Australian Collins-class Submarine within seconds from sinking.

July 23, 2005

An Australian submarine carrying 55 sailors was seconds from sinking to the bottom of the Indian Ocean following a catastrophic on-board flood off the coast of Perth.

The near-tragedy has forced the navy to permanently reduce the diving depth of its fleet of six Collins-class submarines for safety reasons - a move that has weakened their military capability.
An investigation by The Weekend Australian has revealed that an accident on board HMAS Dechaineux on February 12, 2003, was more serious than the navy has publicly admitted.

"I don't think there was anybody on our boat who wasn't scared that day," said Able Seaman Geordie Bunting, who almost drowned in the flood and who has now spoken about it for the first time.

"Another five seconds and we would have been in big trouble ... another 10 and you have got to question whether we could have surfaced."

Mike Deeks, the then commander of the navy's submarine force, said: "We were talking seconds, not minutes. It was a very serious, significant flood."

quote edit: language

news.com.au

These sub's have been a lemon from the day sea trials were launched.

Sanc'.

No cover-up of sub flood.

"You know there are certain things the Navy have to keep secret because they're operational security matters that go to the heart of the national security of the country.

"And one of them is the operational capability of the Collins Class submarines and the last thing we want is potential adversaries to learn about their operational capability."

Article

So who's telling the truth?

"I don't think there was anybody on our boat who wasn't scared that day," said Able Seaman Geordie Bunting, who almost drowned in the flood and who has now spoken about it for the first time.

"Another five seconds and we would have been in big trouble ... another 10 and you have got to question whether we could have surfaced."

Mike Deeks, the then commander of the navy's submarine force, said: "We were talking seconds, not minutes. It was a very serious, significant flood."

CANSG Commodore Mike Deeks
(dated June 2004)
Commodore Mike Deeks

Talk about a flip flop.
These subs' are diesel powered lemons.

Sanc'.

[edit on 23-7-2005 by sanctum]

One of those bloody kiwi divers swam down and knocked on their hatch, the Australians thought it was the pizza delivery they had ordered back in port so they opened it to see if it was....

... they got more anchovies than they expected....


They were drinking fosters and one decided to pop outside for a pee....


They were driving along happily at the bottom of the Indian ocean when Bruce decided to open the window to give turn signals by hand.

[edit on 23-7-2005 by Netchicken]

They saw a groper and thought Howard their PM was coming to visit....

One of the sailors got hungry and popped out for a curry and rice with popadoms .... (they were in the indian ocean afterall)

[edit on 23-7-2005 by Netchicken]

^^^

hmmm...somebody getting frust with the Ashes?

Ok. Who didn't close the screen door on the submarine?

Those "jokes" are slightly less humorous than a burning orphanage.

Having built an orphanage, I can't say I agree.

Anyway, all they show is ignorance. No Aussie would be seen dead drinking Fosters, there's a reason we export that pi$$, it's on an exact par with Budweiser.

From the Pythons: What do American beer and making love in a conoe have in common?

They're both fu__ing close to water.

Having built an orphanage, I can't say I agree.

Anyway, all they show is ignorance. No Aussie would be seen dead drinking Fosters, there's a reason we export that pi$$, it's on an exact par with Budweiser.

From the Pythons: What do American beer and making love in a conoe have in common?

They're both fu__ing close to water.

Apparently John Cleese from Python sent a message out about if America returned to British rule.

John Cleese's view on America

Kinda off-topic yeah..but....HE MENTIONED PYHTON!!

An otherwise excellent submarine still plagued with ongoing problems? The AU governmetn says alot of the problems are now fixed, but a May 2005 article raises some questions as to what the AU government asserts:

The Collins Class Submarines are an engineering marvel, but have not been without their problems, which included:

Design faults: The metal that had been selected for use in the propeller had not been thoroughly tested and was brittle and inadequate.

Sound signature faults: The vessel's sound signature was not correct and could not adequately avoid detection (it was a noisy sub).

Water ingress problems: Initially the Collins Class had water ingress in excess of 300 litres per hour, flooding into the sub. This was eventually corrected to only 3 litres.

Most of the problems the Collins Class faced were the result of the fact that the vessel was different to anything else that the engineers had tried to achieve before.

The seven engineering wonders - the collins class submarine






seekerof

[edit on 25-7-2005 by Seekerof]

LMAO Seekerof

That's two thumbs up from our defence department.

I love oz humor..."Yeah sure these thingo's are a heap of crap, but she'll be right"

Now where did i leave my can of Tooheys?

Sanc'.

