Comparison of 3 CEP contenders by Keyword Search in Defence White Paper

March 3, 2016, 1:13 am

≫ Next: Australian "Delay" in Receiving the Future Subs

≪ Previous: Australia CEP contenders Japan's KHI - Australian New Submarine Delay

Some stirring music in this 2010 youtube "The Top 10 Best Diesel-Electric Submarine in the World". China's Yuan "7", Soryu "6" under-rates them. The old Sodermanland at "5" is over-rating - surely Gotland better! Scorpene at "3" (providing much input into Shortfin) is OK, Lada at "2" Nope,
Type 212 (much input into Type 216) at No. "1" debateable - TKMS would be happy.
---

Continuing the keyword search approach to the 2016 Defence White Paper (DWP), using Ctrl + F, throws up comparative data on the three CEP participants by country (Germany, France and Japan).

This is particularly useful if there were a correlation between the number of mentions on countries/peoples and the choice of CEP winner. This is noting that the Governments of France and Germany (and Japan of course) have leant weight to the corporate bids.

Also important is the more subjective element of the context of each comment. Quoting actual paragraphs below does to some extent remove the distortions of a document analyst's preconceptions. Distortion is known as the sin of "situating an analysis".

In the search process I have cited the mentions using the clearly marked paragraph numbers in the text.

Keyword search of the DWP - large PDF, 10 MB, 191 pages, at http://www.defence.gov.au/whitepaper/Docs/2016-Defence-White-Paper.pdf yielded:

GERMAN/GERMANY

3 mentions.

2.105 Australia welcomes the comprehensive plan of action negotiated between the Permanent Five members of the United Nations Security Council (the United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom) plus Germany [P5 + 1] ...on Iran’s nuclear program.

4.121 France, Germany and Japan, are participating in the future submarine Competitive Evaluation Process [CEP], which will assess their ability to partner with Australia to deliver the future submarines...

5.86 Australia will also work with other partners, [War on Terror] ...This includes cooperation with a broad coalition of concerned countries, including...Germany.

FRANCE/FRENCH

10 mentions.

2.69 To help countries in our immediate neighbourhood respond to the challenges they face, Australia will continue to play an important regional leadership role. ...We will continue to play that role in close collaboration with New Zealand, France, the United States, Japan and other partners.

2.105 [see above]

4.121 [see above]

5.39 We will coordinate our efforts, particularly in relation to maritime security and disaster relief, with New Zealand, France, the United States and Japan.

5.83 Australia and France share a longstanding and close defence relationship with a shared commitment to addressing global security challenges such as terrorism and piracy. We are strong partners in the Pacific where France maintains important capabilities and we also work closely together to support the security of our respective Southern Ocean territories. Under the FRANZ Arrangement between France, Australia and New Zealand the three partners coordinate humanitarian and disaster relief operations in the Pacific. Australian and Frenchdefence forces worked alongside each other to provide life-saving humanitarian assistance to Vanuatu in the wake of Tropical Cyclone Pam.

5.84 Following the 13 November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris, Australia has expressed its unwavering solidarity with the people of France. Australia will continue to work with France and other like-minded countries to combat Daesh as part of the fight against terrorism.

JAPAN/JAPANESE

36 mentions

Most are below.

Page 22 Executive Summary [no paragraph number available] "As Australia’s strategic environment becomes more complex it is important to further develop our international partnerships including with our allies the United States and New Zealand, and with Japan, Indonesia, India, Singapore, the Republic of Korea, China and other key partners."

2.3 " Three Free Trade Agreements, with Korea, Japan and China, have entered into force since December 2015. The Trans Pacific Partnership between 12 regional nations, which account for 40 per cent of global trade, including the United States, Japan and Australia, has great potential to further drive opportunities for growth in Australia."

2.37 Asia’s defence spending is now larger than Europe’s. [Japan is in Figure 1]

2.69 ...We will continue to play that role in close collaboration with New Zealand, France, the United States, Japan and other partners.

2.72 ...The waters of South East Asia carry the great majority of Australia’s international trade including to our three largest export markets in China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Nearly two thirds of Australia’s exports pass through the South China Sea, including our major coal, iron ore and liquefied natural gas exports...

2.80 Australia is committed to working with the countries of South East Asia, and with the United States, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, India and China to support security, development and growth.

2.85 Australia has a deep and abiding interest in peace, stability and security in North Asia. More than half of Australia’s exports are to North Asia, with China, Japan and the Republic of Korea being three of Australia’s four biggest trading partners. Almost all of that trade, by volume, moves by sea. While our interests in peace and security in North Asia are vital, our capacity to influence events acting alone is limited. Our defence engagement in North Asia will continue to be based on partnerships, including with Japan, the Republic of Korea, and our alliance with the United States.

2.91 Japan is a major power in North Asia with advanced self-defence forces and is an important contributor to regional and global security. Australia welcomes the prospect of Japan playing a larger role in international security and will continue to deepen and broaden our growing security cooperation with Japan. More details on the Australia-Japan relationshipcan be found in Chapter Five.

3.9 below this para is [Figure 2. which has a prominent place for Japan as Australia's second top trading partner.]

4.121 France, Germany and Japan, are participating in the future submarine Competitive Evaluation Process [CEP], which will assess their ability to partner with Australia to deliver the future submarines...

5.9 The Government will increase the number of multinational exercises the ADF participates in across our immediate region and the broader IndoPacific, working closely with the United States, Japan and other regional countries and international partners.

5.17 The Government’s highest priority will continue to be our alliance with the United States. We will look to mature and deepen practical engagement with partners across the Indo-Pacific, particularly Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, India and China. We will also maintain global partnerships including with NATO...

5.28 The United States Force Posture Initiatives will also provide opportunities for broader collaboration between the United States, Australia and partners in the Indo-Pacific, including Japan

5.39 We will coordinate our efforts, particularly in relation to maritime security and disaster relief, with New Zealand, France, the United States and Japan.

5.59 Japan is a major power in North Asia with advanced military forces and an increasingly active approach to regional security. Australia and Japan have a deep and broad relationship. We share democratic values, have been close economic partners for decades and more recently we have become close strategic partners. We each have alliances with the United States and we have common strategic interests in secure and free-flowing trade routes, a stable Indo-Pacific region and a rules-based global order. We welcome the Japanese Government’s recent decision to adopt policies that will enable it to contribute more directly to regional and global security and stability.

5.60 Australia has a growing security relationship with Japan. In recent years we have signed treaty-level agreements on cooperation in defence science and technology, information sharing and logistics support. These agreements provide the basis for further developing our defence cooperation based on the 2007 Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation.

5.61 Australia and Japan are implementing a broad range of initiatives to further enhance practical defence cooperation. These initiatives will strengthen defence cooperation in a number of areas including: increased training and exercises between all three Services, increased personnel exchanges, deepening cooperation on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, maritime security, peacekeeping, capacity building and increasing trilateral cooperation with our common ally the United States. We will enhance strategic dialogue between Australia and Japan, which includes joint Defence and Foreign Affairs 2+2 dialogue held at Ministerial level, as well as senior officials’ level dialogue. We will continue to explore opportunities to expand cooperation with Japan in areas such as intelligence, developing common capabilities like the Joint Strike Fighter, air and missile defence and maritime warfare technologies.

5.62 To underpin our growing cooperation, we will work towards an agreement with Japan that improves our administrative, policy, and legal procedures to facilitate joint operations and exercises.

5.63 We will continue to expand trilateral defence cooperation between Australia, Japan, and the United States for our mutual benefit.

5.67 Our strong defence relationship is underpinned by a mutual interest in working together with the United States and Japan to contribute to security in North Asia and shared concern about the threat posed by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

OTHER KEYWORD MENTIONS WERE

Indo-Pacific 68

Asia 85

Pacific 137
ANZUS (only) 7
NATO 13

Europe 2

COMMENT

If Australia is not putting any weight on intergovernmental relations in the CEP then the keyword search frequency approach to the DWP may be irrelevant.

Nevertheless, looking at the results:

Germany gets honourable mention as one of the P5 + 1 nations on Iran nuclear; is a CEP participant and is/has been a fellow venturer with Australia in the Middle East and Afghanistan in the War on Terror.

France, usually grouped with other regional nations, cooperates with Australia on maritime security especially regional humanitarian/disaster relief and is in CEP. We jointly work together on global security including counter-terrorism and piracy. I've studied South Pacific international relations and history over the years but never encountered the "FRANZ Arrangement".

Japan is way ahead on mentions and column inches. Australia's current and future relationship with Japan appears very close. This is on the alliance, common opponents, importance of North Asia, officer exchanges, 2 + 2, second top trade partner, in CEP, Japan being more active in regional order, treaty-level agreements on cooperation in defence science and technology, information sharing and logistics support.

Paragraph 5.61 summarises the growing Australia - Japan relationship well. Rather revealing on the CEP may be the final sentence of 5.61 "We will continue to explore opportunities to expand cooperation with Japan in areas such as intelligence, developing common capabilities like...maritime warfare technologies."

So even if Japan were not the CEP winner there is what amounts to a close alliance relationship with Australia to console Japan.

Just for interest. Here's some reporting on the Defence White Paper from Channel 9 News in the shipbuilding hotspot of Osbourne, Adelaide, South Australia. Specific mentions of submarines right at the beginning and 1 minute 45 seconds onwards.
---

Pete

↧

Australian "Delay" in Receiving the Future Subs

March 3, 2016, 9:10 pm

≫ Next: Collins Midlife Upgrade/Extension - Companies, Tomahawks and Possible Timings

≪ Previous: Comparison of 3 CEP contenders by Keyword Search in Defence White Paper

Note that the new submarines will only begin to be built in about 12 years time - for entry into service not in the late 2020s but the early 2030s.

There is currently a political confrontation between former Prime Minister Abbott and current Prime Minister Turnbull over what Abbott perceives as a new submarine "delay".

Only beginning the build in 2027 may cause much uncertainty for the winning contender. The delay may effect TKMS and DCNS less as there is a full export or foreign build order book for TKMS (for Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Singapore, Israel and South Korea) and almost full for DCNS (India and Brazil).

For Japan it is a long wait. The delay may benefit Australia with the opportunity for Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs), new diesels and the new snorkel system being operationally tested in Japanese Soryu Mark 2s and new, post Soryu class, over a longer period. If Japan is chosen see the Australian build details in red in the SORYU TABLE below.

If TKMS or DCNS are chosen Australia may benefit from those companies spending a longer period developing and testing new air independent propulsion (AIP) technologies and also LIBs.

Without the CEP contender even being announced the "delay" controversy should serve as a warning to contenders about how political the new submarine issue is in Australia. Australian government decisions may continue to be surprising, personality and election driven. Different Prime Ministers and Coalition versus Labor governments may have conflicting ideas as to when and where the submarines should be assembled.

