia.
Designated the Type 1400, the Indonesian boats will still be very capable. The first is expected to be in use by 2015 with the second scheduled for delivery in 2018. There is grave concern delays in the Government's decision making process means there is no longer sufficient time to design and build an ''evolved'' Collins class boat by the 2025 deadline. Former ASC chief executive officer, Greg Tunney, is on the record as having said ''serious concept work and definition studies'' should have begun in 2010.
HDW's Type 216 concept, the subject of a special report in the current edition of Jane's International Defence Review, overcomes the shortcomings of small European submarines and would take less time - and money - to build than a ''son of Collins'' analysts claim. At almost 4000t, 89m long and with an extendable minimum range of 10,400 nautical miles (19,240km), it outclasses the existing Collins in every way. The evolved 216 would come with air-independent propulsion giving it a nuclear submarine-like ability to linger underwater in choke points such as the Straits of Malacca for weeks on end. It would have the ability to launch cruise missiles, carry a ''swimmer delivery vehicle'' for special operations and be extremely quiet thanks to propulsion design parameters and an outer shell that absorbs sound. The first part of a review into Australia's Collins Class submarines has identified significant systemic problems. Defence Minister Stephen Smith commissioned the Coles Review after revelations that at times only one of the six submarines had been available for service. It found there was no long-term strategic plan for the efficient use of the assets of the Navy's Collins Class submarine program and a lack of accountability, authority and responsibility. Mr Smith has acknowledged the review's early findings are not flattering. "The report itself makes very salutary reading and it is a no-holds-barred report into what I regard as a long-standing systemic difficulty so far as Collins Class maintenance is concerned," he said. "It points to very serious flaws over a long period of time and draws attention to the need for fundamental reform in the way in which the maintenance and sustainment of the Collins Class is effected." The Government has plans for a fleet of 12 new submarines and has started discussions with three overseas companies. The second part of the report is due in April. Getting Australia's submarine fleet into shape after a lengthy history of mistakes is the nation's biggest defence challenge, Defence Minister Stephen Smith says. Mr Smith stressed the project's importance in releasing an initial report from a review led by John Coles, an independent expert from Britain's BMT Defence Services, on Tuesday. "This has been a longstanding, difficult issue, which has bedevilled the defence, navy and successive governments," he said. "That report shows very deep, longstanding difficulties so far as maintenance and sustainment of the Collins class submarines is concerned. "It points to very serious flaws over a long period of time and draws attention to the need for fundamental reform in the way in which the maintenance and sustainment of the Collins class is affected." The report identified poor submarine availability caused by a crew shortfall, lack of spares and unreliable equipment. It also found there had been a lack of cohesion in leadership and no long-term strategic plan for efficient use of assets, and noted submarine knowledge was thinly spread and goals had been unrealistic. The phase-one report recommends resources be directed to providing spares and says any decision to reduce agreed Materiel Ready Days in a year should be taken by the program manager. It also says a course should be held for commanding and engineering officers before they are deployed to submarines. In phase two, the Coles review will seeks ways to improve the performance of the Collins submarine. That report will be released in April next year. The 2009 Defence White Paper outlined the government's plan to acquire 12 new submarines to be assembled in South Australia. Mr Smith said Australia would need help to deliver the submarines and had held discussions with the United States. The submarines will be constructed over the next 30 years. On the $3 billion Landing Helicopter Ship project, Mr Smith said HMAS Canberra was on schedule, undergoing a final fit-out with the installation of a hospital, storerooms and accommodation. The superstructure and hull are to be consolidated in Melbourne in late 2012. HMAS Adelaide was ahead of schedule, with the hull expected to be launched in Spain in the second half of 2012. The two ships will be more than 230m long, 27.5m high and weigh about 27,500 tonnes. Each will be able to carry a combined armed battle group of more than 1100 personnel, 100 armoured vehicles and 12 helicopters. Mr Smith also said the government would purchase a third humanitarian and disaster relief ship to join HMAS Choules and HMAS Tobruk. He said it would mean a large improvement from February when there were no amphibious ships to help during Cyclone Yasi. Dec 13 (Reuters) - Australia has asked three European companies to submit designs to replace its submarine fleet at a cost of up to A$36 billion ($36 billion) in a defence buildup aimed at protecting resource exports and countering an accelerating arms race in Asia. French naval builder DCNS, part owned by Thales, Germany's Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft GmbH