I'm surprised by the discussion here. I know an Australian engineer who's heavily involved with underwater sensors(Electrical Engineering) and he
and his firm have been involved with sharing sub sensor info with the US Navy.
I'm under the impression that the initial problems of the Collins were mechanical, due to ridiculous cost savings, but that those were dealt with and
that the sensors are top notch. In fact, the USN sub drivers I know spoke highly of the RAN subs in war games as well.
You can have the best sensors in the world, but if your sub isn't seaworthy, they aren't gonna do you any good. Subs and ships can't just sit for
years, without having work done on them, otherwise Bad Things happen to you when you get into the open ocean.
Heh, granted, but again, i was under the impression that the mechanical problems of the first batch were corrected in the followons, and that they had
solved the unreliability of the first batch with time in the yards.
But then he could've just been full of Aussie pride.
Well from the way the story sounded, this one was bought third hand, and had sat for several years, so they may have corrected them, just this one sat
and sat and sat, and then bit them when they took it to sea.
As a Canadian, yes, we feel our commonwealth homeboys' pain with their sub.
Our issue was a result of lack of maintenance personel and spare parts that are a positive pandemic in the forces. only 20% of our airforce is
operational at any given time, and about another 20% are all but scrap beign cannibalized.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.