SORYU TABLE (with earlier Oyashios, as at March 4, 2016)

SS No.	Building No.	Pennant No.	MoF approved amount ¥ Billions & FY	LABs, LIBs, AIP	Laid Down	Laun -ched	Commi-ssioned	Built By
5SS Oyashio	8105	SS-590/ TS3608	¥52.2B FY1993	LABs only	Jan 1994	Oct 1996	Mar 1998	KHI
6SS-15SS Oyashios 10 subs	8106 -8115	SS-591-600	¥52.2B per sub FY1994-FY2003	LABs only	Feb 1994		Mar 2008	MHI & KHI
16SS Soryu Mark 1	8116	SS-501	¥60B FY2004	LABs + AIP	Mar 2005	Dec 2007	Mar 2009	MHI
17SS	8117	SS-502	¥58.7B FY2005	LABs + AIP	Mar 2006	Oct 2008	Mar 2010	KHI
18SS	8118	SS-503	¥56.2 FY2006	LABs + AIP	Feb 2007	Oct 2009	Mar 2011	MHI
19SS	8119	SS-504	¥53B FY2007	LABs + AIP	Mar 2008	Nov 2010	Mar 2012	KHI
20SS	8120	SS-505	¥51B FY2008	LABs + AIP	Mar 2009	Oct 2011	Mar 2013	MHI
No 21SS			No 21SS built
22SS	8121	SS-506	¥52.8B FY2010	LABs + AIP	Jan 2011	Oct 2013	Mar 2015	KHI
23SS	8122	SS-507	¥54.6B FY2011	LABs + AIP	Feb 2012	Oct 2014	Mar 2016	MHI
24SS	8123	SS-508	¥54.7B FY2012	LABs + AIP	Mar 2013	Nov 2015	Mar 2017	KHI
25SS	8124	SS-509	¥53.1B FY2013	LABs + AIP	Oct 2013	Nov 2016	Mar 2018	MHI
26SS	8125	SS-510	¥51.7B FY2014	LABs + AIP	?	?	Mar 2019	KHI
27SS Soryu Mark 2	8126	SS-511	¥64.3B FY2015	LIBs only	?	?	Mar 2020	MHI
28SS	8127	SS-512	¥63.6B FY2016	LIBs only	?	?	Mar 2021	KHI
29SS	?	?	1^st of New Japanese Class	LIBs only	?	?	2023?	MHI?
Aus1	?	?	1st of new Aus class (if Japan chosen)	LIBs only	2028?	2030?	2033?	in Aus or Jpn?
Aus2 to 12?	?	?	between 5 and 11 additional Aus subs	LIBs only	from 2029?	from 2031?	from 2034?	in Aus or Jpn?

Table courtesy of information provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries,

AIP = air independent propulsion, LIBs = lithium-ion batteries.
---

Pete

↧

Collins Midlife Upgrade/Extension - Companies, Tomahawks and Possible Timings

March 3, 2016, 11:07 pm

≫ Next: Japanese Navy bilateral exercises and humanitarian support

≪ Previous: Australian "Delay" in Receiving the Future Subs

The most comprehensive, up-to-date Asia-Pacific sub numbers-types map I've seen - at March 3, 2016. Australia's six Collins subs may need to be upgraded with Tomahawk cruise missiles to keep pace with Klubs fitted to Kilo subs of India, Vietnam, China, Russia and perhaps two future Indonesian Kilos. (Graphic courtesy news(dot)com(dot)au with this clearer, larger, image)

---

The leaking of Top Secret Cabinet documents on Future Submarine project timings has prompted Submarine Matters to draw together many details on the Collins "life extension" (or "midlife upgrade"). The midlife upgrade may result in much work for Lockheed Martin in cooperation with Saab and Thales.

The Australian Defence Department apparently has been advising for years that the future subs would not be delivered until the early 2030s.

Defence sources said the handover of a future submarine by 2026 was always more of a political aspiration (of former Prime Minister Abbott) rather than a sensible shipbuilding schedule.

Australia’s six Collins subs were launched between 1993 and 2001 which, after the standard 30 years of operation, would usually lead to decommissioning between 2023 and 2031. A submarine midlife upgrade would aim to keep them operating until the mid-2030s.

In the meantime a midlife upgrade of the Collins might include more modern sonar, the latest software and hardware for its AN/BYG-1 combat system, derusting, new batteries, overhaul of the diesel engines and maybe introducing Tomahawks. The upgrade would cost much more than A$2 Billion total.

TOMAHAWK CRUISE MISSILES

An additional item which Australia might include in the Collins is Tomahawk (land attack and long range anti-ship) cruise missiles (compatible with the combat system) which would be launched through the torpedo tubes. Wikipedia records: "During the [Collins] construction phase, consideration was given to acquiring submarine-launchable Tomahawk cruise missiles; giving the [Collins submarines] the capability to attack land targets after minor modifications.^[44] Plans to acquire Tomahawk or similar land-attack missiles remained under consideration until 2009, when the Defending Australia in the Asia Pacific Century: Force 2030 white paper was released; stating that land-attack missiles will instead be incorporated into the armament of the Collins-class replacement."

With the future submarine delay a decision not to include Tomahawks could mean Australia falling behind in a region with increasing numbers of submarine fired Klub land attack cruise missiles. This is noting that Kilo diesel electric submarines belonging to Russia, India, China, and Vietnam are being fitted with land attack Klubs missiles (with ranges varying from 300km to 2,500km (depending on user modifications)). Indonesia may also buy two Kilo submarines fitted with Klubs.

UPGRADE WORK FOR LOCKHEED MARTIN, SAAB AND THALES

The life extension may result in much work for Lockheed Martin in cooperation with Saab and Thales. This is noting that the AN/BYG-1 combat system to be upgraded in the Collins is intertwined with the broader sensor, communications and weapon systems of the Collins. Lockheed Martin, Saab and Thales are already working together on submarines solutions. This may allow them to provide an integration solution for most of the upgrades required by the Collins. See Lockheed Martin on Tomahawks for US and UK submarines.

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

Saab (as early as October 2015) publically anticipated the likely timeline of the Future Submarines and need for a midlife upgrade of the Collins. Nigel Pittaway in DefenseNews, October 10, 2015 reported:

“Saab Pitches Collins Submarine Upgrade

…Speaking at the Pacific 2015 Maritime Exhibition in Sydney last week, a Saab senior executive said …a Collins midlife upgrade [will be] a cost-effective measure to maintain capability…“In Australia, you have decided on a new submarine program, which is fantastic, but it’s not going to be here for a number of years…”

…Australia is looking to acquire up to 12 new conventional submarines under Project Sea 1000, but has a tight timeline if it wishes to avoid further full cycle docking overhauls, which will need to be performed on at least two submarines if the Collins needs extending beyond 2030.

…However, the slow progress of the program is causing concern that the submarines cannot be designed, selected and built in time to avoid a Collins life extension.

…[Gunilla Fransson, Saab’s senior vice president, Security & Defence Solutions] said that if Saab’s proposal for a Collins midlife upgrade is accepted, the work would be undertaken in Australia. “You sustain the Collins boats here in Australia and I don’t see any reason why you could not upgrade them here,” she said.

“Saab would certainly like to position ourselves to support Australia in an extended Collins life of type. You have a very capable local submarine company in ASC, which certainly has the capability to perform the work, together with Saab Kockums and other local Australian companies.”” [WHOLE DEFENSENEWS ARTICLE]

COLLINS TABLE

(heavily modified from Wikipedia)

Name	Laid down	Launched	Commissioned	Usual Decommissioning 30 years after Launch. (Upgrade to operate to?)	Namesake
Collins	14 Feb 1990	28 Aug 1993	27 Jul 1996	2023 (2033?)	Vice Adm Collins
Farncomb	1 Mar 1991	15 Dec 1995	31 Jan 1998	2025 (2034?)	Rear Adm Farncomb
Waller	19 Mar 1992	14 Mar 1997	10 Jul 1999	2027 (2035?)	Capt Waller
Dechaineux	4 Mar 1993	12 Mar 1998	23 Feb 2001	2028 (2035?)	Capt Dechaineux
Sheean	17 Feb 1994	1 May 1999	23 Feb 2001	2029 (2036?)	Seaman Sheean
Rankin	12 May 1995	26 Nov 2001	29 Mar 2003	2031 (2036?)	Lt Cdr Rankin

Pete

↧

Japanese Navy bilateral exercises and humanitarian support

March 5, 2016, 11:50 pm

≫ Next: Mid-life upgrade of the Collins class will be a real headache.

≪ Previous: Collins Midlife Upgrade/Extension - Companies, Tomahawks and Possible Timings

On March 6, 2016 S has kindly provided the following on Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF) or (Japanese Navy) bilateral and humanitarian activities.

S’s Comment: Though its activities are constrained by the Japanese Constitution, the Japanese Ministry of Defense (MOD) is seriously making international cooperation efforts. Here are some examples:

The bilateral training exercises of JMSDF in 2015 and 2016:

2015/04/05	Sri Lankan Navy (Sri Lankan west ocean area)
2015/04/23	Maldives National Defense Force (Maldives surrounding ocean area)
2015/05/12	the Philippine Navy (Manila west ocean area)
2015/06/13	French Navy (east Gulf of Aden)
2015/08/19	Malaysian Navy (Sabah, west ocean area)
2015/09/14	US Navy (Yokosuka) for disaster relief training
2015/09/21-24	US Navy (Okinawa surrounding ocean area) for 127th anti-submarine operation
2015/10/19	S Korean Navy (Kanto south ocean area) for search and rescue training
2015/10/19-22	RAN (Kanto-Shikoku south ocean area)
2015/10/23	French Navy (Okinawa north ocean area)
2015/11/11	Sri Lankan Navy (Sri Lankan west ocean area)
2015/11/16-25	US Navy (Japan surrounding ocean area, airspace)
2015/11/30	Sri Lankan Navy (Sri Lankan west ocean area)
2015/12/18	Turkish Navy (Gulf of Aden)
2016/01/28	EU (Spanish Navy) (Gulf of Aden)
2016/01/26-02/02	US Navy (Tokai ocean area) for 128th anti-submarine activities
2016/02/09	Pakistan Navy (Gulf of Aden)

JMSDF (or Japanese Navy) humanitarian support in the South Pacific and other areas are as follows:

2009-	present Anti-piracy operation (P3C, Warship)
2004	Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami
2010/08-09	Pakistan damaged by flood
2013/11-12	The Philippines damaged by Severe Tropical Storm Pewa: humanitarian support & disaster relief by 1,180 JMSDF troops
2014/01/03-09	Air Asia flight 8501 for search and rescue operation
2014/03-04	Air Malaysia flight 370 for search and rescue operation
2015/06/21-27	the Philippine Navy (Palawan Island, Palawan Island north west ocean area）for humanitarian support & disaster relief training by using P3C.
2016/02/25-29	Hosting of 19th Asia-Pacific Countries Navy University -“Strengthening of Maritime Security and Corporation in Asia-Pacific Area”
2016/03/05-present,	the Aurora Australis rescue operation

Further information is at http://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/formal/english/about/operation/index.html

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

Japanese Ministry of Defense (MOD) 2015 Year in Review video. 50 seconds in it goes to a clear English voice-over. The video concentrates on Japan's Self Defense Forces (SDF) humanitarian activities. (Published March 1, 2016).

Like Australia's close relations with the US a close Japanese relationship with the US is evident. Note the humanitarian aid Pacific Partnership 4 minutes in.

S and Pete

↧

Mid-life upgrade of the Collins class will be a real headache.

March 7, 2016, 12:48 am

≫ Next: Japan's First Ship-Submarine FONOP in South China Sea, set for April 2016

≪ Previous: Japanese Navy bilateral exercises and humanitarian support

HMAS Rankin - probably at Fleet Base West - Rockingham, Western Australia. The Collins submarines have been extra-ordinarily problematic. Even after a mid-life upgrade systemic problems (eg. continuing diesel engine unreliability) are likely. HMAS Rankin may have had the most problems. APDR Reported "With reference to delays, it is worth mentioning at this point the history of HMAS Rankin – the 6th submarine in the series. She was launched 41 months late because in the late 1990s during her construction resources had already been diverted to making urgent improvements to other members of the Collins Class. Rankin started a prolonged period of maintenance in 2008 and is still out of the water and is likely to remain so until [2014] – an extraordinary absence of six years." (Photo of HMAS Rankin courtesynachohat(dot)org).

