Quantcast
Channel: Submarine & Other Matters
Viewing all 2347 articles
Browse latest View live

Japan's Submarine Deployment Areas, Straits and Ports

$
0
0
Japan's major straits (with possible patrol details below)
---

[According to this open source] During the Cold War the Japanese Navy's active 16 submarines mainly watched three straits for Russian subs. At any one time around 3 submarine may have been available to watch each of the following straits:

-  the Soya Strait [aka La Perouse Strait) (between Hokkaido and Russia's Sakhalin island), 
-  the Tsugaru Strait (between Honshu and Hokkaido), and 
-  the Tsushima Strait between Kyushu and South Korea. 

Since the end of the Cold War and with the rise of Chinese naval power, some of Japan's subs have been diverted to patrol waters in the East China Sea around the Nansei (aka Ryukyu) Islands (island chain between Kyushu and Taiwan). Japan now has 18 active (Oyashio and Soryu class) submarines, with plans to raise the number to 22 by 2018.

US Air and Naval Bases in Japan, (not too many Japanese Base maps available!) But note:

-  the Japanese Navy's s fleet and sub HQ is at Yokosuka (including Submarine Flotilla 2 with about 9     Oyashio and Soryu submarines)  and
-  at Kure (near US Marines Iwakuni Base) is Submarine Flotilla 1 about 9 Oyashio and Soryu subs)
---

In a remarkably detailed open source description - the following are excerpts of a Sentaku Magazine's article via The Japan Times, November 26, 2015  http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/11/26/commentary/japan-commentary/japans-crack-submarine-fleet/#.Vle27HYrLb1:

"Japan’s crack submarine fleet

The central headquarters of both the U.S. Navy [Seventh Fleet] in Japan and the [Japanese Navy] are located in Yokosuka, Kanagawa Prefecture, and [the Japanese Navy's] submarines’ operations are effectively integrated with the U.S. Navy.

During the Cold War, the U.S. Navy entirely entrusted to [the Japanese Navy's] submarines the role of watching the movements of Soviet submarines in the Soya Strait between Hokkaido and Sakhalin, the Tsugaru Strait between Honshu and Hokkaido, and the Tsushima Strait between Kyushu and South Korea.

The American reliance on those [Japanese Navy] submarines stemmed from their excellence in small-turn performance [maneuverability]. They are capable of navigating over topographically complicated sea floors with steep uphills, gorges and tangled sea currents in pitch-dark conditions, usually moving at a speed of 5 knots. Today, [the Japanese Navy's] submarines can trace every movement of Chinese naval vessels, including subs, from their port departure to every point of their routes, by utilizing an analysis of information sent from U.S. reconnaissance satellites as well as radio waves.

Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the [Japanese Navy] had 16 submarines and deployed three each in the Soya, Tsugaru and Tsushima Straits with the remaining seven under repair or engaged in training exercises. Lately though, with the rise of Chinese naval power, many of [the Japanese Navy's] submarines are being shifted to waters around the Nansei (aka Ryukyu) Islands (the island chain between Kyushu and Taiwan). The [Japanese Navy], which now has 18 submarines, plans to raise the number to 22 by 2018.

Critical areas of [the Japanese Navy's] submarine activities aimed at China are the Tsushima Strait, the Miyako Strait between Okinawa Island and Miyako Island, and the Osumi Strait off the southern tip of Kyushu, each of which constitutes a passageway through which Chinese naval vessels must pass to move from the East China Sea to the Pacific Ocean.

…Moreover, [the Japanese Navy's] submarine crew members possess outstanding skills for detecting the position and movement of enemy vessels by analyzing and processing the sounds emanating from them. The subs’ sonar equipment, including a towed array sonar trailing behind a submarine for several hundred meters, has the capability to detect sounds coming from a vessel up to 80 km away.

…Some time ago, Adm. Wu Shengli, commander of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy, told a high-ranking [Japanese] Self-Defense Forces officer that his navy was aiming to become a “blue-water navy,” meaning that it would become capable of operating across the deep waters of open oceans. In the 1990s, China was known to have only a “brown-water navy,” which can operate only in rivers and coastal areas. True to Wu’s words, China has since been endeavoring to expand its areas of operation into the Pacific.

The East China Sea, where [the Japanese Navy's] submarines are deployed, has long stretches of continental shelves, making the average depth only 180 meters, and some areas only 50 meters. That is why China now looks to the South China Sea, where waters are 3,000 to 4,000 meters deep in a number of areas, and has concentrated its state-of-the-art submarines in the South Sea Fleet [with many subs of that fleet based at Sanya/Yulin, in China's Hainan Island].

That has led the Japanese Defense Ministry to keep an eye on the 150-km-wide Bashi Channel [Luzon Strait] between Taiwan and the Philippines, which could be used by Chinese submarines as a gateway to the Pacific, which in turn could rapidly increase confrontation with [the Japanese Navy's] submarines around the [Bonin Islands] and other Japanese islands in the Pacific.

The capabilities of [the Japanese Navy's] submarines today far surpass those of their Chinese counterparts [eg. Yuan class subs]. But [a Japanese naval] officer has warned that if China secretly obtains advanced technologies from various countries and combines them like a jigsaw puzzle, the day may come when Chinese submarines will be on a par with those of [the Japanese Navy]…” See WHOLE ARTICLE
 -------------------------------------------------------------


Please connect with Submarine Matters Possible Japanese Submarine Deployment Area, February 20, 2015 which also describes the rising importance of the Bashi Channel (Luzon Strait) as a deployment area.

Pete

Japan providing small aircraft & patrol boats to the Philippines

$
0
0
Will the 10 x 40 meter class patrol boats Japan is building for the Philippines be developments of the Bizan (aka Raizan) class? PS 07 (above) and PS 06 (below). Weighs 200 tons ("PS" = Patrol Vessel Small). 46 m long. 
---

Japan Coast Guard Bizan (aka Raizan) class patrol boat (Photo courtesy DDmurasame
---

A Japanese Navy Beechcraft TC-90 King Air (Photo courtesy planespotters). Japan is likely to provide the Philippines with three.
--- 

PETE'S COMMENT

Japan is providing the Philippines with 10 small patrol boats and 3 small patrol aircraft. These are at the small, inexpensive coast guard level rather than naval scale. Japan may be cautious:

-  not to escalate its paramilitary assistance program too quickly or expensively. This may be partly due to domestic Japanese political sensitivities over military assistance programs.

-  not to start at weapons too large, expensive and complex. This may raise the expectations of  recipients too high for subsequent vessels and aircraft.

-  also Japan may not wish its assistance programs to escalate tensions with China too quickly. China may tend to be hyper-sensitive to the weaponisation of South China Sea tensions. This is even though China's island building program may be the most substantial program of militarisation. 

-  Japan also may not wish to fully take over the US's role of major weapons provider to the Philippines (that has included large coastguard cutter patrol ships).

Reuters via Japan Today, November 22, 2015 advises http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/abe-considering-request-from-philippines-for-large-ships-to-patrol-south-china-sea  “There have been media reports that Tokyo would supply Manila with three used Beechcraft TC-90 King Air aircraft suitable for maritime surveillance in the South China Sea. ... Japan is also building 10 40-meter-long vessels for the Philippine coastguard. Manila [says it] needs 100-meter-long patrol ships.”

DETAILS FROM S

"S" in Comments, at Philippines Naval Challenges – Submarines Less Useful of October 21, 2015 has provided, what appear to be, hitherto unpublished details about Japan's provision of 40 meter patrol boats to the Philippines:

Japan supports the maintenance of the Philippines maritime security by supplying patrol aircraft and patrol boats building through the “Philippine Coast Guard Maritime Security Enhancement Project” agreed December 14, 2013. The Official Development Assistance (ODA) is for patrol boats smaller than [Australia's 57 meter] Armidale-class, but the Japanese boats will show good performances. Target date for the project for 10 multipurpose ships, about 40m long, is around February 2018. Likely specifications include:

-  Length: 44.00m
-  Beam: 7.50m
-  Depth: 4.00m
-  Engine: MTU 12V4000M93L x 2 (2580kW x 2)
-  Officer and crew: 5 and 20 (total 25)
-  Voyage speed: 15 knot/h
-  Shipbuilder: Japan Marine United Corporation (JMU). JMU is one of the biggest warship builders in Japan, having built helicopter carrier“Hyuga”. [JMU was established in 2013 within IHI Corporation.]

Pete and S

Life inside a Russian built Kilo class submarine

$
0
0


Just above is an excellent Indian submarine Youtube. It is about INS Sindhukirti a Kilo (called Sindhughosh class in India) submarine designed and built by Russian shipbuilder Sevmash.

Looking at the Youtube:

3min 25secs - in shows many advanced looking combat system and steering screens

7m 40s - battery checking, a very arduous looking manual task done twice a day. Perhaps remote sensor system checking batteries would be more effecient.

8mins - amazingly cramped and hot engine room. Pays not to be 6 feet tall!

9m 50s - Indian ELF antennass at INS Kattabomman in southern India aid in submarine navigation/positioning and to send commands to subs in the Indian Ocean

12m - crew is 53, but "average of 70 serve on board". Presumably for short missions?

15m 30s - selection, recruitment, training,

20m 20s There is a need for reform and major updating in India's submarine program, new subs needed. China's subs are much more modern.

Pete

Long range torpedos and anti-ship missiles

$
0
0

The SEAHAKE Mod 4 ER long-range torpedo (aka DM2A4) (above and below) has a range of at least 140 km. It features an advanced electrical propulsion system and a fiber optic cable for torpedo guidance and communication, which, in conjunction with advanced signals processing and mission logic, makes the torpedo largely countermeasure resistant. Its long at 6.6m (22 feet) long. With that range it may be a viable torpedo tube deliverable medium-large UUV.




