East China Sea (Senkaku) Dogfights Continued - Comments and Articles

July 7, 2016, 1:47 am

≫ Next: A Japanese Assembled F-22 Industrial Strategy

≪ Previous: Poland may buy Norway's Ula class submarines

$

0

0

Just northeast of Taiwan is the Senkaku Islands - the main East China Sea flashpoint. (Map courtesy Reinhard Drifte's 2009 article).

---

On East China Sea (Senkaku) dogfights here are the June 29, 2016 - July 3, 2016 Comments. 

Articles include:

-  Near Miss Japanese Chinese Encounters in East "China" Sea
   http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/near-miss-japanese-chinese-encounters.html
   of July 5, 2016

-  Dangerous Chinese Air and Sea Incursions in the East China Sea,
    http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/dangerous-chinese-air-and-sea.html  of July 5, 2016

Rounding off the topic well is The Diplomat's article:
Chinese and Japanese Fighter Jets Come Close to Dogfight in East China Sea

http://thediplomat.com/2016/07/chinese-and-japanese-fighter-jets-come-close-to-dogfight-in-east-china-sea/ of July 6, 2016 .

Pete

---

A Japanese Assembled F-22 Industrial Strategy

July 7, 2016, 2:56 am

≫ Next: An early July 18, 2016 Trident Decision Possible, To Further Split UK Labour

≪ Previous: East China Sea (Senkaku) Dogfights Continued - Comments and Articles

$

0

0

The prototype "X-2" much smaller than the final F-3 (resulting in a Japanese built F-22). Photo courtesy Defence Aviation, April 23, 2016 which advises: MHI “have been developing the aircraft’s airframe since 2008 with cooperation from 220 domestic companies and guidance from Japan’s Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency (ATLA) at an estimated cost of  [only!] 39.4 billion Yen ($322 million)…and is built as a successor to the F-2 fighter jets...developed jointly between Japan and the Untied States.”

---

Anonymous in Comments July 1, 2016 advises the prototype "X-2" (or ATD-X or "Shinshin" = "Spirit of the Heart" (above)) of what will be the F-3 is equipped with XF5 engine (max. power ca.5ton) has been developed
-  also see HUFF POST Japanese Edition.
-  there are 20 pictures of Shinshin in SankeiBiz. 

The operational F-3, labelled "fifth generation" or "sixth generation fighter" (presumably a UAV herder) is much bigger than the X-2 and will be equipped two very powerful engines (max. power per engine 15 ton) and excellent stealth performance with radar cross-section (RCS) smaller than a  sparrow.

This Reuters via Yahoo article of June 29, 2016 describes the process of the Japanese MoD mainly offering US companies Boeing and Lockheed Martin (notionally European countries as well) up to $40 billion to develop 100 air superiority fighters.

PETE'S COMMENT

Japan clearly wants export-to-Japan versions of the F-22 in what Japan calls the "F-3 fighter program" and many other designations. MHI appears to be the designated Japanese prime domestic contractor. 

Lockheed Martin strategy

Lockheed Martin's strategy appears to be to induce customers to buy the F-35 first and then a lower spec F-22 will be released for some valued customers. See my article of 2008 about Lockheed's ability to game all sides - including the US Government. 

Clearly the F-35 is inadequate as an air-superiority fighter, not only for Japan but for other sophisticated users, like Israel and Australia. It is no surprise that Lockheed Martin has drafted in Congressional lawmakers and the  Pentagon into this beneficial-for-the-US sales strategy: 

Japanese industrial strategy

For decades it appears Japan has followed a "We'll tell the US we'll spend $Billions re-inventing the wheel, instead of paying the US to send us high levels of technology transfer. So while we are reinventing - the US loses. But with this technology we will build US designed fighters under licence. So it is a win-win situation for Japan and the US."

This F-3 strategy has worked with the earlier F-1s and F-2s decades ago:

-  Mitsubishi F-1 which looks like a Jaguar-Phantom hybrid which helped induce technology transfer 
   for the F-4EJ "Kai" Phantom II.

-  Mitsubishi F-2 (was FS-X or SX-3) is a F-16 look alike which induced more technology transfer to
   Japan to build F-15Js.

So the Mitsubishi F-3 is a gesture symbolising re-invention of the F-22 with the aim of inducing Lockheed Martin to hand over much F-22 technology (for a great deal of Yen of course) so Mitsubishi (MHI) can build export spec F-22s in Japan.