---

In continuation of Submarine Matter’s article on the Collins mid-life upgrade issue of March 4, 2016 further information and comments are:

- All foreign and Australian companies involved with the Collins mid-life upgrade will most probably need to work with ASC. ASC will likely have main carriage. This may have eventual impacts on blowout of Government cost estimates and extended timings Collins are out of the water being upgraded.

- the Collins mid-life upgrades will occur while ASC is heavily involved completing the AWDs (see problems) (now due to be completed by 2020) and ASC will then be ramping up to build the Future Frigates (from 2020). A midlife Collins upgrade will be intricate.

- Mid-life upgrades to the Collins is of course not a start from clean-slate issue. There is a whole series of issues and costs in upgrading an old problematic submarine. Upgrades to the Collins may continue to be as many and as complex as reflected in Kym Bergmann’s comprehensive Asia Pacific Defence Reporter (APDR) article of May 6, 2013 - see http://www.asiapacificdefencereporter.com/articles/304/Collins-Class-upgrades-a-mixed-scorecard .

- Reflecting how over-committed Australia’s warshipbuilding programs will be in the early 2020’s (clashing with a mid-life upgrade for the Collins) see:

= Page 21 of the 2016 Defence White Paper (10MB): “The Government’s shipbuilding plans are based on long-term continuous builds of surface warships, commencing with construction in Australia of offshore patrol vessels from 2018 and future frigates from 2020.” The AWDs may be further delayed past 2020. And

= page 89 - 90, Table 6, Summary of key investment decisions from FY 2016-17 to FY 2015-26 of http://www.defence.gov.au/whitepaper/Docs/2016-Defence-Integrated-Investment-Program.pdf (5MB) which appears to be a spike in warship, submarine and naval aircraft spending.

The Government will suddenly need to accelerate Defence spending regardless of expected low revenue and heavy commitments for non-defence spending.

- the alternative of retiring the Collins in the progressively until 2030 should be considered - even if there is a temporary capability gap. This is noting the last time Australian submarines fired torpedos in anger - was 1915 near Gallipoli. On the more usual intelligence collection function - there are other platforms and other countries' submarines that will continue to contribute.

- If a mid-life upgrade is done - perhaps better to have it done in Sweden. ASC will be too busy building the large warships anyway. Saab Kockums is doing mid-life upgrades of two of Sweden’s three Gotland class submarines. There is limited information on the upgrades (to occur in 2017?) on Saab’s website - more information would be useful.

Pete

↧

Japan's First Ship-Submarine FONOP in South China Sea, set for April 2016

March 8, 2016, 3:19 am

≫ Next: We all live in a Black-Gray Submarine!

≪ Previous: Mid-life upgrade of the Collins class will be a real headache.

In what amounts to a Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) Japan will sail 2 of its warships and a submarine from Subic Bay, Philippines (see map above) to Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam. This will cross China's "nine dash line" (see map below) the vast sea-space (most of the South China Sea) that China claims.

---

First reported March 6, 2016 in Japanese newspapers and then to other news agencies March 7, 2016 in several news sources here, here and here is news of a Japanese Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) set for April 2016.

Pete's summary - These newspaper and news agency reports have likely come from Japanese military sources who say Japan will be sending an (Oyashio class?) training submarine and 2 destroyers(?) to visit the Philippines. They are likely to set out in late March 2016 on Japan’s normal patrol route of the Bashi Channel (Luzon Strait) and reach Subic Bay (now a civilian port) in the Philippines in early April 2016. They will then sail across the South China Sea to Vietnam’s largest naval base at Cam Ranh Bay. This will be the first Japanese submarine visit to the Philippines in 15 years.

China has, by itself, decided to claim most of the South China Sea within its artificial "Nine dash line" (Map above) (Map courtesy GeoGarage).

---

CHINA'S RESPONSE SO FAR

In answer to “It is reported that Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force plans to send a submarine to the Philippines along with two warships that will then sail on to Vietnam. What is China's comment on that?” The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs March 7, 2016 answered:

“It needs pointing out that cooperation among relevant countries should be conducive to regional peace and stability instead of targeting a third party, still less harming the sovereignty and security interests of other countries. Japan once illegally occupied China's islands in the South China Sea during WWII. We are on high alert against Japan's attempt to return to the South China Sea through military means.”

JAPAN'S SURVEILLANCE AID STRATEGY

Rather than confronting China in such a direct way, Japan instead wants to build the capacity of nations that need help in the region (particularly the Philippines and Vietnam) to improve their surveillance of Chinese forces.

Japanese Defense Minister Nakatani is traveling to the Philippines in April 2016 to discuss cooperation. This includes providing the Philippines with several used Beechcraft TC-90 King Air for surveillance of the South China Sea. Japan and Vietnam have also discussed holding a joint naval exercise

A Japanese TC-90 King Air (photo courtesy planespotters)
---

Advice received in early March 2016 on the TC-90 is that Japan is leasing not granting the TC-90s to the Philippine Navy with Japan and Philippines to agree on a lease contract in several months. The Japanese government will not grant aircraft to the Philippines using overseas development assistance (ODA). This is because ODA is limited to non-military areas and current Japanese law bans give away Japanese government-owned assets. So the Japanese government decided to lease the TC-90s which will remain Japanese Navy (JMSDF) property. The value of the lease is millions yen (US$10,000s) per year.

The TC90s will have no search radars or other devices but rely on visual monitoring of the Spratly Islands. The TC90 will extend the Philippines' aerial coverage of the Spratly Islands from the current 300kms to 600kms – see http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/politics/20160228-OYT1T50110.html?from=ycont_top_txt(in Japanese). A future Submarine Matters article will talk about Japan's provision of patrol boats to the Philippines.

As the Japanese submarine will be a "training" submarine it is likely to be an older Oyashio class (middle submarine, above). An Oyashio would have slightly less sensitive features than the latest Soryu class (top). Japan can expect that a Chinese (Yuan or Song class) submarine will be posted in the Bashi Channel (Luzon Strait) to put the Japanese submarine under surveillance, if possible. (Diagram courtesy Shipbucket)

---

Please connect with Submarine Matters December 4, 2015 article Japanese Concerns About Philippines Alliance Building and Providing Military Aid.

Pete

↧

We all live in a Black-Gray Submarine!

March 8, 2016, 11:59 pm

≫ Next: Potential Soryu Problems - Recalculations

≪ Previous: Japan's First Ship-Submarine FONOP in South China Sea, set for April 2016

Life beneath the waves in the Soryu submarine.
---

A friend has kindly provided an English translation of the subtitles in the above Youtube.

The Soryu submarine, where all the action takes place, is Zuiryu“Sword Dragon”. It is the fifth Soryu built, hence designated SS-505. It has lead-acid batteries and Stirling engine AIP. It was laid down March 2009, launched October 2011 at MHI and commissioned into the Japanese Navy (JMSDF) in March 6, 2013 see “Soryu Table”. It is homeported at the Japanese Navy's main base at Yokosuka.

Scene - In the tight confines of a submarine dwell 65 souls (9 officers, 56 men). They take a female reporter out for the day. Note - Japanese submarines are usually an all male preserve.