The following are parts of an article by Christopher P. Cavas in DefenseNews, November 27, 2015:

 [Retired Vice Adm. Michael Connor, a former commander of the US Navy’s submarine forces, spoke to House Seapower subcommittee on October 27, 2015] 

LONG RANGE TORPEDOS

Connor specifically wants torpedoes with ranges of more than 100 miles. [the SEAHAKE Mod 4 ER long-range torpedo has a proven range of 140 km, achieved in March 2012. Since then improvements in battery and fuel cell technology would mean even longer ranges. Meanwhile the US Mark 48 torpedo may still be restricted to 50 km.]

“This is definitely doable with chemical-based propulsion systems and will likely soon be achievable with battery systems,” he said. Such a range also will need better command-and-control systems, including the ability to communicate with the torpedo, perhaps via manned or unmanned aircraft or by satellite, he said.

“The torpedo will come to be considered along the line of a slow-moving missile,” he said, “with the advantage that it is more difficult to detect, carries a much larger explosive charge and strikes the enemy beneath the waterline, where the impact is most severe.”

LONG RANGE ANTI-SHIP MISSILES

Connor also wants the US “to get back into the business of submarine-launched anti-ship missiles” with the ability to “confidently attack a specific target at sea at a range of about 1,000 miles [see two competing options: an update of the old, reliable Tomahawk or the new Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile] We should be pursuing this more aggressively than we are.”

Artist's vision of a Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (Image on Breaking Defense)

UNMANNED UNDERSEA VEHICLES (UUVS)

Connor also wants better and more-capable undersea vehicles.

“We need to improve the endurance of the vehicles, expand the payload set, and get to the point where any submarine can recover the mission data, if not the vehicle. We need to do this while keeping the cost of the vehicle down. The cost should be low enough such that, while we would always like to get the vehicles back, it is not a crisis if we don’t. The value is in the data, not the vehicle.”

Bryan Clark, a naval analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, appeared alongside Connor and urged greater development in undersea sensors — onboard submarines, unmanned vehicles and weapons, as well as deployed [SeaWeb like] in the water and fixed on the seabed.


…Clark [as ever talked up large UUVs] urged continued development in a wide range of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV), including looking at ways to arm some. He pointed to the compact, very lightweight torpedo — now under development — as having potential not only as a defensive, anti-torpedo weapon but also as a weapon that could be carried and launched by larger UUVs. See WHOLE ARTICLE

Pete

South Korea delivering Golden Eagle light fighter-attack aircraft to the Philippines

$
0
0
South Korean Air Force T-50 Golden Eagle (with public relations paint job)  (Photo courtesy Dmitriy Pichugin (Photos at airliners.net) via Flugzeug)
---

One of two newly acquired FA-50PH fighter jets is given a water cannon salute while taxiing on the runway at Clark Air Base, Philippines, November 28, 2015 (Photo courtesy VOA News).
---

“S” has provided the following details in Comments of [November 28, 2015 at 8:29 PM] and [November 29, 2015 at 10:28 AM] at Philippines Naval Challenges – Submarines Less Useful of  October 21, 2015. Pete has further translated some of the English:

A South Korean article [in Japanese] reports that Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI), delivered the first two Korean-made light fighter-attack aircraft (FA-50PH) to the Philippines on November 27, 2015. The FA-50PH has been specially modified for the Philippine Air Force as a multirole fighter all-weather version of the KAI T-50 Golden Eagle

Since the late 1990s South Korea has been developing the T-50 Golden Eagle with technical assistance from Lockheed Martin. The T-50 uses the high power GE F404 engine used in the F/A-18 to achieve supersonic flight. The engine is expensive and its re-export to the Philippines needed US  approval.

In March 2014 South Korea agreed to sell 12 FA-50PHs to the Philippines for about US$420 million in total. 

 S's COMMENT

As a weapons export it is a successful deal. But, as a country strategy, it is a risky deal. If the Philippine uses the FA-50PH against Chinese ships, South Korea may face fury of China.

The delivery of the first two FA-50s to the Philippines [notes 1 and 2 below], brings new tensions to the South China Sea situation [3]. 

An expert pointed out a possible eventual war in the South China Sea, [see note 4]: Deputy dean of global studies at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, Professor Joseph Siracussa, previously told news.com.au China was “spoiling for a fight” and an eventual war in the region was inevitable. “Once you militarise a problem, you don’t get a diplomatic solution,” he said.”The trigger is there, it’s just waiting to happen. This will happen. This is about power. The South China Sea has become a flashpoint for war.”

[1] http://www.voanews.com/content/philippines-new-jets-south-china-sea/3078530.html(Voice of America)“Philippines Gets 2 New Fighter Jets Amid S. China Sea Tensions”
[2] http://slide.mil.news.sina.com.cn/k/slide_8_27471_39274.html#p=1(Chinese, 新浪网)” South Korea began deliveries to the Philippines two FA-50 fighter”
(Chinese环球网)”Philippine President agreed that "under the original capital" to buy weapons desire to strengthen the South China Sea military”


Please connect with Submarine Matters within Philippines Naval Challenges – Submarines Less Useful of  October 21, 2015.

S
(with some translation by Pete)

A Vertical Launch System for Future Australian Submarines

$
0
0
For a 4,000 ton (surfaced) future Australian submarine design (weight likely required/expected under the Competitive Evaluation Process (CEP)) an option for a vertical launch system (VLS) may be required. Certainly the German TKMS contender (see Diagram 2. below) carries a VLS (more specifically called Vertical Multi-Purpose Lock (VMPL)). 

A VMPL inside the pressure hull, probably aft of the sail, can carry more than missiles. As it is accessible during the mission it can take such non-missile payloads as:
-  large UUVs
-  unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for scouting and targetting
-  submarine launched airflight missiles (SLAMs) for eg. anti-aircraft
-  complex decoys
-  mines
-  diver delivery vehicle
-  special forces stores eg. inflatable boats
-  even short term accommodation/bunks
-  and other payloads.

As some Virginias and the Ohio SSGNs already have this VLS/VMPL these may provide blueprints for an Australian VMPL. The uses/weapons fitted and mission implications also provide a blueprint.

If the already developed Virginia VLS (or Ohio SSGN's VMPL) is adopted the Australian VLS might have a diameter of 2.5 meters and would be capable of holding 6-7 Tomahawk miles. Tomahawks are probably another CEP requirement or option (fitted for but not with). See Raytheon Australia marketing Tomahawks. 

In future a class of 1 to 7 mini-ballistic missiles could also be possible. I'm wondering if India has already discussed its K-15 mini-SLBM with the US?

Diagram 1. Two vertical launch systems are already on Virginia Block IIIs (and planned for later Blocks). At 4,000 tons (surfaced) the diameter of a future Australian sub would be too small for VLS to be placed in the bow (Virginia style). In any case to have full, within pressure hull, multi-use, functionality a VLS, better called Vertical Multi-Purpose Lock (VMPL), would probably be sited aft of the sail. (Diagram courtesy Defense Industry Daily).
---

Close-up of a Virginia's (or Ohio SSGN's) Vertical Launch System. 6 or 7 Tomahawk size missiles can be fitted. (Photo courtsy Sino Defence Forum).
---


Diagram 2. Part cutaway of TKMS Type 216. Note at least one Vertical Multi-Purpose Lock (VMPL) aft of the sail (for Tomahawk cruise missile vertical launch and other uses). Crew may be below 50 people, providing enough space/weight for a VMPL, within the constraints of a 4,000 ton (surfaced) design. (Diagram courtesy TKMS via news com au). 


Pete

Japanese Concerns About Philippine Alliance Building and Providing Military Aid

$
0
0
It appears Japanese Prime Minister Abe (right), Defence Minister Nakatani (center) and Foreign Minister Kishida (left) may be alliance building with the Philippines too quickly. Naval weapons or even Coast Guard aid to the Philippines may cause security and diplomatic problems over the next 30 years. Careful consultation with the Diet (Parliament) and clearance by the Diet is badly needed. (Photo courtesy gettyimages - The Asahi Shimbun).
---

The growing strategic relationship between Japan and the Philippines is occurring rapidly. There has been a buildup of relations which preceded Japan’s Abe Government from 2012. Japanese perceptions of the Philippines are complex. As the following commentary indicates problems in the South China Sea are not only caused by China’s activities. Following are excerpts from a commentary and then comments by an anonymous person.

The excerpts are from a commentary by Shunji Taoka (military journalist) writing in Japan’s DIAMOND Online magazine http://diamond.jp/articles/-/74608(originally dated July 9, 2015). The commentary was forwarded to Submarine Matters article “Japan providing Small Aircraft & Patrol Boats to the Philippines”) on November 30, 2015 in the Comments Section. Pete has further translated some of the English:

[It is Risky to form an Alliance With the Philippines Without A National Discussion in Japan]

With almost no discussion in the media or the Diet [Japan’s Parliament] Japan is entering into alliance with the Philippines. [see http://www.mofa.go.jp/s_sa/sea2/ph/page3e_000417.html]  Japan is donating 10 patrol boats (see photo below of what they may look like) [costing a total of US$104 million Dec 4, 2015 exchange rate]. There is a consultation of the Status of Forces Agreement between the Japanese and Philippines defence forces. Joint exercises to improve military interoperability are planned. President Benigno S. Aquino said that joint operations would be also needed in future at a press conference in Tokyo. 

Japan seems to satisfying the US request of covering the defense of the Philippines in the confrontation with China over the Spratly Islands. But the Japan-Philippines alliance is powerless and the Philippines is at risk of confrontation with China.

Prime Minister Abe inherited the decision of the previous Administration (of the Democratic Party of Japan, last in power 2009-2012). Abe met with Philippine President Aquino in Manila in July 2013, and committed to donate the 10 patrol boats (44m in length, 200 tons in weight) under the official development assistance (ODA). The Philippines also asked for two large patrol ships (100m in length, 1800 tons in weight) to be donated to the Philippine Navy. [There has been no agreement on 100m ships. The Japanese government is concerned such 100m ships would be weapons].