Anonymous and Pete

An early July 18, 2016 Trident Decision Possible, To Further Split UK Labour

July 7, 2016, 8:27 pm

≫ Next: Special SubMatt Shipbuilding Report to Donors on July 13, 2016

≪ Previous: A Japanese Assembled F-22 Industrial Strategy

$

0

0

This BBC article of June 30, 2014 indicates where the 4 UK Trident SSBNs are located (at Faslane, north of Glasgow, Scotland) and nearby Coulport nuclear warhead base. Alternatives sites in the UK, France and the US (marked in green) all involve great cost and major domestic and international political downsides.

---

The UK Guardian (Australian edition) June 8, 2016 reports that Prime Minister David Cameron (while still UK Conservative leader) aims to hold the vote on building 4 Trident (Successor class) SSBNs on July 18, 2016.

This timing is partly aimed at sustaining the late June 2016 split in the UK Labour Party Opposition.

The split is between:
-  the leftist-pacifists led by Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn (who clearly dislike peace maintaining
   nuclear weapons) and
-  solid Labour MPs (like John Woodcock of Barrow) whose electorates stand to gain from the
   construction of any new SSBNs. There are also many centrist Labour MPs who back Trident.

The timing is also to decide on Trident before the downstream Brexit impact sinks in - of losing the Trident Base (at Faslane, Scotland) and buying the new Trident SSBNs with a diminished "UK" defence budget. By 2019, after the possible break-off of EU-wishing-to-stay-in Scotland and Northern Ireland the "United" Kingdom defence budget may only be able to drew revenue from England and Wales.

See Submarine Matters articles on the Trident debate on:

-  April 11, 2012
-  May 24, 2016
-  June 24, 2016 and
-  June 28, 2016

Three of the possible Trident replacement options. See much larger readable image here (Diagram courtesy SIPRI and the Financial Times)

---

Pete

Special SubMatt Shipbuilding Report to Donors on July 13, 2016

July 7, 2016, 11:57 pm

≫ Next: Putin's Purge of Russia's Baltic Fleet Officer Corps

≪ Previous: An early July 18, 2016 Trident Decision Possible, To Further Split UK Labour

$

0

0

Hi

I shall be emailing the second special Submarine Matters Report to Donors on Wednesday July 13, 2016.

My thanks to Donors who have already donated the $50 (per year).

I invite New Donors to donate, by: 

1. going to the right sidebar of Submarine Matters at http://gentleseas.blogspot.com.au/   

2. then clicking on the Donate button which allows payment through the Paypal system.

I shall email the Report (a 1,000 word Word Attachment) to Donors' email addresses.

The topic this month is Implications of Australia's Election Result on the Shipbuilding Industry:

This includes the Collins maintenance-upgrades and Future Submarines (including Combat System), OCVs, Future Frigates and Patrol Boats.

Questions that will be addressed include:

1.  How will the new MP and new Senator changes effect the volume and type of Shipbuilding
     work in the different Australian States?

2.  How might a new Prime Minister and new Defence Minister effect shipbuilding work?

3.  How will a lower Defence Budget and lower than hoped for revenue base effect shipbuilding?

If a Donor would like to suggest a Report on a new topic (for August onwards) please email me to discuss it.

Regards

Pete
pete74730@yahoo.com.au

Putin's Purge of Russia's Baltic Fleet Officer Corps

July 11, 2016, 1:02 am

≫ Next: Economic Ties Will Hopefully Pacify Any Chinese Aggression

≪ Previous: Special SubMatt Shipbuilding Report to Donors on July 13, 2016

$

0

0

Pathologically stony-faced Putin manages to crack another unsmile at hapless Russian Captain (2nd rank) (who was equivalent to a USN Commander).

---

A most curious article has cropped up in The Moscow Times. This is aportion of Matthew Bodner’s, Chaos Consumes Russia's Baltic Fleetof July 6, 2016:

Bodner reports:

“On June 29, [2016] the Russian Defense Ministry announced it was purging the entire senior and mid-level command of the Baltic Fleet. It was a dramatic move that suggested deep structural problems within the fleet command. In total, 50 officers were dismissed from their post, including the fleet commander, Vice Admiral Viktor Kravchuk, and his chief of staff, Vice Admiral Sergei Popov.