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

Youtube Time mins:secs	Speaker and What he/she/they Said
0:05	Reporter: Ah!
0:12-0:22	Reporter: Thank you. Oh Great. Now, we are offshore. Numbers of ships are becoming less.
	Captain Ryu Moriyasu: Yes.
0:25-0:58	Narrator: A jet back mass with a cloud of white smoke sails the sea. This is the latest class of submarine, a [Soryu specifically the] Zuiryu. Its maximum width is 9.1, and length is 84m. Building cost is more than 50 billion yen [A$600 million]. Zuiryu commissioned three years ago. Zuiryu rarely conducts activities such as disaster relief or life-saving. It is a weapon just for attack.
1:05-1:20	Narrator: Submarine conducts secretly mission in the deep sea. We are allowed to accompany with training of submarine. This is the first TV filming of Soryu-class submarine training. Soryu's Command Center area, drive/sonars/combat system etc. Darkened for security. Note chairs on rails. ---
1:24-1:35	Narrator: First, we went section called “Control Room”. We can see a row of instruments and monitors, filming of them is rarely permitted.
1:39	Captain: To the mast. Dive!
1:40	Crew: Dive. Dive.
1:47-1:50	Narration: Suddenly, something happens in the ship.
1:55-2:05	Reporter: Ship is inclined. It is quite inclined to the front.
	Captain: It is going more inclined.
	Reporter: My body is nearly moving. I feel to be powerfully pushed to the front.
2:07-2:09	Narrator: Because the submarine starts deep diving for training.
2:14-2:20	Narrator: This is footage from camera set out side of the submarine under the special permission.
2:35-2:43	Narrator: The submarine has no windows. After submerging, they hear sound and detect abnormality.
2:46-2:53	Reporter: We already submerged deep. In this submerged situation, training is going to be carried out.
2:56-3:05	Narrator: Under the red light, combat training is carried out. One word perfectly changed tense and quite atmosphere. Periscope area in Command Center ---
3:06-3:08	Sonar man: Detected sound. Hundred twenty degree.
3:10-3:21	Narrator: Sonar man checking sound in the sea detected the warship. They say, if it is enemy, they will conduct preemptive attack before being detected. Immediately, Captain starts action.
3:22-3:28	Crew: We get in the position.
.	Captain: Roger. Get in the position. Prepare training torpedo warfare
	Crew: Get in the position. Prepare training torpedo warfare.
	Crew: Prepared the position related to launch control.
3:28-3:35	Narrator: The they identify (the warship) whether it is all or enemy by such as huge date accumulated in the latest computer
3:38-3:49	Reporter: Captain check and confirm the monitors, and gives direction. He does not look actually nor use periscope.
3:49-3:50	Crew: Yosoro (=go forward as-is). Yosoro. Yosoro. Captain: (unclear)180 degree stop.
3:51-4:00	Narrator: If submerged deeply, the periscope cannot be used. Is target ally or enemy?
4:03-4:12	Crew: Currently detected the ship in 120 degree direction.
	Captain: We will conduct torpedo attack against this target.
4:13-4:26	Narrator: Captain assumed this target as enemy and ordered torpedo attack.
	Crew: Prepared No.3 and N.4 torpedo tube for firing.
	Captain: Roger.
	Crew: We will fire No.3 torpedo, fire prepared.
.	Crew: Fire
	Crew: Ute (fire).
4:29-4:50	Narrator: Emergency situation is assumed for most of trainings. In the deep sea, such a secret training was conducted. In submerging, generally, they do not communicate outside. Decision whether attack or not is depends of only Captains judgement.
4:53-4:56	Narrator: Next we went here
4:58-5:03	Captain: Curtains are set. There are [Japanese built Type 89] torpedoes opposite side of the curtains. [No picture of Type 89, even on Wikipedia!]
5:03-5:10	Reporter: I understand. Can’t we film these, we can?
	Captain: No.
	Reporter: Wow. Torpedoes! Exactly.
5:12-5:14	Narrator: This is a section for torpedo firing.
5:17-5:46	Reporter: Have you ever fired torpedo?
	Captain: Yes. But, we have not fired live ammunition against the target.
	Reporter: Actually, you will fire such a huge torpedo against something. In this meaning, do you feel scar on firing?
	Captain: Rather scary, we must avoid to fire (torpedo) against wrong target. So we are very careful in this point.
5:48-5:59	Narrator: Attack secretly enemy. To improve this ability, in the latest submarine, there are many equipment different from those of existing submarine
6:00	Caption: Equipment of latest submarine
6:05-6:27	Reporter: This is cockpit. In the cockpit of Oyashio-class which I boarded before, back and forth operation of handlebars was conducted. In this submarine, they adopted sticks operated by right and left hands.
6:29-6:57	Narrator: By these control sticks, they move X-shaped rudders in the stern.
	In the existing submarine, they decided the upper-lower and left- right directions by cross-shaped rudders. Contrary, in the new submarine, X-shaped rudders move independently and provide sharper maneuverability. Stirling AIP section ---
7:00-7:25	Narrator: There are another modifications. We went to AIP section. Actually, new engines called AIP were equipped inside of the boxes. We cannot film AIP, because it is defense secret.
7:26-7:36	Reporter: I can see thick tube in the back and arrays of small valves. Bub, it does not look like engine at first glance.
7:38-7:43	Narrator: This is what is the maximum features of the latest submarine.
7:46-8:09	Narrator: The existing submarine, there is need to take in air to charge the batteries. But, surfacing has a risk to be detected. The new engine need not taking in air and provides significantly longer submerged period.
8:10-8:16	Captain: Surfacing provides risk of detection by radar, but now we can avoid such risk.
8:17-8:21	Narrator: On the other hand, there is price to pay.
8:23	Caption Unknown life in submarine.
8:31-8:34	Reporter: Same as always, steep and narrow stairs. (she used to visit Oyashio-class).
8:38-8:54	Reporter: Look at this. I am surprised. Beds are set just next corridor. One, two, three, it is three-stage bed. This is extremely narrow corridor. Thus tee beds are placed along parallel to corridor.
8:56-9:06	Narrator: Shower and WS are set in the back of 3 tier bunks. Private space of crew is limited to the bunkbed.
9:10-9:29	Reporter: It looks extremely cramped, doesn’t it?
	Crew: Yes
	Reporter: Wow
	Crew: It has become smaller.
	Reporter: As expected, smaller than in the preceding Oyashio class submarines?
	Crew: Yes
	Reporter: Where are your personal belongings?
	Crew: Belongings compartment is under the bed.
	Reporter: Are your belongings in this compartment?
	Crew: Yes. Because only this can be locked space.
	Reporter: My legs become high.
9:30-9:39	Narrator: Actually. Equipment of the new engine AIP makes living space small.
	Reporter: OMG. It is terrible feeling of pressure.
9:41-9:56	Reporter: Why do they lengthen submarine?
	Captain: If the size (of submarine) become bigger, it become more likely to be detected by the enemy and become more expensive, and so on. So they make submarine compact.
9:58-10:27	Narrator: It is not only tightness that submariners who engage in long submerged mission must acclimatize. You can use shower only once in every three days. Because, in addition to saving water and not making a sound as much as possible. Crews are obliged to wear headphones for watching for TV or DVD, because leaking sound provides a risk to be detected.
10:28-10:34	Reporter: Now, one after another, crews walk down the stairs and enter this room. I will follow them.
10:40-10:42	Reporter: A good smell.
10:44-10:50	Narrator: Drinking and smoking are prohibited inside of submarine. Only pleasure is a meal.
10:54-10:58	Reporter: Hmmmm. It is yummy.
11:01-11:04	Narrator: A crew member cannot give details of his mission to his family. How do they think their mission?
11:07-11:09	Reporter: Don’t you feel scaring in sailing?
11:10-11:21	Crew: We convince the scarring mission, rather, my parents or wife worry about mission, because it is very unclear.
11:21-11:30	Crew: We cannot tell returning date, so, we can only tell “not worry, and wait”, though I do not have a girlfriend.
11:30-11:34	Reporter and other crews---laughter
	Reporter: How can you speak like that?
	Crew: If I have a girlfriend, I would say like that.
11:37-11:38	Crew: We work for 6 hours and then take for 12 hours.
11:38-11:42	Narrator: Then crews start to confess their feeling.
11:44-11:49	Crew: I think smaller number of our sailing means more peaceful Japan.
11:50-11:51	Reporter: As expect, does the number increase?
11:52-11:53	Crew: Mmmmm.
11:56-11:59	Crew: I just feel increase in number of training.
12:01-12:04	Reporter: What happens? I cannot perceive it at all.
12:05	Caption - The 60th Anniversary of JMSDF Submarine Fleet Founding at Yakosuka base
12:11-12:20	Narrator: Japan started operation of submarine 100 years ago. Tension of situation of East Asia is increasing.
12:22-12:31	Commander of submarine fleet of JMSDF, Vice-admiral Doma Seiichi: As military environment surround our county is increasingly severe, further improvement in deterrence is required under the new security legislation guide line.
12:34-12:49	Narrator: Currently, 16 submarines engage in defense of Japan. Government aims to proceed with building of latest submarines, and finally to increase to 22 submarines. Meanwhile an Australian Admiral, who is a submarine expert, explains Australia's submarine needs. (July 9, 2012) ---

↧

Potential Soryu Problems - Recalculations

March 10, 2016, 7:07 pm

≫ Next: Japanese SeaWeb and Stealth Jet Detection Research - Quite Public

≪ Previous: We all live in a Black-Gray Submarine!

Click on image to enlarge.
---

To calculate the Soryu's real size estimates were made using standard published information. On the basis of the cut-aways (top) and other published diagrams a side drawing, with meter measurements, (immediately above) was created. This is all part of reverse-engineering the Soryu's principal particulars.

The conclusion (in summary) was:

- difference between calculations and standard published information is 800 to 1,100 tonnes and

- the Soryu is bigger by 25% to 33% in reality.

A heavier submarine requires more engine power and fuel to achieve speed-range requirements. The disparity in surface displacement (2,900 tonne published, but 3,700 tonnes estimated) would particularly impact the Soryu's surfaced, speed-range.

SPECIFICATION (with wiki published figures if available)	CALCULATION
Pressure hull calculated volume:	3,300 m3
Pressure hull displacement:	3,300 x 1.025 (average seawater density) = 3,382 tonnes
Estimated ballast tanks:	500 tonnes
Estimated external fuel tank:	150m3 – 127 tonnes. Not sure much room left for more inside, even alongside batteries (compensating tanks and others need room too!)
Estimated submerged displacement: (4,200 tonnes published in wiki)	>4,200 tonnes (between 4,200 to 4,500 tonnes)
Estimated surface displacement: (2,900 tonnes published in wiki)	>3,700 tonnes (= 4,200 tonnes – 500 tonnes): (between 3,700 tonnes to 4,000 tonnes)
Estimated accuracy of calculations:	300 tonnes (7 to 8%)
Difference between calculations and standard published information:	800 to 1,100 tonnes!
	Soryu is bigger by 25% to 33% in reality.

ANONYMOUS COMMENT

"So that tells you something about Soryu's real size...

The reserve of buoyancy is indeed 13-15% on that submarine (500/3700). Sorry, not possible to add more ballast tanks, because your submarine would be too high on the water. And the pictures tell us that Soryu's draught is around 7.6-7.8 m. So I made the calcs on my software tool, they check out. !

And yes, these two diesel engines (Kawasaki 12Ｖ 25/25 SB-type)'s power is unknown. Anyway, it will be less power in total than on Collins (with Collins 3 × Garden Island-Hedemora HV V18b/15Ub (VB210) 18-cylinder diesel motors), even with a favourable de-rating due to shorter life-expectancy.

Shorter life expectancy raises another interesting point: the Japanese keep the same 2 Kawasaki diesel-generators sets on Australian Soryu but claim to extend Future Submarine life to 35 years; so either you de-rate their power by, say 50% and there is little left, or you ditch the engines every 15 years (current life span of Japanese boats)? by cutting the hull (can their steel accommodate that?). At the end of the day, the winner is: higher indiscretion ratio than Collins!

And fuel storage: largely inferior to what is needed. you would need to add 50% for the 3rd diesel and double the lot to have Collins legs. Issue: Soryu's design would become infeasible and diverge due to added length and drag etc...

SIMILAR DOUBTS

Geoff Slocombe, writing in the ASPI Strategist, March 11, 2016 also has doubts http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/sea-1000-is-there-a-strategic-necessity-to-choose-the-japanese-submarine/:

“Modern European submarine construction uses a single pressure hull, while the Soryu class uses a combination of double pressure hulls for the forward and aft compartments, but with a different steel alloy from single pressure hulls for the intermediate four compartments. Does this create differential expansion/cracking and corrosion problems at the dissimilar metal junction and is this the reason why Soryu has a 20 year life, not the 30 required by Australia?

While double pressure hulls increase a submarine’s reserve of buoyancy, they also increase cost and complexity of manufacture, probably give a shorter planned sea life, and increase the wetted area of the submarine requiring more energy to propel the vessel underwater.

A 4,200 tonnes Soryu has a crewing capacity around the same as Israeli Navy’s 2,400 tonnes Dolphin 2 Class submarines. The physical layout inside the current Soryu won’t meet ergonomic standards for future RAN submariners, affecting their alertness, health and welfare during a long range/endurance mission. Arguably the current Japanese internal design is inefficient and a poor starting point for an evolved Soryu detailed design.”

PETE'S COMMENT

The Anonymous calculations and observations tend to reinforce comments I made in a Submarine Matters article of February 12, 2015 where I wrote:

"One additional issue is that the Japanese Navy has been running its submarines with the assumption the service life is 15-20 years - while Australia assumes submarines should be in service for at least 30 yours. This may or may not be a problem. After 15-20 years moving parts may or may not start to wear out. This may be most significant in the submarine's diesel engines and the very large electrical motor. Changing engines-motors is very heavy maintenance involving cutting into the submarine hull. This might only be possible in Japan for the Soryu? Maintenance realities may or may not be a problem.

NO ELASTIC MOUNTS ON SORYUS

Anonymous also located the above diagram from the KHI

website specifically http://global.kawasaki.com/en/corp/rd/magazine/166/img/n166tr102a.jpg . Anonymous commented:

"Their "modular" building is indeed decks rigidly mounted/welded on the hull: there are NO pre-outfitted platforms on elastic mounts such as in Collins. So what? It means radiated noise much higher than Collins (seriously higher, not marginally: something like a dud sub of the 80s) and difficult to build".

Anonymous and Pete

↧

Japanese SeaWeb and Stealth Jet Detection Research - Quite Public

March 13, 2016, 1:58 am

≫ Next: Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) Comparative Noise and Youtube

≪ Previous: Potential Soryu Problems - Recalculations

Modern SeaWeb (mostly underwater communications, detection and database) systems are no longer restricted to Cold War era seafloor wired together SOSUS sensors. As the diagrams below show - there is likely to be much greater use of multiple sensor (eg. LIDAR, infrared, magnetic anomally and sound) nodes that work to may platforms (submarines, UUVs, UAVs, USVs, surface ships, shore stations, patrol aircraft and satellites).

Nodes may be fixed seafloor, tethered, surface floating, many platform mobile, popping-up to send data bursts to satellite (eg. wavegliders) etc.

Underwater communications/relays between the nodes may be much more dependent on VLF-ELF radio waves or sound waves rather than cumbersome SOSUS cables.

All major naval powers have their research and installation programs. This continues with varying degrees of secrecy depending on national security culture. China and Russia maintain tight security while Japan or the US security may not be so tight (for reasons including commercial opportunities, organisational pride, and justifying taxpayer funding).

Discovered today is some interesting diagrams (below) from Japan's Ministry of Defense (MOD). Two from the Acquisitions, Technology and Logistics Agency (ATLA) http://www.mod.go.jp/trdi/saiyou/kenkyu.html.