While the Japanese public has a negative attitude to the export of weapons, it is indifferent to the donation of weapons. But donation is more troublesome than export. Exporting weapons is a business transaction while donation is military aid and is regarded as a hostile act by the other side [China]. Japan therefore needs to show exceptionally careful judgement when donating weapons.

In particular, the Philippine Coast Guard tends to fire on neighbours too easily. In May 2013 a Philippine Coast Guard vessel fired 48 shots at a Taiwanese fishing boat and killed one Taiwanese fisherman in waters north of Luzon, Philippines. This was in the 200 mile exclusive economic zone of the Philippines. The Philippine Coast Guard also killed one Taiwanese fisherman in 1996 and one Chinese fisherman in 2000. Due to this record Japan should be careful donating vessels to the Philippine Coast Guard.

Japan should also be careful in donating patrol vessels to the Philippines because, unlike land weapons, naval vessels are very conspicuous. Vessels also last 30 years, a period that may involve major changes in international relations between the Philippines and China. As Japan may be seen as the donor of weapons to the Philippine China may blame Japan.

ANONYMOUS COMMENT

As the US is a former colonial power and from 1951 signed has the Mutual Defense Treaty US-Philippines, the US wants to be good to the Philippines

However, the US wants to avoid a decisive confrontation with China because of the US’s huge economic relations with China. When the Philippines requested maritime defense assistance from the US, the US provided a 46 year old Hamilton-class coastguard cutter and a 20 year old Cyclone-class patrol boat. In contrast it appears the US requested Japan to donate new patrol boats to the Philippines.

Japan’s donation of the patrol boats to the Philippines and future military aid is expensive for Japan and raises very sensitive security and diplomatic issues for Japan. According to the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA), the Three Principles of Defense Equipment Transfer http://www.mofa.go.jp/press/release/press22e_000010.html does not need Diet [Parliamentary] approval. Other matters the MOFA believes do not require Diet approval are:

-          the provision/donation of military aid [also called official development assistance (ODA)] and

-          the Status of Forces Agreement with the Philippines.

This situation allows the Philippines to receive items with military potential from Japan. The Philippines can then add parts or modifications to make these items weapons. The Philippines therefore has a strategic alliance relationship with Japan.

It is wrong and regrettable that Japan can form alliances without discussion occurring in the Diet. It is also wrong that the Japanese public are not informed or consulted about this alliance building. Japan’s Diet opposition parties and the media should be made aware of this serious situation. 

Will the 10 x 40 meter class patrol boats Japan is building for the Philippines be developments of the Bizan (aka Raizan) class (above) . The Bizan/Raizans weighs 200 tons and are 46 m long. (Photo courtesy DDmurasame).

Pete

Comments on Russia's (possibly) nuclear armed, nuclear propelled torpedo.

$
0
0
The following diagrams and torpedo and submarine specifications are from H I Sutton's excellent Covert Shores website .  H I Sutton's specific post with H I Sutton's full analysis is "Analysis - Russian Status-6 aka KANYON nuclear deterrence and Pr 09851 submarine", November 20, 2015. 

The test submarine preceding the KHARBAROVSK is known as the SAROV. See SAROV photo below.


                          See the Covert Shores post on the Sarov of September 9, 2014. 

H I Sutton has provided the following description of the SAROV's extraordinary powerplant: the "propulsion arrangement is one of the things that makes [SAROV] so unique and interesting. There isn't even a designation for it. SSKN? How it works (apparently) is that the nuclear reactor on board is much smaller than the ones in regular submarines, and is not used to power the boat directly. Instead it is used to recharge the batteries, which power the electric motors which in turn drive the propeller. This is a form of air-independent propulsion [unlike any] installed on the latest conventional submarines. [SAROV] also has an auxiliary diesel powerplant as back-up."

Status-6 "KANYON" torpedo 

The Status-6 aka KANYON, described as an unmanned midget submarine, is better thought of as a massively-large nuclear powered and nuclear armed torpedo. It is huge 1.6m in diameter and about 24m long. To put that into perspective, it is about 27 times the volume of a regular 533mm  heavyweight torpedo. 



Above is the outer casing and cross section of what the Status-6 "KANYON" nuclear armed, nuclear propelled torpedo may look like. (Cross section according to the "leaked" Russian plans)
---

The Status-6 torpedo may be intended to strike coastal cities and strategic targets (eg. Pearl Harbor, Norfolk Virginia, even the SSN base at Guam, the SSBN base in Georgia, US or the SSBN base at Kitsap Washington State). The warhead's high reported yield of 100 megatons sounds excessive and may indicate its fear-deterrent value rather than practical military value. 

The following are excerpts from H I Sutton's comments. Pete has redded some particularly interesting parts.

Depth: The stated running depth of the torpedo of 1,000m is possible as there is no inhabited pressure hull to worry about.is credible and places it below current countermeasures.

Speed: The claimed speed of 100 knots is fast for a torpedo. The leaked cutaway drawing shows that there is a nuclear reactor coupled with a steam turbine driving a propeller shaft.

Range: The leaked document claims that the weapon can be launched from as far as 10,000 km (5,400 nm) away. At 100kt, it would take 4 days to reach its target at maximum range. It also seems likely that some of the distance would be accomplished under ice adding additional complexity both to navigation and to NATO countermeasures.

The speed parameter seems unrealistic and the range is not operationally necessary. To put it nicely, most people exaggerate their projects to their bosses. I’d wager that they are lying to Putin and themselves as much as to the West. This does not mean that the project is not (at his stage) real. 

Status-6 "KANYON" Torpedo Specifications:


Length: 24m (estimated) [4 times longer than a long 533mm heavyweight torpedo]

Diameter: 1.6m [3 times diameter of a standard 533mm heavyweight torpedo]
Weight: TBC - heavy and negatively buoyant
Speed: Stated as 100kt
Endurance: 10,000 km (5200 nm) and ~100 hrs
Maximum Operating depth: 1,000m
Crew: unmanned
Warhead: Nuclear with Cobalt shell. Payload to be confirmed but speculated to be as high as 100 megatons.
Powerplant: 1 x nuclear reactor driving a pumpjet.
Sensors: Long range internal guidance, possibly with external update/abort. Obstacle avoidance sonar.
No decoys?

Trail of radioactive contamination 
It is not feasible that the structure of the torpedo contains shielding for the reactor so the device must leave a trail of radioactive contamination behind it as it runs. This is true even in test runs.

The lack of shielding also means that the reactors cannot be test-run while inside the launch tube. Maintenance is thus much harder than on the ICBMs carried in other strategic submarines, and the weapons are essentially sealed containers. 



KHABAROVSK submarine

The main launching platform of KANYON is likely to be the new Project 09851 "KHABAROVSK" submarine. Similar to but smaller than the Project 955 'BOREI' SSBN

The KHABAROVSK:

-  may be 120m long versus 160m for the BOREI. 
-  does not require the missile section behind the sail. 
-  may share components and even hull sections with the BOREI
-  stated displacement of 10,000 tons (surfaced) makes it large but much lighter than the 13,000 ton BOREI.


The leaked graphic strongly hints toward the KHABAROVSK having two side-by-side hulls in the bow. This is a highly unusual arrangement but is similar to the SAROV submarine used to test the Status-6 torpedo. The basic reason behind this arrangement is that the torpedoes have to fire forward, and are carried externally to the inhabited pressure hulls. Therefore a stack of six massive torpedo tubes occupied the space where the forward pressure hull would ordinarily be, thus shifting occupied space into smaller hulls either side. 

Above is a front on cross-section of KHARBAROVSK  (right). The orange circles indicate the tubes for 6 x Status-6 nuclear torpedos. 

Below is a cutaway view. As the weight of the KHARBAROVSK  is an estimates 10,000 tons surfaced what appear to be 6 average sized torpedo tubes are actually large Status-6 torpedos.




What the KHARBAROVSK may look like. Note standard 533mm (and/or 650mm) torpedo at top above bow then just above bow is the much larger Status 6 nuclear powered, nuclear warhead Status-6 torpedo (Original artwork by H I Sutton) 
---

KHARBAROVSK submarine specifications:

Displacement: 10,000 tons surfaced
Length: 120m (estimate, see analysis)
Diameter: 13m main hull, 16m across forward section (estimates, see analysis)
Speed: TBC but almost certainly over 20kt
Endurance: Unlimited. At least 60 days supplies
Maximum Operating depth: TBC - likely 400-500m
Crew: TBC
Powerplant: 1 x nuclear reactor (probably ОК-650В) driving a single pumpjet.

Armament: 6 x Status-6 nuclear torpedoes. Unspecified capability to launch 533mm or 650mm torpedoes and decoys.

H I Sutton assesses SAROV, KHARBAROVSK and Status-6 to be real projects and "far too expensive to play such a ruse."

PETE'S COMMENT

The leaking of Status-6 (‘KANYON’) nuclear torpedo details [around November 11, 2015] may be a  piece of Putin propaganda. The concept of firing a huge nuclear armed, nuclear powered Status-6 torpedo would be very unstealthy and easily countered. However, Putin is the kind of unorthodox leader who may preside over such a project.

Treat the Status-6 as an underwater cruise missile that only travels at 100 knots, compared to around 10,000 mph for an SLBM. It may take days of submerged travel of the KHARBAROVSK carrier submarine and/or Status-6 independent travel to hit a target.

Undersea sensor arrays may give several hours of warning of a  KHARBAROVSK submarine or Status-6 torpedo approach. The sensor arrays may be slaved to fast moving mines, missiles, depth bombs or torpedos to destroy the a KHARBAROVSK or Status-6. Here is a commercially available radiation sensor.

