# AIP Sub Problem - 110 days on patrol - Never detected



## Kirkhill (19 May 2006)

And to think one of the options available to us is/was and AIP (Fuel Cell) plug for the Victorias.  Interestingly this uses a Stirling Cycle engine instead.


> HMS Gotland In For Service
> 
> 
> (Source: Kockums AB; dated May 12, web-posted May 18, 2006)
> ...



http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/modele.pl?session=dae.16882086.1133972074.Q5cKasOa9dUAAFC2ZcA&modele=jdc_34

Wikipedia article on the Stirling Cycle engine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine


----------



## Armymatters (19 May 2006)

There is also the option of sending our Vic's to Germany's Nordseewerke shipyards for their closed cycle diesel propulsion refitting, which will take the most minimal of changes to the submarines, which mostly involves the installation of an liquid oxygen/argon tank:
http://www.nordseewerke.de/e/prod/fe_aip_ccd.html

Edit: And while we are there, we can ask the Germans to help knock out every single bug in the ships as well, and possibility help get Chicoutimi back in operation...


----------



## Melbatoast (19 May 2006)

A press release from the submarine's manufacturer wouldn't be at all biased, would it?

In a war situation the waterspace would be flooded with so much low frequency active (LFA) sonar that you could walk to Hawaii on dead dolphins and AIP submarines.

The moral is that you will never get the straight story on ASW anywhere, because it's real secret and nobody _really_ knows what's going on anyway.  Some know enough to maintain a good front of knowledge and elicit the occasional ooh or ah from the higher ups, though.  AIP is a growing concern nonetheless - that said, it's always a race between the bubbleheads and the skimmers, like in WWII and the Cold War.  It's a little biased in their favour these days but it will even out, as there are pretty neat passive detection capabilties in the pipeline (fiber optic arrays and so forth).

What would be real neat with regard to the Victorias would be, you know, having them in service for a change rather than sitting in someone's dockyard for some reason or another.  Everyone knows it's the Navy's goal to have two of them in fully operational by 2009 (eleven years after purchase!), and seeing as they have been well behind schedule since day one we can probably even move that to the right a little.  They will never, ever see AIP propulsion.



			
				Armymatters said:
			
		

> Edit: And while we are there, we can ask the Germans to help knock out every single bug in the ships as well, and possibility help get Chicoutimi back in operation...



Never, ever happen.  Politics has already detemined that the subs will not be serviced outside of Canada.  The learning curve for our maintainers has been a big chunk of the problem in getting those things done, or so I'm told.  If they had been sent to an American yard in the first place we could be talking "Happy Five Years of Sailing, HMCS Victoria!"


----------



## Kirkhill (19 May 2006)

> A press release from the submarine's manufacturer wouldn't be at all biased, would it?



Might could maybe....


----------



## Centurian1985 (19 May 2006)

> The Swedish crew has performed extremely well, receiving considerable praise from their American colleagues. HMS Gotland has been able to remain undetected. The Stirling AIP (Air Independent Propulsion) system, developed and installed by Kockums, has enabled the vessel to escape detection, even when sought by talented US crews, and even under difficult operating conditions.



I would be more impressed if they said Australian or Canadian crews, who in my day were the usual winners of the sub-hunting competitions - need aesop81 to testify as to whether we are still better than the US at sub-hunting.


----------



## ringo (20 May 2006)

IMO the best thing to do with the Vic's is replace them and not waste any more money on them then is absolutely necessary, Chicoutomi should never return to service part her out to service remaining three.


----------



## cobbler (20 May 2006)

The RAN's submarines have space set aside for AIP mods. They have some stirling gear around somewhere. 

After all their evaluations, they decided not to install any AIP mods on the collins, there must be a reason why. And with the amount already spent getting the collins to where they are, I doubt the cost would have been much of a factor.


----------



## Armymatters (20 May 2006)

cobbler said:
			
		

> The RAN's submarines have space set aside for AIP mods. They have some stirling gear around somewhere.
> 
> After all their evaluations, they decided not to install any AIP mods on the collins, there must be a reason why. And with the amount already spent getting the collins to where they are, I doubt the cost would have been much of a factor.