Above is a Japanese SeaWeb concept diagram and description at http://www.mod.go.jp/trdi/saiyou/kenkyu.htmlas at March 13, 2016.

(Translation from Japanese by right-click mouse "Translate to English" and then by Pete)

Title Research of advanced underwater acoustic communication network technology (warships equipped Research Institute)

　In comparison with strong radio wave linear propagation, a sound wave in the sea is refracted in accordance with the change in the water temperature and water pressure. Sound wave propagation follows a complex path. Thus in order to stretch a digital communication using sound waves in the sea, it is necessary to suppress the influence of multiple reflections bouncing off the sea surface and the seafloor.

　Therefore, in this Japanese Defense Institute - to suppress the influence of multiple reflections, we conducted a study on advanced underwater acoustic digital communications that enables telecommunication.

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

(Courtesy Japanese language document from Japan's MOD ATLA agency http://www.mod.go.jp/atla/ats2015/image/pdf/P12.pdf 2015 in connection with http://www.mod.go.jp/atla/ats2015/ )

---

Above is a Japanese concept diagram from http://www.mod.go.jp/trdi/saiyou/kenkyu.html as at March 14, 2016.

(Translation from Japanese by right-click mouse "Translate to English" and then phrase order rearrangements by Pete)

Research of next-generation radar warning and control (electronic equipment Institute). We aim to further improve the performance of warning and control radar needed to respond in the future of stealth aircraft and ballistic missiles.

Unlike previous performance improvements, which were acheived by the size of the antenna, a distributed network of small antennas can be electronically configured to take account of the size of the attacking aircraft or missile. We are studying a distributed radar network to achieve what can be considered a large-scale radar equal to or higher than current detection performance.

Thus we shall apply the most advanced MIMO (Multi-Input Multi-Output) Radar techniques to achieve an equivalently large antenna optimally combining signals from a network of small antennas.

Pete's Comment - Presumably China and Russia are working on similar radar concepts as an air/missile defence priority as those countries have to face current Western stealth jets (F-35, F-22s and B-2s).

Pete

↧

Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) Comparative Noise and Youtube

March 14, 2016, 1:56 am

≫ Next: The Echo Voyager LDUUV - Great for Intelligence Gathering

≪ Previous: Japanese SeaWeb and Stealth Jet Detection Research - Quite Public

Australia's future submarines will operate against a much more formidable strategic opponent (China). China is developing and installing much better sensors to detect the sound of the loud (heavy truck like) submarine diesel engines that the future submarine needs to run about once every two days. China is filling out the strategic South China Sea with increasing numbers of anti-submarine sensors. This Sea may become a standard operating area for our subs.

When the diesels are being run is called low discretion. Ways to improve discretion include choosing nuclear propulsion, using better batteries and/or using Air Independent Propulsion (AIP).

Australia's future submarine debate appears to involve unquestioned assumptions of rejecting AIP in favour of a new fairly untested battery type, Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs), that have never been used operationally.

Choosing Japan will involve choosing LIBs and rejecting AIP because Japan is specifically rejecting AIP.

Germany (TKMS) and France (DCNS) may adopt or retain AIP and use the old lead-acid battery type or, if encouraged, adopt LIBs.

To rejects AIP while adopting LIBs is a $Multi Billion dollar gamble for Australia.

This makes it all the more important to revisit (now and then) the relatively arcane subject of AIP - below .

AIP Section Loudness

In recent Submarine Matters comment threads there has been increasing discussion about the comparative loudness or silence of AIP systems. This has come from comments of observers standing in submarines AIP sections on Youtubes or by viewers of the Youtubes.

There are several variables which could distort the sound for listeners within AIP sections including:

- their hearing adjusting up or down (were they last in quieter front of sub or in louder engine room)

- is the AIP being run near its max workload, low workload, or basically in neutral or turned off?

- how close are they to the AIP engine?

- is their hearing focussing more on the AIP because they've been asked to focus on it?

To someone listening to the AIP on Youtube variables can be:

- the sound quality/distortion/age of the Youtube

- how loud they've turned the Youtube up

- are they relying on a mic within the AIP section?

- do they already know through knowledge/reading whether the average loadness of an AIP is higher or lower than other AIP systems? At what submarine speeds (4 knots? 7 knots?).

1. Are there any good online links comparing AIPs (with tables, graphs and curves)?

2. What real significance does the sound of an AIP have to an observer within the submarine anyway?

3. Isn't the main attribute the ability of a strategic opponent's fixed or mobile passive sonar/SOSUS/microphones to hear the sound of AIP?

Comparing AIP Systems

David Schueler, a Seattle Base Member of United States Submarine Veterans Inc

presented an interesting Youtube commentary on Air Independent Propulsion Submarines" on May 1, 2010. Most of the information seems up to date. As the US isn't building AIP for submarine an American perspective may be more neutral.

(David Schueler's Youtube starts off quietly. Sound kicks in at 00:25 (25 seconds).

---

First 14 minutes maybe less interesting is about:

- fairly well accepted (non-nuclear) definition of AIP.

- danger of 1940s onward for German, US, UK, Russian experiments with hydrogen peroxide AIP

- US, Russia then UK steadily adopted nuclear "AIP" then US-UK full use of nuclear.

- up until about the 1980s no safe, practical AIP for submarine.

Youtube most interesting:

14:25 - detailing and implicitly comparing current AIP systems

15:05 - Closed Cycle Diesel Engines no-one using – trialled many on years ago on a Type 205 but never adopted. Still offered by German Nordseewerke (?) for retrofitting?

17:00 - Closed Cycle Steam Turbine system engine active in French MESMA many efficiency limitations. High power delivery. Three Pakistani Agostas using.

18:55 - Stirling Engines. Simple mechanism, quiet. But large for limited power output, LOX heavy with usage effecting whole submarines buoyancy. Since 2010 Saab involved in development of more advanced Stirling.

[Existing use by Sweden and Singapore. For 2010 very advanced information on then new use on Soryu and on Chinese Type 041 Yuan.

China may have reverse engineered, autonomously researched and parallel engineered, bought or illegally acquired dual use technology from Sweden. Or all of these methods.]

23:00 - Fuel Cells (Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (PEM)) only exhaust product is water, low heat, stackable parallel arrangements depending on electrical need. Low power output (not good for high power use Combat Systems).

[Used on TKMS Type 212, Italian Todaro class, Dolphin 2, Type 214 (and soon 218). Maybe Lada using but insufficient information. Since 2010 increasing interest in developing more stable Direct Methanol Fuel Cell (DMFC). Also see. Likely future/current Chinese and Russian interest.]

26:45 - what AIP can do and not do. Good for slow gradual (no quick acceleration) movement. Not good for quick sprints. Pure hydrogen or pure oxygen can be dangerous.

Pete's Comments

The ease or difficulty a strategic opponent in a military setting can hear AIP counts more than reporter's perceptions in AIP sections.

Variables for a strategic opponent may include ability to hear your AIP under different conditions of distance, direction, AIP sub hiding in holes and behind rocks (littorals), behind icebergs, depth/water pressure, water temperature, salinity differences(?):

Sound detection devices and networks available to strategic opponent:

- the sensitivity of passive sonar/SOSUS/microphones of (say):

= one listening submarine using bow and hull sonars and/or towed array sonar

= SeaWeb collection of many microphones on many platforms to triangulate your AIP.

Basically it seems there is continuing interest in Stirling (with unknown Chinese adoption). Sweden and maybe China are steadily improving Stirling.

Main interest in Fuel Cell (including from French, Russian and Spanish(?)) especially Direct Methanol Fuel Cell (DMFC). US and Japanese civilian interest and development as well. Germany busy improving submarine uses.

Australia does not appear to be interested in AIP for the future submarine. This may prove dangerous for any 2+ week Australian missions in the South China Sea or further north than that.

BACKROUND ON AIP TECHNOLOGY

- Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) Issues, April 23, 2015, and

- Air independent propulsion (AIP) Technologies and Selection, August 5, 2014.

Pete

↧

The Echo Voyager LDUUV - Great for Intelligence Gathering

March 15, 2016, 4:36 am

≫ Next: Japanese Submarine Evolution "stronger, longer, more silent " and Operational Life

≪ Previous: Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) Comparative Noise and Youtube

Youtube description "Published on Mar 10, 2016. Echo Voyager, Boeing’s latest unmanned undersea vehicle (UUV), can operate autonomously for months at a time thanks to a hybrid rechargeable power system and modular payload bay. The 51-foot-long [15.5 m] vehicle is the latest innovation in Boeing’s UUV family, joining the 32-foot Echo Seeker and the 18-foot Echo Ranger."

---

Echo Voyager may be the largest of a rapidly expanding group of Large Diameter (or Displacement) Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (LDUUVs).

Much more sensor and propulsion capability for its small size can be packed into the Voyager because there is no need for manned life support equipment (no oxygen, water, food, or air conditioning) and far fewer safety measures.

"Missions", 0:55 seconds into the Youtube, are displayed very briefly - so here they all are for slower reading:

- Surface Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissand / Information Warfare [perhaps used for downloading deeply embedded SeaWeb node data and then relaying data to satellite. See antenna at youtube 1:10]

- Payload Deployment [SeaWeb sensors, undersea cable tapping equipment, environmental sensors. Though long the 51 foot Voyager can probably fit into 100 foot special missions hull extension on nuclear submarine USS Jimmy Carter.]

- Critical Infrastructure Protection [of naval bases, ports, coastal nuclear reactors, oil terminals]

- Weapons Platform [small torpedos, mines and a whole Voyager might be rigged to explode]

- Unmanned Aerial Vehicle [UAV] Operations [launching UAV]

- Subsea Search and Reconnaissance [If the smaller Echo Seeker can dive 20,000 feet under then Echo Voyager is highly likely to be able to as well. For subsea uses USS Jimmy Carter special missions also comes into the picture.]

- Anti-submarine Warfare Search and Barrier [Can tail slow submarines]

- Submarine Decoy [acting like a slow moving or stationary submarine]

- Mine Countermeasures [detecting and perhaps destroying mines]

- Battlespace Preparation [perhaps working with submarines or for an assault on a beach]

Improvements in the electrics, electronics and communications to UAVs will accelerate the development of UUVs like Echo Voyager. How autonomous Echo Voyager is will depend on the mission - particularly if it is used as a weapon (weapon uses would require closer human supervision).

Its endurance of around three months will depend on its energy source and energy expended particularly its speed (including steady cruising or acceleration, deceleration and turns).

ASW Uses

The increasing size and capabilities of LDUUVs are coming at a time when the capabilities of anti-submarine warfare (ASW) sensors and weapons are also increasing.

SeaWeb ASW sensors summarised as "eyes in the sky" and "ears in the sea" are becoming more sensitive perhaps making ever larger submarines all the more detectable.

These are all putting traditional manned submarine operations at greater risk particularly slower moving conventional diesel-electric submarines (SSKs).

An SSK moving at its most efficient LIB or AIP speed of 4 knots may not realise that a very large LDUUV like the Echo Voyager has tailed it (in its "baffles") for two weeks. A 51 foot Echo Voyager is much smaller in length (hence stealthier) than a submarine. Even a WW2 Japanese 2 man submarine was 78 feet long.

An Echo Voyager may look large by UUV standards but it may be very difficult to detect if it is dull gray/black, remains at about 600 meters or deeper, has an anechoic coating and is powered by a three month lithium-ion battery (LIB) and/or a fuel cell AIP.