Unlike an ICBM the Status-6 is not MIRVed and carries no known decoys. The Status-6 torpedo is particularly unstealthy because it will shed a radiation trail and have an unusual (probably loud) acoustic signature. Underwater radiation sensors exist - that may be on the seafloor, tethered 1,000 meters deep or nearer the surface   

While the KHARBAROVSK and Status 6 may be of limited military value they may act as a feared deterrent in the spirit of mutually assured destruction (MAD)


Some of the many additional articles from H I Sutton's superb Covert Shores include:




Pete

Prime Minister Turnbull Likely Making "Lightning" December 2015 Visit to Japan

$
0
0
The launch of the second Soryu class submarine (502) in 2008. If Japan wins the submarine for Australia may have the temporary name of "Super Soryu" (a submarine with the major external difference of being about 7 meters longer than the Soryu pictured). (Photo courtesy Japanese Navy, known as the "Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF)".
---

[Some Australian politicians feel that Prime Minister Turnbull has been travelling too frequently, lately, and so should cancel a visit to Japan in December 2015. However Turnbull is mindful of former Prime Minister Rudd’s diplomatic error in April 2008, when Rudd’s first visit to northeast Asia only included China, not Japan].


“… Turnbull [is] determined to visit Tokyo to send a signal of solidarity. It also had a practical side as far as the $50 billion submarine bid [is] concerned because there was the impression that Abbott had an understanding with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. [The main reason for the understanding being] the strategic argument of strengthening defences ties between Japan, the US and Australia would give Japan a priority.

[bolded by Pete] “Japan Inc” is so committed to the success of the Japanese bid that Australian officials have been told the Japanese government has told Mitsubishi the bid is not to be framed with profit as the priority. [that is Mitsubishi should not ask Australia to pay too much :-]

Indeed, some Japanese have told Australian representatives that the seeming success of the submarine bid was so surprising that they felt they had “gone fishing and caught a whale”. Originally the plans were for Turnbull to spend a few days in Japan to cement the political relationship and to look at the submarine project himself.

Combined concerns about international distraction, the need for domestic focus and the danger of Japan’s other whaling decision would overwhelm the visit have led to a trimmed-down lightning [short visit to Japan] visit as Christmas looms…."

Some Background/Issues that May Be of Interest To Some of Turnbull’s Advisers Going to Japan:

The following are some of the comments S has made in Submarine Matters Comment sections over the last few weeks:

November 22, 2015, 1:12AM Comment on Delivery On Time and Pricing

“Delivery delays or initial failure are not reported for modern Japanese submarines.”

“[The export cost of the “Super Soryu” Japan’s offering for Australia] “depends on Australia’s situation. Every year, the Japanese Ministry of Defense calculates life cycle costs (LCC) of major equipment, including submarine. LCCs are calculated based on proven data (actual operation). This calculation process predicts total cost from design to eventual disposal of equipment, and is most reliable."

Jobs and Training in Adelaide


"On November 30, 2015, the Japanese government submitted the [Super Soryu] submarine building plan based on the Soryu-class submarine to Australian government. Japan plans to set up a local training facility to enable building in Australia and to train technicians over up to 7 years. Japan believes job security is important in Australia.

For technician training, Japan will set up the training facility in Adelaide, to train local technicians in special welding. Training will also occur in the Kobe [Japan] shipbuilding facility [home of KHI and MHI submarine building]. The Japanese government presented this plan at an on-site meeting in Adelaide, in November 2015 [also see].

Welding may include gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW). The Japanese Ministry of Defense reports that the welding strength by GTAW is around 10% higher than that by gas metal arc welding (GMAW). GTAW is one of the key technologies of Japanese submarine building. The USSR applied GTAW technology to weld pressure hull made of titanium alloy allowing some Russian submarines to dive very deeply [Pete comment: The high strength properties of GTAW is in line with Japan’s likely provision of NS110 (very high yield steel) for the Super Soryu. NS110 is very sensitive technology held by Japan].

See Japanese language article “Australian submarine construction Plan to present government technician training” in The Mainichi, Dec 1, 2015: http://mainichi.jp/articles/20151201/k00/00m/010/123000c

November 22, 2015, 1:12AM Comment on Pressure Hull Steel
“High strength steel for the pressure hull of the Super Soryu is very possibly NS80 and NS110 which is stronger than HY100”. [Pete comment: HY100 is standard high yield steel used by other countries to achieve safe diving of around 400 meters. Japan’s “NS110” steel is equivalent to a yield strength of HY156 and may permit safe diving as deep as 600 meters – providing a major safety and tactical advantage].

November 22, 2015, 1:12AM Comment on Key Diesel and Snorkel Technology

[the Super Soryu will likely have “Kawasaki Heavy Industry (KHI) diesels…KHI is the traditional supplier of submarine diesel engines and is also involved in [the advanced] snorkel generation system.”

One of the Japan Bid’s Major Strengths is Advanced Battery Technology

November 18, 2015 at 10:16PM Comment about Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs)
[Pete comment: LIBs will, very likely, be placed in the Super Soryu if Japan wins. Development of automobile (cars) LIBs has relevance to advances in LIBs for submarine] S comments “According to those researching LIBs, the development of LIBs for electric/hybrid electric vehicles are very important. Although anode materials have been developed, conventional cathode materials have some issues such as low capacity, high cost and low conductivity to apply to electric/hybrid electric vehicles. The practical capacity of current LIBs is 100-180mAh/g, but LIBs with high capacity (270mAh/g) and high capacity retention (92% after 140charge/discharge cycles) have been reported. In future, LIBs in automobiles will be realized.

November 17, 2015, 10:38PM Comment about Lithium-sulphur Batteries (Li-SBs)
[Pete Comment: Li-SBs (aka Li-S or LSBs) if developed and safe, may replace LIBs in the late 2030s. See performance graph that allows some comparison of Lead-acid Batteries (currently used on subs) with LIBs and LSBs] The theoretical capacity and energy density of LSBs is 1672mgA/g and 2567 Watt Hours/kg, respectively. The latest laboratory [tested] value of energy density is around 1300Watt Hours/kg (which reduces to 1000Watt Hours/kg after 50 charge-discharge cycles). Practical but limited applications of small LSBs in the near future are expected.


Pete comment: Submarines are inherently high tech and it is essential that all the systems work together in a balanced, predictable, safe, way.

S and Pete

Women in US subs seemed promising - But then...

$
0
0
Pete's Comment

While the most controversial issue for the UK RN seems to be Trident submarine replacements, women in submarines seems the USN's most public submarine issue.

ARTICLES

24 women "pioneering the way toward gender equality"

May be one of the first 24 woman to serve in US subs (Photo courtesy ForceChange(dot)com)
---
Anna Allisonof ForceChange(dot)com “Congratulate First Women to  Serve on Navy Submarines", 2010 http://forcechange.com/55499/congratulate-first-women-to-serve-on-navy-submarines/: 

Target: Lt. Britta Christianson and the other 23 women who took part in submarine officer training 

Goal: Congratulate the first women to serve on a Navy submarine and thank them for pioneering the way toward gender equality
The Navy first began to allow women to serve on ships in 1994. However, until recently they were not allowed to serve on submarines. It was believed that allowing women to serve on submarines, where the tour of duty is 90 days in a confined space, would be too distracting for the other soldiers aboard the ship. The ban was lifted in 2010, but the first woman was not certified to work on a sub until June 2012. Congratulate Lt. Britta Christianson on being the first woman to serve on a Navy submarine and for earning her dolphin pin.
The lieutenant spent more than a year training aboard the USS Ohio where she was required to become proficient in basic submarines operations, engineering fundamentals, damage control functions, and qualify as a diving officer. Part of the training involved spending six months deployed on a submarine...
Lt. Christianson is one of the first 24 women who were selected to begin submarine officer training since the Navy reversed the ban in 2010. The women were divided among four of the largest submarines in the Navy. These women were chosen to jump start the pilot program that eventually hopes to integrate women on Navy submarines...[see WHOLE ARTICLE]
-------------------------------------------------------
But now 3 left!
Lt. Jennifer Carroll (facing). (Photo: MC3 Timothy Schumaker via NavyTimes)
---

By Meghann Myers and David Larter, NavyTimes, "Sources: Few women choose to stay in submarine force", December 6, 2015http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/careers/navy/2015/12/06/sources-few-women-choose-stay-submarine-force/76605940/:

For the first women to earn the coveted dolphin pin, it's decision time about whether to stay in the Navy. And so far, only three of the original 24 have signed up.

The reasons span the work-life spectrum. The demands on a nuclear engineering trained submarine officer. The strain of balancing careers with a spouse who's also a military officer. A lingering sense of disgust after the submarine video scandal.

"I would probably expect that most of the women are going to get out," Lt. Jennifer Carroll told Navy Times. "I don’t know exactly what everyone’s personal reasons are for it, but I think a lot of it has to do with co-location." Carroll, 28, was one of the first women to earn her dolphins in 2012 as a junior officer aboard the ballistic missile sub USS Maine (SSBN-741) and today works with the Submarine Force's integration office in Norfolk [Virginia]...

Keeping officers

[SUBFOR spokesman Cmdr. Tommy Crosby replied]…three of the original 24 women selected for submarines have signed up for their department head tour, and noted that the window for the bonus is still open.

When assessing officer retention, Crosby said officials factor in losses and time served. Five officers have washed out of the program for medical issues, academic failures and other reasons. Something as simple as a shellfish allergy could disqualify a person from submarine service. The service also only counts those who have reached three years of commissioned service.
Factoring in those unplanned losses leaves the retention rate at 16 percent for the first submarine officers, Crosby said.

Crosby noted that retention for nuclear-trained women in surface warfare stands at 14 percent, and pointed out that one women from the 2011 year group has already committed to being a submarine department head…

Couple that with the fact that many more female sailors are married to male sailors than the other way around, and keeping a dual-service family together is a challenge. Carroll said that's the issue for her and many of her colleagues. She said her options to be stationed with her husband for sea duty are limited to Norfolk and the Los Angeles-area Naval Base Ventura County...

Another important factor is the commanding officer. In her case, Carroll said, her skipper made it clear to everyone on the boat that they were all equal and would be expected to do the same things…
The goal is to get women through the initial shock of joining a force where they are still a rarity and then convincing them to stick around for another tour.