Ahhh the Collins class sub. There hasn't been a farce this big in Australian military history since we sold our retired Carrier HMAS Melbourne to China for scrap metal, binding them by contract to never use it at sea again. Since the carrier was beyond repair by this stage anyway the Chinese reluctanctly agreed, chopped off the landing deck and put it at a Naval training air base (on land).

That's definetly an oops.
It's lucky that they were awake at the time (and paying attention), but still depending on everyones reaction time to the sitution there was a high chance they wouldn't have made it like the article said.

If anyone is from Australia there is a 6 part series on SBS following the voyage of a crew on the new Collins Class from Australia to Korea. It's on Wednesday night at 7:30pm on SBS - part 2 was last night.
I highly recommend watching this, it pulls no puinches and the crew is very candid about the problems of the Collins. The engineers especially aren't happy with the diesel engines, which so far seem to hvae problems every 2-3 dys.

This article indicates that they took on water when a pipe burst underway or at a certain depth.
Submarines are built with their sea water systems being capable of isolation at the hulls. Usually a two valve ..system at the hulls where the water comes in or goes back out.
For a pipe to burst it means poor design or manufacturing process or poor maintnence. It is not clear whether there was a mechanical process of nuts and bolts/studs or the pipe broke where it was brazed or welded.
Nevertheless the system should have been capable of being isolated at the hulls where he water comes into the boat. This is called a hull and back up valve system. This whole system should have been capable of being isolated. Any excess water should have been capable of being pumped out of the bilges where it collected. A good submarine design will have all these sea valves and back up valves being overidden in case of emergencys like this by a master valve which will shut all hull openings from a emergency flood control station. These are sometimes called "Chicken switches".
Alot of this also depends on the competency of the crew...the whole crew..particularly those who are on watch at the time. This emergency type drill is standard practice in case of this type of casualty.
The other system which needs to work and flawlessly is the one for emergency blow which brings you to the surface by blowing emergency air into the ballast tanks..also from a emergency station.
My initial reaction is that they have some problems with designs...materials used or both.
A system like this would be tested by isolating the system at the hull valves, filling it with water and pumping it up to designed testing pressure. It should be tested to pressures higher than the depth at which the boat will be normally operating. This will tell you where your problems are at. Either mechanical or piping design failures.
If they are having known problems in this area and have been forced to put to sea..someone is really screwing up or covering up. You dont fool around with stuff like this.
It makes me wonder since the Canadians are also having problems with thier submarines.

Seawater like this on a diesel boat would be used to cool other systems within the boat with a section tapped off to go to the distillation or potable water purification equipment. I think now days these are what is called a reverse osmosis system.


Thanks,
Orangetom

This is pretty simple-minded and dumbed-down non-engineer talk, but...

How many of the problems the Canadians had (like fire, ouch) were the result of the things sitting unused at Rosyth, or wherever they were, for a few years.

I mean I leave my Honda for a month and it bitches at me when I get back on it and that's a very simple piece of low technology compared to the systems required in an attack sub.

You rebuild a car or bike and you're supposed to take it easy running it back in (shakedown cruise, I guess!), not take off on a cross-continent journey!

I did not know the Canadian boats had been sitting a long time before they took them out to sea.
True they had shakedown tests or trials when they got them. Most problems should have been detected here.

It is however true that equipment that does not get used frequently tends to act up..sort of like having arthritis from lack of use. The car I store in the garage I will sometimes take out and jack up the wheels and let it run the axles with wheels in the air for about 30 minutes. Failing this I will sometimes sneak it around the block a couple of times in the middle of the night to get the kinks out of it from sitting up a long time. Your quite right about this ..
Even tied up at the piers..they will run certain systems on a boat to get them moving and lubricate...etc..etc..electronic systems too. THis is not a complete test as one cannot simulate test depths sitting at a pier. Test depth will be the ultimate test and certification outside of actual patrols.

Thanks,
Orangetom

Yes the canadians bought the subs , then didn`t even survice them before they ran them into canada

www.btinternet.com...


basically - they lay doing nothing for at least 4 years each before cananda got them and this is the most telling part:

Accepted into service July 1991. Paid off 1994, leased to Canada and renamed HMCS Victoria (SSK 876). To operate in Atlantic Ocean. First submarine to be taken out of mothballs and reactivated. Officially handed over to Canada at Barrow-in-Furness on 6th October 2000. Set sail for Halifax three days later.

other info on teh internet says theat teh CDN forces did very little reactivation work.


they blame the brits - the brits say they got a cut price diesel boat and never said they would make them sea worthy at that was the new owners job.


[edit on 4/1/06 by Harlequin]