Sideview of an Echo Voyager (Photo courtesy Boeing)

Other major points about Echo Voyager are:

- A military Echo Voyager could extend its range and mission capabilitities if it is considered disposable - on a one way mission. At the end of a mission non-explosive self-destruct equipment could be used to erase its hard disks and destroy other classified equipment.

- A 2015 gizmag article reported on Boeing patents for a UAV that turned into a UUV.

- Voyager could use its antenna to regularly receive encrypted data to give it further instructions.

- It could use small periscopes.

- Sea trials of the Echo Voyager are planned to take place off the coast of California in June-August 2016.

Pete

↧

Japanese Submarine Evolution "stronger, longer, more silent " and Operational Life

March 16, 2016, 2:03 am

≫ Next: Nearing the end of the Type 216's Prospects?

≪ Previous: The Echo Voyager LDUUV - Great for Intelligence Gathering

Above is the last page of the document History of submarine in our country - stronger, longer, more silent that S is referring to. Above is a Harushio-class submarine (left), second Oyashio-class (center) and Soryu-class (right).

---

On 15/3/16 9:27PM S provided a Summary here (Pete has further translated and provided the links below) of History of submarine in our country - stronger, longer,more silent :

Title: History of submarine in our country - stronger, longer,more silent

[dated?]

[You will find the document is 15 pages of overheads (with photos, text, tables and diagrams) all in Japanese. If you right-click mouse - select "Translate to English" much is translated. Unfortunately the text seems to be lost if converted to .jpg pictures]

Author: Toru Sato (Department of Naval Systems Development, Technical Research and Development Institute, Japanese Ministry of Defense [MOD]:

Feature: The history of submarine built after WWII in our country will be reviewed from a technical standpoint.

Abstract: [the Japanese Navy] JMSDF has built about 50 submarines from the first Oyashio-class[a one submarine “class” SS-511, Laid down December 1957] which was [Japan’s first post war domestically built] submarine to the latest Soryu-class.

In hull form, from 195[7?] to1966, the:

- first Oyashio-class[Laid down December 1957],

- Hayashio-class [Laid down 1960, small, 59m long]

- Oshio-class [Laid down 1963],

were underwater cruising-oriented submarines based on the pre WWII hull form.

Graph similar to page 3 of the Japanese document. The steady evolution of Japan's submarines. Long history by class, elsewhere in Submarine Matters here. (Graph courtesy Australia's news-com-au)

---

From 1967, Uzushio-class, Yushio-classand Harushio-class were continuously built with tear drop shaped hulls, which were underwater speed-oriented. From 1993 to present (2012), [the second Oyashio-class and Soryu-class] with cigar shaped hulls were built. A partial single hull structure was adopted.

[Over the 1957 to 2012 period] various technical evolutions have been experienced, i.e:

- increase in submerged depth by improvement of steel welding technology and others;

- improvement in battery performance;

- extension of submerged period by using AIP and other measures;

- equipment of [towed array sonar system] TASS and flank array sonar;

- [combat system improvements in terms of] improvement of sonar search and detection attack abilities by increase in processing speed;

- reduction of underwater radiation noise by reduction of equipments and adoption of damping steel alloy and material.

Our submarines have continuously evolved depending on the operation aspects, considering request of operators [Japanese Navy customer] and taking in latest technology. The direction of this evolution can be expressed as “stronger”, “longer” and “more silent”.

On that day, from a technical standpoint, all submarines of JMSDF will be visually introduced. [This is expressing the technical evolution of Japanese Navy submarines in visual terms].
------

[On the Relatively Short Operational Life of Japanese Submarines]

S comments:

“Many people think short commission period of Japanese submarine is due to its short life time caused by degradation, fatigue, corrosion, and so on. But they are perfectly wrong, the short commission period results from require for continuous evolution.

From standpoint of material science and design, designing and building of the weak structure which regularly degrades within defined period are much more difficult than those of the strong structure. In the former structure, perfect control and insight of key elements including prediction of future warfare, which are extremely difficult, is needed.

As Japan unfortunately has not such high technology and insight, it can only build the strong structure.”

S (with some further translation and links by Pete)

↧

Nearing the end of the Type 216's Prospects?

March 17, 2016, 1:43 am

≫ Next: The Bigger The Sub The Longer Its Range?

≪ Previous: Japanese Submarine Evolution "stronger, longer, more silent " and Operational Life

Uploaded on Nov 19, 2009 "The latest German submarines. Virtually undetectable, unlike diesel or nuclear submarines that generate more noise and/or higher heat signatures."
---

Admiring a TKMS-HDW Type 216 (foreground), in the ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) Endeavour program for Australia’s future submarine are: (left) Dieter Rottsieper, Deputy Chairman, Executive Board, TKMS; Vice Admiral Andreas Krause, Chief of the German Navy; and (right) Dr John White, Chairman, TKMS Australia. A Type 212A is behind the 216. (Photo courtesy Australian Defence Business Review).
---

After I published this article at 7:43pm, March 17, 2016 Australia's ABConline posted an article at 8.24pm that day, entitled "Germany argues political incentives in bid for submarine contract".

Two major TKMS points in it were:

- "…choosing their boats, unlike Japan's, would avoid inflaming tensions with Beijing." and

- "…offering to build all 12 submarines entirely in Australia."

Cutaway of likely 216 (Courtesy Submarine Dossier)
---

Uploaded on Feb 5, 2009. U-32 (S182) is the second Type 212A submarine of the German Navy. U-32 is powered by one diesel engine and an electric motor driven by two fuel cells and features a cavitation-free screw, making it virtually undetectable. U-32 was the first non-nuclear submarine to stay submerged for two weeks.
---

Likely No Conflict of Interest

Noticed by Submarine Matters on October 10, 2015 the Australian Prime Minister's wife, Ms Lucy Turnbull AO, was/is an Honorary Office holder (President no less) of the German Australian Chamber of Industry and Commerce. As at March 17, 2016 Lucy still is see http://australien.ahk.de/en/about-us/board-of-directors/

"Honorary Officers of the Chamber

Patron / Schirmherr:	H.E. Dr Christoph Müller Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany
President / Präsident:	Ms Lucy Hughes Turnbull AO Turnbull & Partners Pty Ltd
Vice-President / Vizepräsident:	Mr Paul G Koenig European Australian Advisory Group
Vice-President / Vizepräsident:	Dr Wolfgang Babeck Buse Heberer Fromm"

Note also that Lucy is a prominent member of the The Australia-Germany Advisory Group which has been established to build closer ties between Australia and Germany. See the photo of the Advisory Group (towards the end of this Australian DFAT report of November 13, 2015t) where Lucy (no husband Malcolm in sight) is standing next to German Leader Angela Merkel.

Obvious conflict of interest questions would come up if TKMS has been chosen. But I think TKMS has not - so no conflict of interest.

Germany hardly mentioned in 2016 Defence White Paper

Mentions in Defence White Paper Japan 36, France 10, Germany 3. Not conclusive but I think indicative.

Not even some sound arguments by Dr John White will likely save the TKMS bid.

But who knows?

Pete

↧

The Bigger The Sub The Longer Its Range?

March 17, 2016, 11:30 pm

≫ Next: Risks in Japanese submarine partnership

≪ Previous: Nearing the end of the Type 216's Prospects?

A World War One Type U-151 U-Boat (U-156 pictured) with an outstanding range/speed of 46,000 km at 10 km/h, 18 torpedos and 2 x 5.9 inch guns, all packed into a snug 1,875 tonnes (submerged). How would it go today? (Courtesy photo end of)

---

A comment I've lost was made today along the lines The Bigger The Sub The Longer Its Range

As the writer didn't include links to backup his argument and does not have the knowledge base to make sweeping generalisations, I thought I'd make things easier by disproving "The Bigger The Sub The Longer Its Range"

Submarine	Displacement Submerged	Range Speed Surfaced
Soryu class (2016)	4,200 tonnes	11,300 km at 12 km/h
Collins class (2016)	3,407 tonnes	21,300 km at 19 km/h
Type 214 (Tridente class) (2016)	2,020 tons	22,000 km at 15 km/h
Type XXI (of World War Two)	1,819 tonnes	28,700 km at 19 km/h
Type U-151 (World War One)	1,875 tonnes	46,000 km at 10 km/h

The Table throws up many issues and inconsistencies but may be a good start for discussion.

eg. what didn't a sub have much of in World War One?

Pete

↧

Risks in Japanese submarine partnership

March 19, 2016, 9:24 pm

≫ Next: Offshore Patrol Vessel (SEA 1180) CEP occurring right now

≪ Previous: The Bigger The Sub The Longer Its Range?

There's a great article, of March 16, 2016, on the Australian Naval Institute website. This is by Hugh White, Professor of Strategic Studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, ANU. This article at http://navalinstitute.com.au/risks-in-japanese-submarine-partnership/ first appeared in The Age newspaper.

"Risks in Japanese submarine partnership"

The article ends:

"What kind of co-operation will we get from Japan if in say, five or 10 years, with the project well under way but no subs yet delivered, Japan faces a confrontation with China and we don’t give it the support it expects? Why wouldn’t Japan walk away from the project, or start putting tight limits on what [sensitive submarine technology] it is willing to share with us?

That would be a disaster for the submarine project, and for our relations with Japan. So we’d be much better off keeping them separate. The beauty of the German and French bids is that their bids are so much simpler. They are only in it for the money, and that’s a good thing, because that is a price we know we are willing to pay."

[see the whole article on the Australian Naval Institute website]

↧

Offshore Patrol Vessel (SEA 1180) CEP occurring right now

March 21, 2016, 1:23 am

≫ Next: Extra Details of Visit of Japanese Soryu Submarine to Sydney in April 2016

≪ Previous: Risks in Japanese submarine partnership

A model of ST Marine's Fearless 75 design on display at Pacific 2015 in Sydney. ST Marine has already built smaller Fearless 55's for the Singaporean Navy. (Model photo and caption courtesy IHS Jane’s 360 /Ridzwan Rahmat)

---

River class OPV. Several in service with UK RN, one with Royal Thai Navy (Artwork courtesy IHS Jane's 360)

---

A Venezuelan Navy Coast Guard Guaicamacuto class patrol boat which is based on Navantia's Avante 1400 design. Avante variants are also serving in the Spanish Navy (Armada) (Photo courtesy Navantia via IHS Jane's 360)

---

While Submarine Matters has been focussing on the, at times, vitriolic Future Submarine CEP debate other Australian non-sub acquisition processes are intrain.

This includes the current SEA 1180 Offshore Patrol Vessel (OPV) Competitive Evaluation Process.

The OPV CEP has the more specific name “Analysis of OPV Alternatives” and is seeking to assess existing off the shelf vessels with minimum changes.

Compiling a shortlist of (ideally) three or more was outsourced (?) to UK based BMT Defence Services in September 2015, BTW here is a BMT PDF Paper which seems to be on the OPV. The short list, with indicative costs, is due mid-2016. Australia's Defence Department is due to present a recommendation to Prime Minister Turnbull (if he’s there after the 2016 Election) and then to the broader National Security Committee of Cabinet to make decisions.

The construction of OPVs has been brought forward by two years, with a continuous onshore build projected to commence in 2018 [see 2016 Defence White Paper (DWP) paragraph 4.118].

Twelve OPVs are being built to progressively replace Armidale Class Patrol Boats (which are rapidly wearing out in part due to searching for refugee vessels). See 2016 DWP paragraph 4.117.

The new OPVs will be:

- much larger and more capable ships than the 300 ton Armidales

- will have a helicopter

- probably will be UAV, UUV and surface SUV capable

- have a longer range and endurance than the Armidales

- no SEA 1180 OPV capability requirements have been publicly released(?) but it could be a vessel of around 80m and 1,500 tonnes

- large enough to accommodate a reasonably sized gun (30 - 56mm?)