Sweetening the deal

The Navy Department is trying to tackle that issue, for officers in general and women in particular, with a slew of new measures announced earlier this year. Among them is a fully-funded, in-residence graduate school program, expansion of the service's career intermission program and — in the future — getting rid of officer year groups altogether.

Officers can take up to three years off with Career Intermission Program (CIP) to raise children, or possibly work in new parenthood during a graduate school stint. But for those staying on active-duty, the Navy extended both installation child care hours and maternity leave this year. Eighteen weeks of maternity leave sounds great in theory, one female officer told Navy Times, but there are still concerns about how it will affect careers...[see WHOLE ARTICLE]

Please connect with Submarine Matters':




All is not gloom and doom. The one and (perhaps still) only female Submarine Officer in the German Navy, Janine Asseln. (Photo courtesy - the German Navy's magazine).
---

Pete

Mother Ships and Rocket Planes - Part One

$
0
0
Rockets have nothing to do with submarines but they're exciting and dangerous - be they government sponsored or corporate.



The Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet was a German rocket-powered fighter aircraft. Test flown Hanna Reitsch and others. The Me 163 was the only operational rocket-powered fighter aircraft used. Although revolutionary and capable of performance unrivaled at the time, it proved ineffective as a fighter and resulted in the destruction of very few Allied aircraft. 

The Me 163's explosive fuel (see above Youtube 2 minutes in) was also extremely toxic when touching organic material eg. the pilot (2:30)! When Germany was running out of experienced pilots the 163s also needed expert piloting to hit bombers at closing speeds of up to 900 mph for head-on attacks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Rockets revolutionised test piloting. The Youtube above depicts Cuck Yeager breaking the sound barrier in the film The Right Stuff. The Bell X-1 was built for speed, breaking the sound barrier just over 2 years after WWII. The mothership was a B-50 (with more powerful and reliable engines than a B-29). On the ground, no one had ever heard a sonic boom before. It rattled the photographs of the test pilots who had died and it was assumed that Yeager had exploded and there would be another funeral for another forgotten test pilot. It took a few moments for everyone to realize the sound barrier had finally been broken and the space age had arrived.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apollo 11 in 1969 needs no introduction.


After the White Knight Two - VSS Enterprise crash see Youtube on October 31, 2014 Virgin's Richard Branson may be turning to a safer project (with no passengers) (below).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Branson is developing the 747 booster rocket combination "LauncherOne". The system is mainly designed to boost Low Earth Orbiting satellites but perhaps could carry payloads to space stations.

Pete

Putin's Submarine Cruise Missile Party

$
0
0
 Its suspicious, in this Youtube footage, why the camera is so far from the launches. The footage in the above Youtube and this one - (freeze video frame at 6 seconds) seems to show that the submarine is firing the Kalibr-PL cruise missiles while surfaced! If so this is not a true submerged submarine launch achieved by US SSNs or SSGNs or UK SSNs.
--- 

Putin, on December 8, 2015, has gone to the trouble of launching Kalibr cruise missiles from improved Kilo class submarine Rostov-on-Don for a variety of reasons:

-  testing is an addition way to launch cruise missiles under operational conditions. Putin could have launched the Kalibrs by surface ship or ground launched but chose submarine launched because the opportunity presented and because it would be noticed.

-  Russia could have used the existing method of fighter-bombers dropping bombs on the targets in Syria. In that sense perhaps the submarine launch is a form of protest against Turkey shooting down a Russian fighter-bomber on November 24, 2015.

-  using weapons under operational conditions irons out technical bugs, organisational chain of command and targetting bugs and reveals any technical upgrades/capabilities that may be necessary.

-  the submarine launch event would be noticed by the Russian public and military/intelligence establishment who still seek vengeance for the IS organised downing of the Russian airliner (Oct 31, 2015)

-  and noticed by the Western military and potential customers for Kalibrs (with a range exceeding the MTCR) or MTCR compliant (not exceeding 300 km range Klub-S 3M-14E - DOD SS-N-30B's)

-  Putin wants the Russian military to be respected by the West as a modern, efficient military.

-  as the Western military have been surface and submarine launching Tomahawk cruise missiles against Middle East targets since 1991 Russia needs to be seen to have the same right. Russia wants to be seen as a legitimate World Policemen in the same way as the US sees itself.

-  It is suspicious why the camera is so far from the launches. The footage in the above Youtube and this one - (freeze video frame at 6 seconds) seems to show that the submarine is firing the missiles while surfaced. If so this is not a true submerged submarine launch. Note that Russian reports - including Putin's organ RT don't mention "submerged" launching.

-  It is a propaganda/PR victory as was Russia's earlier highly publicised cruise missile launches by Caspian Sea ships (Oct 7, 2015). Obama does not appear willing to highlight missiles strikes by the US or its Western allies in the Middle East - thus Western propaganda opportunities are lost. Obama's relatively peaceful moderation wins him few friends.

-  According to a combined report from the major agencies of the US intelligence community (CIA, NSA and DIA) the coalition is losing in its war against ISIS. It is understood Obama doesn't want to be seen as a Dubya-like warmaker but Obama aims to leave office in February 2017 with his moderate-liberal reputation intact. Obama's scrupulously clean Presidency may be at the expense of losing ground to terrorism. Obama needs to look beyond his reputation and beyond the countdown to his exit. Obama need not go down in history as too much like fellow lame duck Democrat Jimmy Carter.

-  For the planners of the future Australian submarine the firing of cruise missiles from a potential enemy SSK stands as a further reason that Australian future subs should be fitted from the beginning with Tomahawk cruise missiles rather than being retrofitted or on a "for but not with" basis. Note that SSKs of other countries in Australia's region (ie. Vietnam, China and India) also have land attack capable cruise missiles fitted (or about to be).

The Rostov-on-Don Improved Kilo Class submarine has fired the first missiles (Kalibr cruise missiles on December 8, 2015) "in anger" of any Russian (or preceding Soviet) submarine. (Photo courtesy Vitaliy Ankov/Sputnik via RT).

Pete

Japanese Whale Killing "Culture" Threatens Japanese Submarine Bid

$
0
0
A mother whale and its baby killed by Japanese explosive harpoons are hauled aboard a Japanese whale factory ship in waters to the south of Australia. Japanese "scientific" whaling is the most divisive bilateral issue between Australia and Japan.
---


As can be seen in the Youtube (above) after being shot by a Japanese harpoon it takes a long time for the whale to die (in pain). Whale killing is seen as "cultural" in Japan - a bit like regular Japanese killing of Dolphins. The cultural differences between Japan and Australia may be the biggest obstacle to buying the Super Soryu.
---

As indicated in Submarine Mattersarticle of December 6, 2015 Prime Minister Turnbull is making a short visit to Japan around December 18, 2015. The major talks are likely to be on Japan’s submarine bid. Japan’s resumption of whaling in waters south of Australia are also likely to be discussed (see Australia Threatens Legal Action over Japanese whaling).

It is not helpful to Japan’s submarine bid that Japan’s traditional-emotional need to kill whales is matched by Australia and other responsible nations' environmental-humitarian need to save whales. Turnbull is a centrist politician sympathetic to anti-whaling causes. 

If Japanese did not eat whale meat would Japan be interested in sailing a whaling fleet half way round the world to kill whales for “scientific" purposes?


“Don’t let whaling rock submarine negotiations, says Japan

Japan has called on Australia not to allow anger over the resumption of Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean to undermine Tokyo’s bid for a $20 billion submarine contract.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop this week described Japan’s decision to resume whaling as “deeply disappointing”, and Malcolm Turnbull is expected to raise the issue with his Japanese counterpart, Shinzo Abe, when he visits Japan later this month.

The row over whaling comes at a time when Japan is lobbying hard to persuade the government to choose it as the winner of a three-nation competition to build the new fleet of submarines.

One of Japan’s most senior diplomats, Toshiro Iijima [2013 bio details], the head of international security with Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs [MOFA], yesterday urged the Australian government to keep the two issues separate. “We are of the view that this difference in opinion (over whaling) should not have a negative impact of the ­entire, very good and excellent, ­relationship between Japan and Australian,” Mr Iijima said in an exclusive interview in Brisbane.

“I think the judgment of the Australian side (on submarines) should be from the strategic viewpoint or the financial viewpoint or the technical viewpoint. I don’t think the final decision would be politicised (with) whaling. Those two things are separate issues.”…”  See WHOLE ARTICLE IN THE AUSTRALIAN

Pete

China's bases in the Indian Ocean - New Djibouti Base

$
0
0
The European Union (EU) welcomed China's support against the Somalian pirate scourge.
---

In 2010 the Chief of Staff of European Union Naval Forces for Somalia (EUNAVFOR Somalia), …told reporters that China's decision to send PLA-N forces across the Indian Ocean to handle Somalian pirates was "extremely good news and will allow us to surge other assets into the Somali basin, where pirate activity remains at an all-time high."

Large Replenishment Ships, like the PLA-N’s Type 093A are an essential accompaniment to Chinese frigates, destroyers and (maybe) submarine anti-piracy activities in the Horn of Africa region (Photo courtesy CIMSEC).

Over recent years China has put varying arrangements in place to have some naval and/or air access to:

-  Hong Kong protected by PLA-N
-  Sanya Base, Hainan Island, China
-  Woody Island and Spratley Islands (in South China Sea)
-  Sihanoukville Autonomous Port, Cambodia (dual civilian - naval use)
-  plans for Kra Isthmus Canal in Thailand
-  Chittagong, Bangladesh
-  Hambantota, Sri Lanka
-  Marao, Maldives
-  Gwadar, Pakistan
-  NATO Libya intervention temporarily ejected China
-  Dili Harbour, Baucau airfield (both vulnerable to Chinese "investment"), East Timor
-  Lamu, Kenya
-  Port Sudan, Sudan
-  Port of Darwin, Australia (99 year lease) near rim of Indian Ocean
-  Djibouti (see below) 


China has various dual-use port arrangements with countries in the Indian Ocean that give Chinese civilian vessels and naval vessels some security. (Map courtesy CIMSEC)
---

As an example of China's consolidation in the Indian Ocean there is the base in Djibouti.