The Stirling AIP system has been tested on a shore rig, but the primary reason for the lack of fitting of AIP is due to the fact that in all, the Collins class submarines, have had massive problems with software intergration (the ship systems simply doesn't want to talk to each other, which was fixed by essentially replacing everything) and there has been issues of excessive noise (what good is an AIP system when the submarine can be heard for miles around?), and after fixing all of this, there was simply no point to installing AIP and spending more money (the subs as designed were wonderful pieces of eqiupment. Just getting it all to work properly was the problem). Infact, read the entire government report on what went wrong with the subs:
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/2001-02/02RP03.htm
The AIP mod, according to this document, was dropped due to a cost-benefit evaluation, as stated here:


> The result of this combination is that the Collins is already close to the type of submerged performance that will only become available to other conventional submarines if radical new Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) systems prove successful. Australia's DSTO tested two forms of AIP in the mid-1990s to assess the advantage they might give the new Australian submarines. On sea trials of HMAS Collins, the combination of large battery storage and high generator capacity was shown to allow the submarine to maintain an energy cycle under patrol conditions which required it to snort (running its engines whilst submerged, by use of a snorkel) for 'less than a few minutes' in every 24 hours:
> 
> Sea trials of the first-of-class have proven that the Collins as it is now can stay submerged for such a long time, and have such a low rate of indiscretion, that a refit of an AIP system is not really needed and would simply not have any cost benefit.(75)
> 
> ...



Thankfully, for the Aussies, most of the problems have been resolved, and the Collins class subs are excellent subs.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Jun 2006)

> ...[HMS Gotland] is on lease to the US Navy, complete with her Swedish crew...
> 
> ...The Swedish crew has performed extremely well...



Hmmm...that doesn't seem right!   

Is that kind of thing legal these days? 

Back on topic, what in the MSE/stoker types' minds would be the best AIP rig for our Vic's?

Cheers,

Duey


----------



## eerickso (15 Sep 2007)

Melbatoast said:
			
		

> A press release from the submarine's manufacturer wouldn't be at all biased, would it?
> 
> In a war situation the waterspace would be flooded with so much low frequency active (LFA) sonar that you could walk to Hawaii on dead dolphins and AIP submarines.



I think you are being overly simplistic. It's not very difficult for a sub to avoid a ship that is blasting away. Going in for the kill is the hard part, but subs have options: harpoon/torp. 

Active sonar is a sub repellant, not a sub killer. :skull:


----------



## eerickso (15 Sep 2007)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Back on topic, what in the MSE/stoker types' minds would be the best AIP rig for our Vic's?



More importantly, what do the operators think? Everybody knows that stoker types won't be happy unless everbody is smelling like diesel fuel.


----------



## geo (15 Sep 2007)

leftcoaster...
reviving a one & half year old thread might prove difficult
most of the responders haven't been around very much.


----------



## a_majoor (3 Feb 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Back on topic, what in the MSE/stoker types' minds would be the best AIP rig for our Vic's?



For our purposes, the only feasible AIP rig would be to install a Liquid Oxygen tank somewhere and allow the diesel engines to breath from that while submerged. All the other strange and wonderful things out there such as Stirling engines, fuel cells and miniature nuclear reactors would require so much refitting and/or rebuilding of the submarines they would be out of action for prolonged periods of time.

If I were to have any influence on this (thank goodness I don't.....) I would direct people to put their time, energy and attention to the _next_ generation of submarine instead.


----------



## aesop081 (4 Feb 2008)

I've hunted the Gottland several times.......fun stuff

....and the title is BS


----------



## Kirkhill (4 Feb 2008)

Solved 'er in the last 18 months then, have you?

Good stuff.


----------



## armyvern (4 Feb 2008)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Solved 'er in the last 18 months then, have you?
> 
> Good stuff.



 ;D

Apparently so. Necroposting can so make the wee morning hours entertaining sometimes.


----------