- and to safely operate the helicopter.

SEA 1180 is now squarely about patrol boat replacement with much less emphasis on multi-mission (eg, survey vessel) replacement. Mine-hunting maybe a future modular capability.

The new OPVs will be a substantial purchase - see the 2016 Defence Integrated Investment Program (DIIP), page 89, Table 6, which contains the following mentions:

- “Offshore Patrol Vessel – Evaluation, Scheduled for approval, Less than $100 million”, then

- “Offshore Patrol Vessel – Design and Construction, 2016-2033, $3 billion - $4 billion”.

POSSIBLE CONTENDERS

include:

- BAE River class OPV with one already constructed in Thailand for the Royal Thai Navy. Several already built in UK for UK Royal Navy. (various sizes, eg. "Clyde" is 81.5m and 1,850 tonnes)

- Navantia’s Avante 1400 (80m, 1,500 tonnes full load)

- ST Marine’s Fearless 75 (75m, 1,100 tons)

DCNS, Fincantieri and Damen may also be possibles for the shortlist of three or more.

COMMENT

The OPVs may be assembled in many shipyards around Australia but I’d say probably in Perth, WA and/or Williamstown, VIC.

SOURCES

Mile Yeo writing in the Asia Pacific Defence Reporter (APDR), March 2016, "WHITE PAPER GIVES THE GO-AHEAD", pages 23-25, (subscription) http://www.asiapacificdefencereporter.com/

Trevor Thomas http://navalinstitute.com.au/uk-boosts-defence-implications-for-australia/March 13, 2016

October 30, 2015 Australian Chief of Navy's speech

Pete

↧

Extra Details of Visit of Japanese Soryu Submarine to Sydney in April 2016

March 22, 2016, 12:47 am

≫ Next: DCNS worried batteries "explode" - Australia Ready for Nuclear sub?

≪ Previous: Offshore Patrol Vessel (SEA 1180) CEP occurring right now

Here's Soryu submarineJS Hakuryu visiting Naval Station Pearl Harbour in 2013 (though video uploaded to Youtube in 2015). JS Hakuryu is the sub that will be visiting Sydney. The engine noises appear not to be the deeper noise of submarine diesels but changing noises from an outboard motor, tugboat engines and the background noise of a large working harbour.

---

Again JS Hakuryu visiting Pearl Harbour in 2013. The side-view gives an idea of its large size.
---

JS Hakuryu (SS-503) will begin at Kure Submarine Base (southern Japan), US Guam Naval Base then Fleet Base East (Sydney, Australia)

---

COMMENT

Japan is utilising the annual (?) Australia-Japan bilateral naval exercise known as “NICHI GOU TRIDENT” to showcase the Soryu submarine (JS Hakuryu) in waters in and around Sydney. If, later this year, Australia chooses the Japanese contender (in the Competitive Evaluation Process (CEP)) as future submarine provider it will (by about 2033) bear many similarities to the Soryu.

A major difference, only observable inside the submarine, is that JS Hakuryu has traditional lead-acid batteries and air independent propulsion (AIP). If Australia buys the Japanese submarines they are very likely not to have AIP but instead will have new, high capacity, lithium-ion batteries (called LIBs).

It reflects how much Japan wants the submarine contract that the Soryu will be showcased in Sydney. Bilateral exercises that include submarines also reflect Australia's close strategic connection with Japan. It is significant that neither the German contender (TKMS) nor French contender (DCNS) are known to be showcasing their submarines, in Sydney Harbour or Fleet Base West, Rockingham.

Some idea of the TKMS Type 216 (drawing board) design could be gained from the Types 209, 212A or 214 TKMS has built. The 2,000 tonne (surfaced) Type 218SG (for Singapore) will provide interesting design ideas when it is completed around 2019.

The DCNS designed Scorpene (in Australia's region belonging to the Indian and Malaysan navies) could give some idea of what the Shortfin (drawing board) design will look like. The Suffren, first of the Barracuda SSNs, being built at DCNS Cherbourg, France, will provide an even more precise idea of what a Shortfin would look like when launched next year. Some useful Barracuda images and details.

It must be added that the Japanese contender in the CEP includes the building companies (MHI and KHI) AND, in practical terms, the Japanese Navy. TKMS and DCNS don’t get such automatic cooperation from their navies - hence sailing a submarine half way around the world is not as easy.

S in Commentsprovided most of the info below from Japanese Ministry of Defence document http://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/formal/info/news/201603/20160309-01.pdf[which is in Japanese] Pete has added some extra details.

On March 9, 2016, the Maritime Staff Office of the Japanese Navy (JMSDF) announced the program [1] of the joint training, NICHI GOU TRIDENT Exercise, between a Japanese flotilla (small fleet), the RAN and RAAF.

1. Aim: for the Japanese Navy to improves its tactical skills and strengthen its collaboration and interoperability ith the RAN and RAAF.

2. Period: Japanese flotilla active March 15, 2016 – May 28, 2016

3. Place: Sydney and surrounding sea area, including Jervis Bay

4. Contingents

4-1 Commander of Contingents: Captain Masahiko Kawakubo, Commander of the 13th Escort Division

4-2 Contingent : JS Asayuki [2] a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatsuyuki-class_destroyer and

Destroyer JS Umigiri [3] which is a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asagiri-class_destroyer

each of the destroyers has a SH-60J(K) mainly anti-submarine, helicopter and

Soryu submarine JS Hakuryu [SS-503] see photo and Youtube above [4]

Total of 440 personnel.

Pete Comment: the destroyers are roughly the same size and roughly the same age as Australia's Adelaide class frigates

5 Schedule [Sailing dates and destinations]

5-1 Escort fleet of the 2 destroyers.

“Mar/22 Kure (departure)---Mar/27 Apra (arrival)---Mar/29 Apra (departure)---Apr/15 Sydney (arrival)---Apr/26 Sydney (departure)---May/13 Apra (arrival)---May/15 Apra (departure)--- May/19 Katsuren (arrival)”

Soryu submarine JS Hakuryu [SS-503] [4] Movements

March 15 depart Submarine Base at 15 Kure, Japan

March 23 arrives US Naval Base Guam“Apra” (arrival)

[After probably refuelling with diesel] leaves Guam on March 25

April 15 arrives Fleet Base East, Sydney

There will be many NICHI GOU TRIDENT Exercise manoeuvres held off Fleet Base East, Sydney and off Naval Base Jervis Bay to the south of Sydney.

April 26 departs Sydney

May 17 arrives Naval Base Guam “Apra” for visit and [probably refuelling with diesel]

May 19 departs Naval Base Guam

May 28 arrives Katsuren, Okinawa.

6, Content of training - Anti-submarine warfare training, tactical exercise, communication training, PHOTEX etc.

[1] http://www.mod.go.jp/msdf/formal/info/news/201603/20160309-01.pdf

[2] DD-132 Asayui (displacement 3,100tonne) is the 11th Hatsuyuki-class destroyer ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatsuyuki-class_destroyer)

[3] DD-158 Umigiri (displacement 3,550tonne) the 8th Asagiri-class destroyer

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asagiri-class_destroyer)

[4] The 3rd Soryu-class submarine (MHI)

S and Pete

↧

DCNS worried batteries "explode" - Australia Ready for Nuclear sub?

March 24, 2016, 1:26 am

≫ Next: The future French SSN and SSBN Programs - DCNS Prototype for Australian CEP

≪ Previous: Extra Details of Visit of Japanese Soryu Submarine to Sydney in April 2016

COMMENT

AAP's article via SkyNews "France pitches nuclear submarine option" March 24, 2016 (note Oberon photo) touched on the possibility that:

- Australia might develop a nuclear submarine (Brazilian ProSub style) under DCNS guidance, and

- that DCNS feared Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) may "explode".

Nuclear Propulsion for Subs

The DCNS article implies DCNS may help Australia design a nuclear submarine (around "2050"). Such a task may gladen ASC's efficiency for a century. An Australian enriched Uranium industry may be needed to refuel (every 10 - 15 years) the submarine reactor ASC develops with Admiral Rickover like urgency, speed and efficiency.

The offer from (then) US Ambassador Bleich in February 2012 to sell or lease Virginia SSNs to Australia - if repeated - may be more practical, leading to usable SSNs for the RAN this century. Someone like Trump may repeat the offer - but Obama be faint-hearted.

Nuclear propulsion is discussed periodicly in Submarine Matters, the last time in early 2015.

Arguments against nuclear propulsion include:

- high reliance on the nuclear facilities and expertise of foreign allies (UK, US, France) to build, refuel and even safely operate reactors at sea and in port.

- the Australian domestic debate over the decades has rejected even hosting a low level nuclear waste dump, so nuclear propelled subs based in Australia would probably be unpopular.

- Sydneysiders, who host Fleet Base East, would certainly be lacking in enthusiasm for frequent hosting of nuclear subs. Would a new naval base on the eastern seaboard be needed?

- many don't see the difference between nuclear propulsion and nuclear weapons. However the difference becomes obscured in the case of Virginia SSNs which rely on a reactor that happens to be over 90% HEU - nuclear weapons grade.

- the Virginia reactor is advertised to last 35 years - hence lasts the life of the submarine. The alternate French Barracuda reactor is advertised with only 10 years of use (demonstrated) between lengthy refuels (in France?) - and this is based on perhaps less use in the Atlantic compared to more use (shorter life?) in long Indo-Pacific transits.

- the upfront price of SSNs may be more a political decision as they have only ever been leased (Russia to India). However buying or leasing may be preferable to the political decision driving assembly of Australian subs in cutting-edge ASC Adelaide.

- any Australian strategic need for SSNs or even SSGNs would also need to anticipate the possibility of a subsequent nuclear sub arms race of nuclear have-nots in the region (proliferation). The first tranche of have-nots going nuclear may be South Korea and Japan. The second tranche may include Indonesia. This is noting Indonesia has more than three times the GDP of nuclear armed Pakistan.

DCNS "explode" Batteries

The worry in the DCNS article article that Lithium-ion Battery (LIBs) may explode should be avoided by a decade (2020-2030) of Japanese Navy operational use of LIBs. This would be before Australian future submarines use them in the early 2030s. Japan may lay down its first operational "LIBs only Soryu Mark 2" this year or next. That Soryu, probably built at MHI, may be designated "27SS and SS-511" perhaps being launched late 2018, then commissioned into the Japanese Navy around 2020 or 2021. See Soryu Table below with possible submarine building schedule for Australian Future Submarine in red (if Japan is chosen).

Barracuda SSN Name	Laid down	Launch (est.)	Commissioning (est.)
Suffren	19 December 2007	end of 2017 (the crew expect)	end 2018 or 2019
Duguay-Trouin	26 June 2009	?	end 2020
Tourville	28 June 2011	?	2022
Grasse	?	?	2025
Ruby	?	?	2027
Casabianca	?	?	2029

Table based on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Suffren_(sous-marin)#Noms with the French frequently calling the Barracuda SSN by the more formal name "Suffren class".

---

The Shortfin that France is offering is to be a conventional version of the future Barracuda SSN. The first Barracuda, the Suffren, was laid down in 2007 and apparently will be launched late 2016 and commissioned late 2018.

What occurred in the decade (so far) of construction, of what in many respects is the prototype for the Shortfin, has not been explained to the Australian public. Why almost a decade, so far? I'm working with French sources to figure this out.