In 2015 China has been cementing its position in the tiny country of Djibouti (see left-center red dot on above map). France has long has bases in Djibouti and more recently the US opened a large (Camp Lemonnier) Base in strategic Djibouti. Djibouti provides China easy access to African - Middle East flashpoints.

His Excellency Mahamoud Ali Youssouf, Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Republic of Djibouti in Washington DC's, The HillDecember 10, 2015 has issued the following statement, which says in part:

"Djibouti values both China and US in East Africa":

China will have its first African naval logistics base by the end of 2017, in Djibouti, on one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors. The objective of this base will be to support the fight against piracy and terrorism, securing the Gulf of Aden alongside international forces from countries including the United States, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Germany, and Japan.

…Over the past few years, China has been increasingly active in our region, working with the US and others as part of this anti-piracy alliance and in support of UN-mandated humanitarian and peacekeeping work across the continent.

Indeed, the Chinese navy has completed twenty missions in the Gulf of Aden, and Chinese naval vessels taking part in these operations use port facilities in Djibouti for supply and service.  In recent weeks, we have concluded a 10-year agreement with the government of China to establish a naval logistical hub in Djibouti to support these operations and make it easier for China to continue its important, burden-sharing role.

Some commentators have questioned our decision to allow China to establish this new naval base.  Our response is, we welcome China’s engagement with anti-piracy and humanitarian work in our region. It is an important contribution to the multilateral effort.  And we want to do what we can to facilitate it. We consider China to be another strategic ally, alongside the U.S. and other forces, in the fight against terrorism and piracy, which are significant threats to the international community and the global economy. See WHOLE STATEMENT at The Hill.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Like the US since 1898 China is projecting power into seas and oceans as this is important for strategic and trade reasons. 

The New York Times via Hamilton Spectator, November 26, 2015 reportsin part

“Strategically, Djibouti offers an excellent place from which to protect oil imports from the Middle East that traverse the Indian Ocean on their way to China, military experts say. From Djibouti, China gains greater access to the Arabian Peninsula.

The U.S. military has praised China's participation in the international anti-piracy operations, which protect vital commercial shipping in a volatile part of the world. 

Shen Dingli, a professor of international relations at Fudan University in Shanghai, who has argued vigorously that China should develop bases commensurate with its growing military power, said Thursday that in doing so, China would only be doing what America had done. "The United States has been expanding its business all around the world and sending its military away to protect those interests for 150 years," Shen said. "Now, what the United States has done in the past, China will do again."

Shen, who referred to the planned facility in Djibouti as a "base," said it was necessary because "we need to safeguard our own navigational freedom," 

[China needs] to protect 1 to 2 million Chinese citizens living in Africa. This year, China's navy evacuated several hundred Chinese citizens and foreign nationals from war-torn Yemen, routing them through Djibouti for their journeys home.

In a recent paper for the National Defense University in Washington, Christopher D. Yung, an expert on China's military, argued that the country was intent on shouldering more international responsibilities involving its military and in turn would need "dual-use facilities"that could accommodate commercial and military operations.

Until now, he wrote, China had relied on commercial aircraft and ships to maintain its anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, but they were expensive and inadequate for the Chinese navy. "China needs to expand beyond its current temporary bases," Yung wrote.


Cutaway and weapons (including up to 36 land attack cruise missiles) of Chinese PLA-N Type 052C destroyer. 052s have been used on anti-piracy patrols in the Indian Ocean. (Courtesy Pakistani defence forum)

Pete

Rocket Planes Part Two - Neil Armstrong and Chuck Yeager

$
0
0

Neil Armstrong, then a Test Pilot, next to his X-15 edge of space rocket plane around 1962. That was  7 years before his captaining the July 1969 Apollo 11 mission to the Moon. (Photo courtesy Uncover California).
---

Prior to Apollo 11 Armstrong had a dangerous career:

-  He cheated death as a fighter pilot in Korea (flew back having lost much of a wing). 

-  As a test pilot he intentionally pushed his X-15 beyond the limits of controllable flight (see below). 

-  As an astronaut in Gemini 8 as his spacecraft was in a freak spin at a revolution per second - near unconscious he analysed the problem and gained control of his craft.  

-  In May 1968 he was within 0.2 seconds of being killed in an uncontrollable Lunar Landing Research Vehicle (LLRV) crash. 

All these events contributed to Armstrong being chosen to be first on the Moon. He had proven he was cool under pressure - and lucky

ARMSTRONG'S "CROSS COUNTRY" FLIGHT


The X-15 rocket plane was also almost all fuel tank. Its loaded weight was twice its empty weight and as is carried no weapons all the extra weight was fuel (with the small addition of the pilot). It began it’s flight at about 30,000 feet when dropped from a converted B-52. An X-15 pilot would fire the rocket engine and shoot upwards faster than the speed of sound until he ran out of fuel after maybe 2 minutes. Momentum carried the X-15  over the top of an arcing flight path where, in the thin upper atmosphere, rockets in the aircraft’s nose gave some directional control. 


The X-15 would then glide-plummet with no engine. The X-15 became a "glider" but as its wingspan was shorter than its body it was like a stone with stubby wings. Falling to Earth, the pilot traced out large circles above the runway to slow his speed to a manageable 370 km per hour at landing. He had only one shot to land - no go-arounds


April 20, 1962 Neil Armstrong's X-15 separated from the B-52 and accelerated past Mach 5 with ease and in control of the aircraft. An unexpected problem developed when he tried to aim the aircraft back towards the runway at Edwards Air Force Base

He was in the thin upper atmosphere, and with the X-15 nose angled upwards, he bounced off the atmosphere instead of being able to aim the nose down to control his flight. The tail of the X-15 skipped off the atmosphere like a stone on water, carrying him further from Edwards. Gravity eventually took over and he was able to set himself back on track for landing. The only problem was that he was 50 miles south of where he wanted to be, and he didn’t have an engine to light to get him any closer. 

Making his situation worse, there weren’t any safe lakebeds for an emergency landing between him and Edwards. The X-15 had metal skids instead of wheels for landing gear as skids when landing on dry mud acted as brakes. So Armstrong needed to land on the dry lakebed surrounding Edwards or crash. One of the pilots following him in an F-104 chase plane saw Armstrong in the X-15 flying level with the treetops he was so low coming in to land. But he managed a safe landing.


The near tragic flight, which lasted 12 and a half minutes, was jokingly referred to as Armstrong’s cross country flight.

 

Short bio details on the late Neil Armstrong who passed away August 25, 2012..

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
One more Right Stuff scene. In December 1963 test pilot Chuck Yeager attempted a height record in a F-104 Starfighter (promoted as the "missile with a man in it" instead of the less upbeat "Widow Maker"). The standard F-104 is only jet powered, but Yeager was using a NF-104A

The NF-104A was a hybrid rocket (fired 3:15 in above youtube) and jet powered craft. Note (1:40 into the youtube) the Roar of Acceleration as the rocket-jet plane shifts to Afterburner. Turn up loud!

The firing of the ejector seat ignited the pure oxygen in Yeager's face mask. Being a a test pilot in a rocket plane is a risky business.

Please connect with Submarine MattersMother Ships and Rocket Planes - Part One, December 8, 2015. 

Pete

China - Australia Defence Relations Closer - Meetings

$
0
0

Chief of the General Staff, PLA, General Fang Fenghui and Australian Defence Minister Marise Payne at meeting.

Visit to Australia by China’s General Fang Fenghui

2 December 2015 | AUSTRALIAN DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE Media Release http://news.defence.gov.au/2015/12/02/visit-to-australia-by-chinas-general-fang-fenghui/

Chief of the General Staff Department ofChina’s People’s Liberation Army General Fang Fenghui , visited Australia this week to conduct the Defence Strategic Dialogue, co-hosted for Australia by the Chief of the Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin AC, and the Secretary of the Department of Defence, Mr Dennis Richardson AO.
This year marks the 18th year of the annual Dialogue, demonstrating that the bilateral defence relationship is robust, and an important aspect of the broader relationship.
The annual dialogue offers the leadership of the Australian Defence Organisation and China’s Peoples’ Liberation Army the opportunity to engage in open and frank discussion on issues of common concern and to discuss a forward program of bilateral defence engagement activities.
While visiting Canberra, General Fang also met with the Minister for Defence, Senator the Hon Marise Payne, to discuss the bilateral defence relationship.
General Fang also visited Headquarters Joint Operations Command where he met with Commander Joint Operations, Vice Admiral David Johnston AM, RAN, and toured the facility. General Fang visited Australia from 30 November to 1 December.

Stephen McDonell and staff for Australian government owned ABC Online report, December 4, 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-03/china-australia-bolster-military-links-after-talks/5939252
 China and Australia set to bolster military links following high-level talks in Beijing

Canberra and Beijing have agreed on an unspecified program of enhanced military cooperation for next year, including exchanges, training and service-to-service engagement.

Australian officials confirmed new avenues to foster defence links would go ahead but did not provide further details.

Chief of Defence Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin was at the annual country-to-country military talks in the Chinese capital when the announcement was made.

In a written statement he said Australia was "committed to working with China" and that there was "a growing maturity" in the defence engagement between Australia and its largest trading partner.

"We discussed the forward program of engagement between the Department of Defence and the People's Liberation Army in 2015, including strategic dialogue, service engagement, practical cooperation activities, personnel exchanges and training and education opportunities," he said.

"Our ability to discuss issues in an open and transparent way is a sign of the growing maturity in our defence engagement. We are committed to working with China to ensure a strong, stable and prosperous region."

China's state-run wire service Xinhua said the pledge was the result of a meeting between vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission, Fan Changlong, Air Chief Marshal Binskin and Australian secretary of defence Dennis Richardson, who were visiting China for the annual defence strategic dialogue.

Mr Fan reportedly said the agreement marked "a new high of mutual political trust between our countries".