Not since Stalin's purges had so many officers been ousted at once.”

There is a theory that this purge was due to mass corruption and inefficiency. But according to this US report of July 8, 2016 corruption, inefficiency and ships and submarines on fire are endemic in the Russian Navy. So there may be an additional reason.

Some hint that the “buzzing” of USS Donald Cook by Russian Su-24 fighter-bombers on April 14, 2016 was meant to be part of a broader series of Russian confrontations against Western ships in the Baltic. But the Russian Baltic Fleet in April, however, refused to follow such dangerous orders – hence Putin’s retaliation against his own naval officers.

They are lucky that Putin is not a Stalin, noting Stalin's officer purges of the 1930s hit the Soviet Navy severely as well.

See fragmentary reports in TASS  and FlashNord of July 1, 2016 as well as a report from Russia's Interfax (with useful biodata).

Pete

Economic Ties Will Hopefully Pacify Any Chinese Aggression

July 12, 2016, 4:02 am

≫ Next: Trend Identified in Australian Election and Shipbuilding

≪ Previous: Putin's Purge of Russia's Baltic Fleet Officer Corps

$

0

0

The red stars mark locations in China where there is investment from Japan's KHI. Examples of KHI investment in Chinais in the areas of cement and equipment making factories. (Map courtesy KHI).

---

Today's Court at the Hague's South China Sea ruling may make China more aggressive generally. This aggression may flow on to Japan as a separate strategic competitor in the East China Sea. Nevertheless China should not forget it is valued as an important member of the interlinked world economic system. This particularly benefits China and its trade partners.

It is up to large scale analytical agencies to discern the relative importance for China of strategic and economic relations with Japan. While China and Japan experience political and strategic tension they also have deep and long-term economic ties. Slower growth in China’s economy over the last two years may well have increased the importance for China of trade with Japan. 

China’s major economic dealings with Japan are in terms of exports and imports. Looking at the right sidebar of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_China - for China’s US$2.28 Trillion in exports in 2015.

-  16.9% represented Chinese exports to the US,

-  15.5% to Hong Kong (though arguably internal “trade”), and

-  6.4% to Japan (representing about US$0.15 Trillion or US$150 Billion) by my reckoning.

Of China’s US$1.68 Trillion in imports in 2015:

-  9.7% was from South Korea, and

-  8.3% from Japan (representing about US$0.14 or US$140 Billion)

 with the US not far behind.

A much smaller but still important China-Japan economic aspect is Japanese Official Development Assistance (ODA) to China. 

Following the normalisation of diplomatic relations between Japan and China from September 29, 1979, Japan played a major role in the development of China through large contributions of Official Development Assistance (ODA) [see 1 and 2 below] and other activities such as investment and technical assistance. 

This is, in part, due to Japanese regret for the invasion of China by Imperial Japan. But, the Chinese Government remains unimpressed and continues to emphasise the invasion while ignoring modern Japan’s substantial contribution of ODA [3]. Recently, Dr. Michael Pillsbury, the adviser of US Department of Defense criticised ODA of Japan to China [4]. As China's economy has grown even larger than Japan's Japanese ODA to China has economically diminished.

[1] http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000103746.pdf (in English) “Review on Japan’s ODA to China”

[2] http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/oda/region/e_asia/china/index.html(in English) "Overview of ODA to China" ODA to China began in 1979 and from that time to the present, approximately 3.3164 trillion yen (about US$32 Billion) in loan aid (yen loans), 157.2 billion yen (about US$1.5 Billion) in grant aid, and 181.7 billion yen (about US$1.8 Billion) in technical cooperation have been implemented.

[3] http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000128001.pdf (English) "Japan's ODA Disbursements to China by Fiscal Year"

[4] http://www.news-postseven.com/archives/20160129_376559.html (in Japanese - need to right-click-mouse) (NEW POST SEVEN, 2016.01.29 07:00).

So economic ties are extensive but the Japanese public should still be cautious about China. Too many Japanese still do not seem to recognise China as a strategic challenger that can threaten Japan's  existence. The might of China is a threat and a challenge to Japan. This has been a long term trend since China exploded H-Bombs in the 1960s. 

There is an argument that Japanese ODA, investment and technical assistance only make China strategically stronger. An economic relationship may be mutually beneficial but Japanese companies should be careful not to export dual (civilian-military) use technologies to China. This includes such areas as aerospace, diesel engine, electronics and marine propeller technology.