and Spanish state shipbuilder Navantia had been asked for information on conventional submarine designs, Australia's Minister for Defence Materiel Jason Clare said on Tuesday. "The Future Submarines Project is the biggest and most complex defence project we have ever embarked upon," Clare said. The country has also budgeted to buy up to 100 of Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighters, double the size of a purchase being mulled by Japan. The buildup is in part aimed at countering China's military expansion and reach into southeast Asia and the South China Sea, where Beijing is involved in disputes with several other states over sovereignty. Australia, a close U.S. ally, also agreed last month to host a de facto U.S. base in the north of the country to provide military reach into Asia and rotate U.S. marines and warships through Australian ports. But Canberra has been keen to paint its growing military clout as directed at beefing up security for offshore resource developments and mineral exports, as well as increasing its capability to respond to humanitarian disasters regionally. The new submarines will be larger and more capable than the navy's current fleet of six locally-built Collins submarines, which are among the world's largest conventional boats, but which have been plagued by manufacturing and design problems. U.S. officials have been pressing Australia to commit to the submarine fleet, and some security and naval analysts had called for the government to consider buying U.S. nuclear-powered attack submarines off the shelf. The Royal Canadian Navy achieved an important milestone in late November when HMCS Victoria became the first submarine in its class to complete an Extended Docking Work Period. On Dec. 5 this milestone was underscored when its Commander and crew returned the boat to sea for the first time since it entered refit. "There is a lot of excitement on board," said the commanding officer, Cdr Christopher Ellis. "It's been a long haul to get us here, and the crew and Formation have been working around the clock for the last year and a half to make sure that we get to this point." While at sea, Victoria is completing several trials for various ship's systems, as well as training the crew to prepare them for future operations. Part of this training included a Hoist Exercise in which a CH-124 Sea King helicopter from 443 Maritime Squadron successfully airlifted a member of the crew off the submarine. Victoria will also spend time in Bangor, Washington, to undergo deperming, a standard practice for all Royal Canadian Navy vessels after refit. Many Fleet Maintenance Facility workers who worked on the submarine over the years lined the jetty to witness the sub's departure and snap photos as it sailed away. "We are operating off Constance Bank and will be coming alongside over Christmas," said Cdr Ellis. "Then the next phase in January will be the dive portion of our trials." Eight sea trainers are currently embarked on the ship to put Victoria's full crew of 49 through work up training during the sail. Women In Submarines (For God's Sake, What next) The Secretary of State has announced today that the restrictions on women serving in submarines will be lifted. I am writing (in advance on an embargoed basis) to explain the background to this decision, to highlight the timelines for implementation of the revised policy and to gain your support for what is an historic and positive day for the Submarine Service and the Royal Navy. Until now, female personnel have been excluded from service in submarines because of medical advice. That advice indicated that certain atmospheric contaminants present in a submarine, while not ordinarily a risk to men or women, might present a risk to female reproductivity and, more specifically, to a foetus. Following a number of further and more advanced studies, and most especially since the ban on smoking in submarines that came into force in 2007, the latest evidence reveals that there are no longer medical safety grounds for this general exclusion, only that pregnant women should not serve at sea due to the risk to a foetus from exposure to high levels of CO2. The Navy Board wants to take advantage of the opportunity now presented to allow female personnel to serve in submarines and so advised Ministers accordingly. By widening the scope of those who can be employed in the Submarine Service, we will be able to make the best use of our current and future talent pools, and be better able to ensure that we do not face the very considerable constraints in the numbers available for service in submarines we have faced repeatedly in the past. Such a change also sits comfortably with the Royal Navy’s desire to be a modern inclusive employer, developing opportunities for all those who seek to take them. There is no intention at present to change the current policy that the Submarine Service is an all volunteer service. The Navy Board advice was that implementation should be on a phased introduction of female personnel into submarines. We learned a great deal from the introduction of female personnel into the Surface Fleet and the lessons from that change in policy will be reflected in the way in which female personnel are introduced into the Submarine Service. A staggered programme allows more time to recruit sufficient volunteers, and for the female officers to have gained some submarine experience before the boats accept female ratings. Moreover, such an approach would give time to