"Military ties forge an important part of bilateral ties," he said. 

The two countries have worked closely in the search for missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 as well as in peacekeeping, anti-terrorism, joint exercises and education exchanges, Xinhau reported Mr Fan as saying, adding he vowed to further promote military cooperation.” 

Pete

Tomahawk Cruise Missiles and Friends Hitting ISIS

$
0
0
All the recent interest in the Russian Kalibr forgets the West's much longer history of hitting insurgents and conventional armies with Tomahawk cruise missiles. Not only missiles but ground attack aircraft like the A-10 Warthog (below).


US Navy warships USS Philippine Sea and USS Arleigh Burke launch Tomahawk missiles on ISIS targets in Syria in 2014. USS Philippine Sea is a Flight II Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser and USS Arleigh Burke is the lead ship of the Arleigh Burke-class guided missile destroyers.
---

The Tomahawk is not alone. There is also the UK-European Storm Shadow, US AGM-86 and more advanced hypersonic missiles in the works.
---


Interesting background on the Tomahawk cruise missile. It has been in service since 1983 and in wars since 1991 - decades before the Russian Kalibr. A cruise missile is guided using several systems, the major portion of whose flight path to its target (a land-based or sea-based target) is conducted at approximately constant velocity; that relies on the dynamic reaction of air for lift, and upon propulsion forces to balance drag. 

Cruise missiles are designed to deliver a large warhead over long distances with high accuracy. Modern cruise missiles can travel at supersonic or high subsonic speeds, are self-navigating, and can fly on a non-ballistic, extremely low altitude trajectory. 
---



The A-10 "Warthog" is ugly but effective. In September 2014, the USAF A-10 strike wing revealed it would be deploying to the Middle East in the next month, which includes 12 of the unit's 21 A-10 aircraft. The timing coincided with the ongoing US airstrike campaign against ISIS. Since mid-November 2014, US commanders began sending A-10s to hit IS targets in central and northwestern Iraq on an almost daily basis.


The A-10 Warthog, 30 mm rotary cannon, over Iraq and Syria against ISIS.
---

Pete


Turkish Subs Great At Blockading Russian Black Sea Fleet

$
0
0
Current tensions between Russia and Turkey would be making Turkish  naval commanders tense. Turkey's medium sized submarine service (13 subs) may give Turkey a useful intelligence tool and make some Russians apprehensive, but ultimately Russia would win a confrontation. Turkey is in NATO so that may give Turkey a little confidence.

Tensions have included:

-  Turkey's suspected soft handling of ISIS. Shared Sunni religion would be part of this. About 80% of Turks would be Sunni Muslim. ISIS is all Sunni Muslim. Also corruption in Turkey is high and the allure of blackmarket ISIS oil is high.

-  November 24, 2015 - Turkey shooting down a Russian fighter-bomber.

-  December 4, 2015 - Russia displays a man portable anti-aircraft rocket launcher (MANPAD) on a Russian warship in the Bosphorus Strait basically in Istanbul (Turkey's largest city)

-  December 13, 2015 Russian Kashin class destroyer Smetlivy shoots (AK-47?) warning shots close to the Turkish trawler called Geçiciler-1

The Kashin class destroyer Smetlivy. Launched in 1967.

-------------------------------------------------------

Turkey is in a good geographical position to blockade or divide Russia's Mediterranean and Black Sea Fleets:

The Sea of Marmara, and very narrow Bosporus and Dardanelles (bottom left of map) are ideal waters for Turkish subs to blockade the Russian Black Sea Fleet (HQ in Crimea) and Mediterranean Fleet (major port Tartus Naval Base, Syria). This is if Turkey and NATO were willing to risk it. (Map courtesy GlobalResearch(dot)ca)
---


Turkey has been a long and substantial user of submarines over the years. Here is a list of Turkish submarines over the last 100 years including many ex Bulao (GUPPY upgrade). 

Currently Turkey has 13 German designed Type 209s, including:

5 x Atılay (aka "Ay") class Type 209/1200s, 1,600 tons (submerged)


4 x Preveze-class Type 209T1/1400s, 1,800 tons (submerged) built at Gölcük Naval Shipyard in Turkey.


4 x Gür-class Type 209T2/1400s 1,800 tons (submerged) built at Gölcük Naval Shipyard



Uploaded March 1, 2015. An example of a the larger German (TKMS) designed Type 214 submarine. Turkey is building six 214s. 
---

OMICS International advises The 214s have air-independent propulsion (AIP) submarines. They will be (or are) being built with maximum local content at Gölcük Naval Shipyard in Kocaeli, Turkey.

As the Turkish Type 214 will have a significant amount of Turkish indigenous systems on board, this variant of the Type 214 will be known as the Type 214TN (Turkish Navy). Germany's TKMS-HDW will preassemble structural and mechanical parts of the submarine in Germany, or classified elements such as the AIP and propulsion system and will then ship them to Turkey. All electronic and weapon systems (including the Combat System) will be of Turkish production. Cost of the contract is 2 billion euros and may last ten years or more.

The Type 214 submarine is derived from the Type 212 but as an export variant it lacks some of the classified technologies of its smaller predecessor, the most important of which is probably the non-magnetic steel hull, which makes the Type 212 submarine impossible to detect using a magnetic anomaly detector. [Is TKMS offering Australia non-magnetic steel hull in the CEP?]

Due to improvements in the pressure hull materials, the Type 214 can dive nearly 400 meters

The six 214s, known as Type 214TN (for Turkish Navy) will replace the early Atılay class (209s) around 2020. Details of the 214TNs include 1,690 t surfaced / 1,860 t submerged, endurance 84 days

214TN's Armament:
8 x 533mm torpedo tubes, 
2.500km Roketsan GEZGIN-D Land Attack Cruise Missile [Tomahawk like?]
IDAS small missile anti-aircraft capability
Harpoon anti-ship missile and land attack
Mark 48 torpedos

This shows the Australian Navy hierarchy that US weapons with an indigenous combat system, can be fitted to German submarines.

See Youtube of Turkish naval vessels. Specific details of Turkish Type 214 submarine at https://youtu.be/hviZXRvMXjw?t=3m12s

---------------------------------------------------------

One reason Turkey may be hesitant or maybe appeasing ISIS is due to the dangerous neighbourhood Turkey lives in (map below):


-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Russia's S-400 anti-aircraft missile system (NATO reporting name: SA-21 Growler) now in Syria, would be making Turkey nervous, as well as NATO and Western coalition pilots who are bombing targets in Syria. The S-400 could also hit aircraft 300-400 km over the border into Turkey or Iraq. Like Israel, Turkey dislikes the realities of being in the Middle East.

Pete

The French DCNS Bid for Future Australian Submarine

$
0
0


The "SMX Ocean" concept is closer to realisation as the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A.

"Australia’s Future Submarines

The Future Submarine Program will deliver Australian an affordable, regionally superior, conventional submarine capability, sustainable into the foreseeable future.
Australia must have the ability to operate, sustain, maintain and upgrade Australia’s submarine force on an enduring basis.

Australia’s Future Submarines project will be the biggest defence acquisition in Australia’s history, valued at $50 billion.

Building the submarines will be a mammoth task – at least twice the size of the Collins Class program.
On completion, the Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A will be the most technically complex artefact in Australia.

Our pedigree

As one of the largest and oldest defence materiel constructors in the world, DCNS has the technical capability to deliver the highest quality submarines for the Australian Navy and the Australian public.
DCNS is the only submarine design company in the world to have design competencies in nuclear and conventional submarines, safely delivering submarines ranging from 2,000 tonnes to 14,000 tonnes to navies all around the world.
In the Western World, alongside the United States and France, France belongs to the very exclusive club of nuclear nations. DCNS designs, builds and maintains the French Navy’s nuclear submarines, and as such, control the most complex and sensitive technologies in our shipyards. It is with this in mind that DCNS has prepared the proposal for Australia’s Future Submarine Program.

The Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A

The Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A, designed specifically for the Royal Australian Navy, is the world’s most advanced conventionally powered submarine.
Cutting-edge technology, direct from France’s nuclear submarine program, pushes the submarine’s stealth capabilities into a new realm.
Pump jet propulsion replaces obsolete propeller technology. Hydroplanes can retract to reduce drag and noise.
The Shortfin Barracuda will field the most powerful sonar ever produced for a conventional submarine.
As new technology is developed between France, Australia and the United States, upgrades can be easily made via quick-access technical insert hatches.
The Shortfin Barracuda is 97 metres in length and displaces 4,500 tons when surfaced.
It is a magnificent, inspiring submarine which will remain state-of-the-art until the 2060s.
In adopting this technology, Australia will join an elite club which includes only the United Kingdom, the United States of America and France.
Australia and France have enjoyed a close friendship across many generations. The Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A marches that friendship well into the future.

The Build

DCNS will present three strategies to build Australia’s future submarines. For
The first option is to start the project in France and build all the submarines in Cherbourg, France.
The second option combines the capacity of two shipyards, one in France and one in Adelaide.
The third option is to start the project in Australia and build all the submarines in Adelaide.
Each option has different costs and benefits, and ultimately the choice of how the submarines will be built is a decision for the Australian Government to make.
For both options, dedicated programs and measures have been designed to transfer technology, expertise and knowledge to Australia. This technology transfer will prepare Australia for the future operation and maintenance of the submarines.
DCNS has the capability and resources to deliver either Australian build option.

Full transfer of stealth technology

France is offering the Australian Government complete access to the stealth technologies utilised on board French nuclear-powered general-purpose attack submarines (SSNs) and ballistic  missile submarines (SSBNs).
These technologies are the “crown jewels” of French submarine design and have never been offered to any other country. The very nature of these stealth technologies and the decision to release them to the Australian Government is a significant demonstration of the strategic nature of this program for the French authorities.
The United States will be responsible for supplying integrated combat systems to the Future Submarines, as well as the submarine’s weapons.
The collaboration between Australia, France and the United States will see DCNS providing design, technology and expertise within this sovereign framework.