Compare the French decade long batch-building approach [Table above] with the Japanese continuous build system. [Table below] The Australian Government is talking "continuous build" so?

Japan's CEP competitors may well use "Japanese submarines have a short operational life (in years)" as further competitive ammunition before the submarine choice is declared.

SORYU TABLE (with earlier Oyashios, as at March 24, 2016)

SS No.	Build No Name	Pennant No.	MoF approved amount ¥ Billions & FY	LABs, LIBs, AIP	Laid Down	Laun -ched	Commi-ssioned	Built By
5SS Oyashio	8105 Oyashio	SS-590/ TS3608	¥52.2B FY1993	LABs only	Jan 1994	Oct 1996	Mar 1998	KHI
6SS-15SS Oyashios 10 subs	8106 -8115 various	SS-591-600	¥52.2B per sub FY1994-FY2003	LABs only	Feb 1994		Mar 2008	MHI & KHI
16SS Soryu Mark 1	8116 Sōryū	SS-501	¥60B FY2004	LABs + AIP	Mar 2005	Dec 2007	Mar 2009	MHI
17SS	8117 Unryū	SS-502	¥58.7B FY2005	LABs + AIP	Mar 2006	Oct 2008	Mar 2010	KHI
18SS	8118 Hakuryū	SS-503	¥56.2 FY2006	LABs + AIP	Feb 2007	Oct 2009	Mar 2011	MHI
19SS	8119 Kenryū	SS-504	¥53B FY2007	LABs + AIP	Mar 2008	Nov 2010	Mar 2012	KHI
20SS	8120 Zuiryū	SS-505	¥51B FY2008	LABs + AIP	Mar 2009	Oct 2011	Mar 2013	MHI
No 21SS			No 21SS built
22SS	8121 Kokuryū	SS-506	¥52.8B FY2010	LABs + AIP	Jan 2011	Oct 2013	Mar 2015	KHI
23SS	8122 Jinryu	SS-507	¥54.6B FY2011	LABs + AIP	Feb 2012	Oct 2014	7 Mar 2016	MHI
24SS	8123 Sekiryū	SS-508	¥54.7B FY2012	LABs + AIP	Mar 2013	Nov 2015	Mar 2017	KHI
25SS	8124	SS-509	¥53.1B FY2013	LABs + AIP	Oct 2013	Nov 2016	Mar 2018	MHI
26SS	8125	SS-510	¥51.7B FY2014	LABs + AIP	?	?	Mar 2019	KHI
27SS Soryu Mark 2	8126	SS-511	¥64.3B FY2015	LIBs only	?	?	Mar 2020	MHI
28SS	8127	SS-512	¥63.6B FY2016	LIBs only	?	?	Mar 2021	KHI
29SS	?	?	1^st of New Japanese Class	LIBs only	?	?	2023?	MHI?
Aus1	?	?	1st of new Aus class (if Japan chosen)	LIBs only	2028?	2030?	2033?	in Aus or Jpn?
Aus2 to 12?	?	?	between 5 and 11 additional Aus subs	LIBs only	from 2029?	from 2031?	from 2034?	in Aus or Jpn?

Table courtesy of information provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries, AIP = air independent propulsion, LIBs = lithium-ion batteries.

↧

The future French SSN and SSBN Programs - DCNS Prototype for Australian CEP

March 27, 2016, 2:14 am

≫ Next: Trump's Moderation and Japan's Nuclear Missile Capability.

≪ Previous: DCNS worried batteries "explode" - Australia Ready for Nuclear sub?

DCNS HULL PROTOTYPE (BARRACUDA) FOR SHORTFIN CONTENDER, 2007 - 2017 LAUNCHES, 1 EXPECTED

Barracuda SSN Name	Laid down	Launch (est.)	Commissioning (est.)
Suffren	19 December 2007	end of 2017 (the crew expect)	end 2018 or 2019
Duguay-Trouin	26 June 2009	?	end 2020
Tourville	28 June 2011	?	2022
Grasse	?	?	2025
Ruby	?	?	2027
Casabianca	?	?	2029

DCNS indicate that the "Shortfin" contender for Future Australian Submarine is to be a conventional (diesel-electric) version of the nuclear propelled Barracuda SSN (Suffren class). Barracudas laid down 2007 - first may be launched in 2017. Table based on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Suffren_(sous-marin)#Noms .

---

The Shortfin that France is offering is to be a conventional version of the future Barracuda SSN. The first Barracuda, the Suffren, was laid down in 2007 and apparently will be launched late 2017 (see Suffren's future crew article) and commissioned late 2018.

What occurred in the decade (so far) of Barracuda/Suffren's construction has not been explained to the Australian public or appeared in the media. Apparently the French Government delayed the construction schedule due to:

- changing mission requirements involving redesign (changes to submarine) perhaps in view of the growing threat from Russia and greater intelligence gathering needs in the post 9/11 War on Terror

- to reduce annual Barracuda construction spending in order to cross subsidize other defence programs and civilian budget items (following the 2008 Global Financial Crisis?)

See https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Suffren_(sous-marin)#Le_projet_fran.C3.A7ais_Barracuda - now translated:

"The fall of the USSR and the new world order, with its low intensity conflicts and the increase in maritime traffic, have upgraded the role of navies. The evolution of the missions has significantly delayed the replacement schedule of the sixx SSNs of the [current] Ruby [Rubis] class ...by six attack submarines [the Barracuda SSNs]. The Barracuda definition phase started in October 1998 and design phase in 2002 for the then planned [launch and] tests in 2008 and [entry into] service in 2010. In 2015, the commissioning of the first in class [Suffren] was postponed [to] 2018 as a result of budget difficulties."

The French Government then reasoned the 8 year delay offered the advantage of being able to smooth (budget and labour force) transition from the last Barracuda (launch around 2028) to the development of the SSBN class replacing the current Triomphant SSBNs. Replacement SSBN class design work will accelerate from the late 2020s with perhaps the replacement SSBN first of class being laid down around 2037.

These need to redesign, re-budget and program transition reasons for the delay in launching the Barracudas have made sense to the French Government that ultimately owns DCNS but it still involves much non-scheduled uncertainty - something ASC is already too good at. The private competitors to DCNS in Australia's Future Submarine contest (that is TKMS, MHI and KHI) would find it unprofitable to have the first 3 submarines of a class (see Table above) sitting in huge sheds under construction for 10 years (on average) before those 3 submarines are actually launched.

The Australian war-ship-building industry can benefit from greater certainty and discipline in what is Australia's most expensive defence project ever.

The Japanese Soryu's building record [Table below] with the prototype for the Australian Soryu [if Japan is chosen] shows certainty not only down to yearly milestones, but frequently down to the month. Very methodical, on-time, on-budget.

JAPANESE (MHI/KHI BUILT) HULL PROTOTYPE FOR AUS SORYU CONTENDER (2007-2017 LAUNCHES, 8 LAUNCHED + 2 (EXPECTED)

SS No.	Build No Name	Pennant No.	MoF approved amount ¥ Billions & FY	LABs, LIBs, AIP	Laid Down	Laun -ched	Commi-ssioned	Built By
16SS Soryu Mark 1	8116 Sōryū	SS-501	¥60B FY2004	LABs + AIP	Mar 2005	Dec 2007	Mar 2009	MHI
17SS	8117 Unryū	SS-502	¥58.7B FY2005	LABs + AIP	Mar 2006	Oct 2008	Mar 2010	KHI
18SS	8118 Hakuryū	SS-503	¥56.2 FY2006	LABs + AIP	Feb 2007	Oct 2009	Mar 2011	MHI
19SS	8119 Kenryū	SS-504	¥53B FY2007	LABs + AIP	Mar 2008	Nov 2010	Mar 2012	KHI
20SS	8120 Zuiryū	SS-505	¥51B FY2008	LABs + AIP	Mar 2009	Oct 2011	Mar 2013	MHI
No 21SS			No 21SS built
22SS	8121 Kokuryū	SS-506	¥52.8B FY2010	LABs + AIP	Jan 2011	Oct 2013	Mar 2015	KHI
23SS	8122 Jinryu	SS-507	¥54.6B FY2011	LABs + AIP	Feb 2012	Oct 2014	7 Mar 2016	MHI
24SS	8123 Sekiryū	SS-508	¥54.7B FY2012	LABs + AIP	Mar 2013	Nov 2015	Mar 2017	KHI
25SS	8124	SS-509	¥53.1B FY2013	LABs + AIP	Oct 2013	Nov 2016?	Mar 2018	MHI
26SS	8125	SS-510	¥51.7B FY2014	LABs + AIP	Oct 2014	Nov 2017?	Mar 2019	KHI

Table courtesy of information provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries, AIP = air independent propulsion.
---

Pete

↧

Trump's Moderation and Japan's Nuclear Missile Capability.

March 28, 2016, 6:42 pm

≫ Next: More on China's Future SeaWeb

≪ Previous: The future French SSN and SSBN Programs - DCNS Prototype for Australian CEP

Is this potential President good leadership material for most of the West's nuclear deterrent and on the US Alliance system? Trump and Wrestlemania tag team partner hoot it up. (Photo courtesy gettyimages)

---

A Japanese Epsilon rocket (with dual-use potential as a future nuclear armed an ICBM) launched from Uchinoura Space Center, southern Japan, September 2013, carrying satellite.
---

Yonhap news agency via The Korea Times has reported reactions to the latest foreign policies of world WrestleMania identity, and coincidentally future American President, Donald Trump. Korea Times, March 28, 2016 reports:

"China gives muted reaction to Trump's foreign policy comments

China gave a muted reaction on [March 28, 2016] to comments by Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump that if he was elected the U.S. president, he would consider letting South Korea and Japan build their own nuclear weapons.

In an interview with The New York Times, Trump also said he would withdraw American troops from South Korea and Japan unless they significantly boost their financial contributions to the U.S. military presence.

"We have noted relevant reports," China's foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told reporters. "And we also noted that these are only hypothetical remarks." Hong did not elaborate further.

Trump said he would consider letting both South Korea and Japan build their own nuclear arsenal to counter threats from North Korea and the rise of China.

North Korea, which conducted its fourth nuclear test in January, has shown no signs of giving up its nuclear program, despite tougher U.N. sanctions.

The U.S. has a long-standing policy of keeping nuclear weapons off the Korean Peninsula. (Yonhap)"

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

JAPAN'S DUAL-USE NUCLEAR CAPABILITY

Japan's Epsilon rocket. Specifications for the Epsilon include: Height 24.4m, Diameter 2.5m, Mass 91 tons, 3 or 4 stages. Its shape, with no strap-on boosters, is ideal for silo, rail or truck launch. Reduced to 2 stages it might provide the basis for an SLBM.

These Epsilon specs are very similar to the fully developed (but then cancelled) US MX ICBM. MXs specs are Height 22m, Diameter 2.3m, Weight 97 tons, 3 stages, blast yield 3 Mt total (using up to 10 MIRVs).

Modern ballistic missiles generally have solid fuel stages (for quicker preparation and more rugged handling) rather than liquid fuel typically used in civilian rockets. So it is notable that the first, second and third stages of the Epsilon are solid fuel.

The 2013 Epsilon launch, carrying satellite.

---

The extent to which the US assisted JAXA's Epsilon Project is unclear. Japan Aerospace eXploration Agency (JAXA) is Japan’s NASA equivalent. Space agencies have dual military-civilian use technology and dual-use career personnel.

Japan has more than enough nuclear explosive Plutonium and HEU for a nuclear capability - see http://thediplomat.com/2014/03/japan-and-chinas-dispute-goes-nuclear/.

^-
Pete

↧