Australia starts ‘high-risk’ life extension of its submarine fleet

CHRISTCHURCH, New Zealand — The Australian government this month announced the beginning of a long-delayed life-extension program for six diesel-electric Collins-class submarines, an effort that government auditors immediately flagged as a high-risk affair.

The boat Farncomb, the submarine with the greatest mileage, is the first vessel to undergo the process at the government-owned ASC shipyard near Adelaide. Work starts in late May.

Replacement of the Collins fleet – introduced from 1996-2003 – had been formally proposed as long ago as 2009. However, successive governments dithered as they first considered French-designed boats — spectacularly dumped in 2021 — and then AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines.

Now budgeted at A$11 billion (nearly US$8 billion), the extension program became ever more critical as a bridging capability before Australia’s navy anticipates its first American Virginia-class submarines in the early 2030s and SSN-AUKUS boats in the 2040s.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) issued a damning verdict on Department of Defence planning for the life-extension program. It noted that “substantial further expenditure has been incurred, delays have accumulated and capability risks have remained.”

Auditors concluded that Defence is not in a good position “to demonstrate that the project will achieve its intended capability outcomes or represent value for money.”

Defense officials claimed in a press release that the extension program “will reduce risk, enhance capability and maximize availability.” The statement proposed a “conditions-based sustainment approach” that restores base components and upgrades critical weapons and systems.

Work on Farncomb will start with a detailed engineering assessment, and subsequent work will depend on what is discovered.

This first effort, which may uncover hidden issues such as corrosion, will inform work to be performed on the remaining submarines. Priority will be given to the youngest boats.

Auditors determined that accumulated delays and a decade of planning forced a revised delivery strategy. Instead of redesigning and replacing key systems like engines and generators, the program will simply refurbish and maintain them, without substantially improving their combat capability.

As some issue experts expect delays in Australia fielding nuclear-powered submarines, and the future possibility of having few or no operational submarines whatsoever, Canberra insists there is no plan B for interim conventional submarines.

Meanwhile, new submarines may be cheaper than Australia’s proposed life-extension refit. For example, Japan will pay US$760 million for its newest Taigei-class submarine.

Asked about Australia’s submarine aspirations, Rear Adm. Stephen Hughes, Head of Navy Capability, told Defense News last November: “Are they high risk? Sure – schedule is demanding, technologies are demanding, workforce is demanding. I could list all the things that could go wrong, but one thing we’re really good at in Defence – despite maybe some other commentators’ views – is risk management.”

Still, ANAO auditors stated: “Ten years after the initial decision to establish the life-of-type-extension project, Defence was not well placed to demonstrate that the project will achieve its objective to maintain Collins-class capability and availability to 2048.”