Local employment

DCNS intends to attract and work with the local Australian defence industry across the design, construction and sustainment phases of the Future Submarine Program.
We view Australia’s Future Submarines Program not only as an opportunity to share our expertise and systems, but also to work in partnership with Australian naval shipbuilders to further develop the technical skills of the naval manufacturing workforce.
Our success as an advanced technology company is not only built on meeting customer needs by deploying exceptional know-how and unique industrial resources; it is also driven by our ability to develop innovative strategic partnerships with the countries for whom we build.
DCNS. Building Australia’s Future Together."
PETE'S COMMENT
This is, of course, the overt summary bid
The Top Secret, Commercia-in-Confidence bid is rather more lengthy.
Pete

Canadian Defence Concerns with some concentration on Submarines

$
0
0
Click here to vastly expand map (Courtesy Melting The Ice). Map of Canada with its 370 km Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) boundary being a particular interest to guard - even from American fisherman and oil interests. Russia even more interesting. Many chokepoints suited to Canada SSKs - perhaps Labrador Sea through to Ellesmere Island. From west, Beaufort Sea to Ellsmere Island and all the narrows in between. Protecting US coast (south of San Diego and Strait of Florida?) from Central America drug drop-offs by sea. 
---

PETE'S COMMENTS

The following is a broad ranging discussion on Canada's defence concerns with some concentration on submarines, related aircraft and surface ships.


Canada's four SSKs protect Canadian interests while complimenting the SSNs of the US Navy:

-  with Canada frequently operating in the Arctic Ocean, Pacific West coast (North (sea-lanes, oil, strategic) Arctic down to Central America? coast (anti-drugs)) similar goals and distances on the Atlantic east coast (up past Labrador Sea).

As Canada’s SSKs are non-AIP they would need to snort every day or two given the risk of being trapped under thick Arctic ice. This would limit far northern strategy and tactics compared to, up to 3 months submerged (food limited), SSNs of Russia, US and perhaps UK SSNs in those waters.

The increasing rate of northern ice melt is increasing the northern areas that SSKs can operate (not only in warmer months but in mid Winter). 

Northern waters are increasingly frequented by Russian icebreakers, oil and gas tankers even in Winter. The Russians need increased watching - especially over competing oil claims. The Northern Sea Route and Northwest passage are becoming increasingly valuable ocean highways that shortern naval and commercial "sailing" times. See map at bottom of this article.


----------------------------------


Nicky and Pete have had ongoing discussions of what type of replacement submarine Canada might opt for or be suitable. On a growing scale TKMS 214s, DCNS Scorpenes, Saab A26s, 218s,  

BRAD JOHNSON'S COMMENTS

Canadian defence specialist, Brad Johnson, added a wealth of comments towards the end of Comments section not only on submarines but aircraft and surface ships (including future Frigates that Australia may be interested in). I've added one or two words and links for clarity. Brad commented:

"New Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, has made three commitments: 

-  strong military, financed by a deficit budget, which permits rebuilding defence infrastructure.

-  committed to current defence spending levels plus planned increases,

-  plans to opt for a cheaper fighter aircraft than the F-35 so those funds can be diverted to the Navy.

A replacement for the Victoria Class may not occur soon. A US$?1.5 billion planned mid life overhaul will probably occur keeping the subs functioning until 2025 or so.

By 2025 the hostile public attitude towards the Victoria’s submarines may still delay replacements.

Another problem is many other military acquisitions will come due in the 2025 time frame, such as the big ticket F/A-18 Super Hornets, new Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue (FWSAR) aircraftand frigate/destroyer replacements.

Canada's and Australia's submarine requirements are very similar (other than Arctic ice AIP) hopefully a success for Australia on that front will make it easy for Canada to make a follow on order.

Fingers crossed Trudeau isn't a repeat of Chretien/Martin Liberal government [1993-2006] for the military. There are good reasons to be optimistic but only time will tell. Trudeau only mentioned pulling out the F-18s from over Iraq and Syria. The Polaris refueling tanker, two Aurora surveillance/ MPAs and embedded "trainers" as far as I know are staying in Iraq.

Yes, I have read about the ordeal the Collins Class has been, it is amazing how many Canadians are absolutely convinced the Victoria/Upholders were a rip off. The reality is the Victoria/Upholders cost Canada practically nothing, the initial cost was a horse trade for leasing the subs in exchange for a base lease for Britain ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army_Training_Unit_Suffield?) zero dollars exchanged. The end of lease price was one dollar (or one pound, I am not sure). Most of the rest of the cost were funds that would have been allocated to Canada's then existing Oberon SSKs anyway.


A Canadian Victoria (ex Upholder) class sub in chilly seas (Photo courtesy Royal Canadian Navy website)
---

[on the Victoria/Upholders] This is not to say there have not been problems, but I have some sympathy for the position of the British. Yes, their mothball procedures left something to be desired, yes there were some deficiencies in their construction (notably the wiring insulation, at least partially to blame for the tragic fire on the HMCS Chicoutimi), but they offered these subs back when they were still in operation. When Canada delayed acquiring them for the better part of a decade, they likely did not allocate funds for a proper decommissioning, resulting in things like salt water left in internal tanks. 

Had Canada taken possession immediately (which like I said would have cost nothing as the operational fund would have come from the Oberon funds), the could have brought the same British crews that were on them to train Canadian crews. The refit to Canadian (US) weapon systems could have been a rolling refit, as crews trained on the submarines with the British weapon systems.

Overall all though I don't think the British are blameless in the poor condition the submarines were received in, but I think the bulk of the blame lies squarely with the unnecessarily delays in acquisition by the Canadian government, and most of the deterioration and damage happened during this nearly decade long acquisition with the subs rusting in wet dock. They could have sent a team to inspect the subs and make recommendations and pay for a proper decommissioning and storage in dry dock.

At the end of it even with the damage, these subs were still an excellent deal. Chicoutimi was all but destroyed in the fire, the other subs needed deep refits that the Chretien government was unwilling to pay for. Had Chretien allocated the proper funds, most of the availability issues of the subs would have been taken care of.

At this point the Victoria Class seems to be doing quite well, and is even scheduled for a $1.5 billion dollar upfit.[mid-life overhaul]

Destroyers and Frigates

On paper both Canada and Australia plan on having some very impressive middle power navies in the future. Currently we are without a single functional destroyer [the last of the 1970s launched Iroquois Destroyers, HMCS Athabaskan has been having severe engine troubles], or a single functional supply ship.

The 12 [Halifax class] frigates were just upfit [overhauled] and pretty much tip top, with added air defence capabilities to make up for the lack of destroyers. Plans are big Arctic patrol ships, 15 surface combatants (likely a mix of excellent Royal Danish Navy frigates, 4-5 Iver Huitfelt-class frigates to replace the destroyers and 8-10 Absalon multirole frigates to replace the current frigates), 2-3 supply ships and a heavy ice breaker are planned. As a couple Mistral class assault ships and some SSNs and you have pretty much as good a Navy you could expect a nation the size of Canada to have. The problem of course is this is all just on paper and Canadian defence acquisitions do not have a habit of going smoothly.

SSNs

As far as SSNs go, the US has worked extremely hard for reasons I don't understand to make sure Canada never acquired them. During the big push to acquire SSNs in the late 1980s, not only would they not sell their SSNs to Canada but they blocked the sale of British SSNs. This is in spite of the fact the fuel design in US nuclear subs and to some extent the reactor design is based on work done at the atomic research facility in Chalk River LaboratoriesManitoba.

They even found a way to block the sale of the French SSNs [smallish Rubis class SSNs used from 1983 to this day]. It was the drama of the SSN acquisition (and the end of the Cold War) that left Canada with no submarine replacement plan for the Oberons when the Upholders became available.

I don't know what the reasoning is for the strong US opposition to Canadian SSNs?, but I suspect it hasn't changed. Roadblocks from the US combined with the public's apprehension regarding nuclear power make me think that permit of SSN acquisition is a bridge too far more likely kill the submarine program entirely than result in operational SSNs. Advancements in AIP technology make SSNs less important anyway.

Given that Canada's and Australia's submarine replacement needs are so similar, it would be a very positive sign to see some teamwork here. Canada just like Australia has a strong preference for US torpedoes and fire control systems on their subs, similar operational requirements and a similar relationship with the US navy, a combined effort on submarine acquisition would make a lot of sense." 

[See this 2007 article on the US opposing Canada's SSN search. It could be the US does not want Canada's Arctic oil interests too well protected by any future Canadian SSNs. Also SSNs might contribute to excessive Canadian independence... :)  ]

PETE'S COMMENT


In terms of joint Australian/Canadian future submarine interest (or combined buying) it is probably a case of our nations at many levels informally liaising, rather than any formal [Anglo-French Concorde :(  like]  liaison. Canada may have some buy-from-NATO realities that Australia doesn't have. Australia has Japanese interests that Canada doesn't have (to my knowledge).

So I think the RAN and RCN, industry organisations, scientific and research bodies can all email each other and meet at High Commissions (Defence and Naval Attaches?) when opportunity arises. Maybe open ended understandings can be reached but not firm agreements that may come back to haunt in the flexible commercial and public realms.

Australia's current submarine buying program (and positive experience with the Super Hornets) can yield much that is useful for Canada. Canada appears to be ahead in the frigate and offshore patrol vessel acquisition process - which would be generating many valuable pointers for Australia.

I'll write future articles on ice melt (and oil) implications, sub surveillance on drugs and Antarctic problems.

As ice melts the economic and strategic value of the Arctic increases. Submarines and surface warships can stay in wider areas of the Arctic even over Winter. Note shaded "Potential oil and gas fields" - Much Russia is claiming. (Map and commentary courtesy Business Insider Australia ). - see map much enlarged at http://static.businessinsider.com/image/53750c126bb3f72e37360e2c/image.jpg

Pete
Viewing all 2347 articles
Browse latest View live