assess demand, give time for those in the Service to become accustomed to this mixed-manning policy, and help assuage the concerns of families. Before 2013, considerable work will be undertaken to ensure not only that we develop a sustainable cadre of female personnel to ensure that the 100% of the female complement level is achieved in every case but, also that a comprehensive suite of control measures is introduced to reduce the risk of a female submariner being at sea while pregnant. Female officers will start to serve first in the Vanguard Class in late 2013. Thereafter, ratings could be introduced into V boats from the middle of 2015, but this date will depend upon habitability changes which will occur during maintenance periods. The introduction of officers and ratings into the Astute Class could follow from 2016, depending when the modifications are undertaken to bunk spaces, heads and bathrooms. Thereafter, there could be a gradual introduction, at about 1 additional crew (which is 9 - 15 females) per year. By 2020 about half the submarine flotilla could have female ratings serving onboard. I know that this decision may not be universally supported, and may generate contrasting headlines and editorials in the media. In this regard we will be engaging directly with submariners and their families over the next few days. Other navies around the world have introduced female personnel into their submarines with considerable success. You may also be aware the US Navy has announced the introduction of female officers into their SSBN/SSGN fleet. Leadership will be key in overcoming any prejudice, in exactly the same way it was when we introduced female personnel into the Surface Fleet – a change that today attracts no debate. Above all, we need to recognise, whether male or female, it is professional competence that is the most important characteristic of those who serve at sea, and you can be sure that we will not be reducing our training standards for those whose role it will be to operate and maintain the Royal Navy’s submarine flotilla. HMS/m Astute in USA 5th Dec 2011
Now operating from the U.S. East Coast as part of a lengthy trials period, the Astute finally has had a chance to show what it can do, and in November test-fired Tomahawk cruise missiles in the Gulf of Mexico. But the British media, even in reporting on its successes, continue to label the ship a jinx.
Cmdr. Iain Breckenridge, the submarine's commanding officer, bristled when asked about the jinx moniker during a Nov. 29 interview on board his ship. "The media will always jump at an easy target. So we're an easy target, they're having a field day," he said. "Fine by me, that's well behind us. I don't dwell on it, I don't look back. Myself and my team move forward to prove what a great submarine she is. With the Tomahawk firings recently, our successful torpedo firings in the summer in the U.K., pushing forward to get all trials completed, getting to Norfolk to meet the senior U.S. leadership, going to AUTEC [the U.S. Navy's Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center test range] in January to finish trials, and getting her back to the U.K. in March, ready to go back into the yard for her final maintenance period before she becomes operational, for us, that's all good news.
"So the media won't use that, because that's not an interesting story. If anything minor happens, they'll jump on it and go, 'wow, wow, jinxed submarine!' "Well, ask any of my ship's company, any of our supporting personnel, anyone in the Navy, any of our families, any of our friends in the U.S. submarine force; in fact, anybody that basically understands what a first-of-class submarine's got to go through, and they'll recognize that the term 'jinx' is just a very easy one that the media jumps on. "Does it bother me? Used to, initially. Not bothered by it anymore. There are much more important things to deal with. It's a fantastic submarine to deliver to the front line as soon as possible. And I've got a really good team helping me do that. "Tests, Tests and More Tests. Breckenridge, a veteran submariner who previously commanded HMS Tireless, brought the Astute to the U.S. in October to begin a series of weapons, sensors, systems and warm-weather trials. "We've got to prove the design, and prove the build," he said. "Over subsequent submarines, they just have to prove the build."
The boat loaded Tomahawk cruise missiles at the U.S. Navy's submarine base in Kings Bay, Ga., then launched two T-hawks from the Gulf of Mexico onto a missile range at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. "Both flew beautifully," Breckenridge said.
Operations on the AUTEC range in January will fully prove the submarine's new Type 2076 integrated sonar suite, and more Spearfish torpedoes will be test-fired. Breckenridge ticked off a list of new features aboard the sub, which is fitted with six 21-inch torpedo tubes, one more than previous classes. The weapons room also is larger, with a lower deck, allowing for a 50 percent increase in the number of weapons carried - "on the order of 36," he said.
The submarine features a large lockout chamber aft of the fin, or sail, and can carry a drydeck shelter to allow swimmers to enter and leave the sub while submerged. "That was a real design driver for the boat, and that's why we've got a big sail," he explained. "The shapes and curves [of the hull] help the dry deck shelter sit in the right place."
|
 |
 |
|
info@hmsdreadnought.co.uk |
 |
| Site Map |