But in terms of current tensions any Chinese military aggression prompted by the Hague Court ruling regarding the South China Sea may flow on to aggressive moves against Japanese interests in the East China Sea. The flow-on effects of the South China Sea ruling are being watched closely in Australia and also Japan. 

S and Pete

Trend Identified in Australian Election and Shipbuilding

July 13, 2016, 6:39 pm

≫ Next: Polite Portuguese Submarine Tangles With French Trawler

≪ Previous: Economic Ties Will Hopefully Pacify Any Chinese Aggression

$

0

0

Senator Eric Abetz (from the conservative wing of the Australian Government) is not a happy bunny over the Government's near electoral loss on July 2, 2016 (Photo courtesy Andrew Meares via SMH) 

---

In the Australian Election and Shipbuilding report that I sent out to donors last night recipients would have noted February 2016 is supposed to be February 2017.

The relevant paragraph is:

"In contrast Abbott (now demoted to ordinary MP) can point to his own win by a landslide, in the 2013 Election. Abbott is also an expert in undermining opponents in his own party. It is possible that leadership tensions will overcome Turnbull. I’ll take a punt that Turnbull may be voted out by his colleagues in the Liberal Party Room by February 2017. Turnbull’s replacement?..." 

An article from Australia’s ABC out today (July 14, 2016) underlines tensions between Government centrists and conservatives that I was referring to. The ABC article reports:

“Conservative former minister Eric Abetz has unloaded on the way his Government's leadership team handled the federal election campaign, saying the Liberal Party fell over the line and failed to heed community concern about superannuation [contributor pension fund] policy….Tasmanian Senator [Abetz] said the election win had been the "barest of victories" and it was time the party listened to backbenchers who had been out doorknocking and hearing directly from voters.”

COMMENT

Abetz seems another possible replacement for Prime Minister Turnbull or at least Abetz may regain a Minister level position in the Government. As I described in Australian Election and Shipbuilding this centrist versus conservative infighting is likely to impact on defence minister and shipbuilding issues over the next 12 months.

If you are interested in receiving Australian Election and Shipbuilding please contact me at pete74730@yahoo.com.au .

Pete

Polite Portuguese Submarine Tangles With French Trawler

July 14, 2016, 12:27 am

≫ Next: Truck Attack in Nice - French Carrier Redeployment Announcement as a Trigger

≪ Previous: Trend Identified in Australian Election and Shipbuilding

$

0

0

NRP Tridente in 2010. Reported yesterday was a training mishap 55km off Lizard Point, Cornwall, UK. (Photo courtesy Pedro Vilela).

---

Modified from a BBC report, July 13, 2016 http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cornwall-36781151:

Until its tangle with a trawl net Portuguese submarine NRP Tridente was training with the UK Royal Navy 55km off Lizard Point, Cornwall. Lizard Point is not shaped like the famous bitey reptile but so named because "Lysardh" in the regional Cornish language means "the high court".

Tridente, while submerged, became caught in the nets of French trawler, Daytona, the Royal Navy said July 13, 2016. The trawler Daytona is registered to Saint-Brieuc, in north west France.

"The submarine immediately surfaced and made contact with the trawler," French maritime authorities said in a statement. There were no casualties and both vessels were safe, the navy said."

BACKGROUND/COMMENT

The French trawler was fortunate that it encountered a conventional sub (SSK) that was then polite enough to stop and surface.  

Nuclear subs have been known to tow whole trawler boats under. 

In "1990, four fishermen died when their trawler was dragged under by a British submarine on a training exercise off the west coast of Scotland.") Sometimes suspected SSNs don't stop - maybe due to the higher secrecy level (than average SSK missions) that they operate under.

The BBC reported, that later, in 2004, five crew died when the French trawler Bugaled Breizh sank off Lizard Point. "The families of the victims claim the trawler was dragged underwater by a submarine involved in an international military exercise, but courts ruled there is no supporting evidence."

NRP Tridente is one of Portugal’s two Tridente class variants of the TKMS Type 214 class. The Portuguese firstly rely on fuel cell AIP to re-charge the batteries and then the diesels rather than the more conventional propulsion pattern of mainly diesel but and sometimes AIP.

The propulsion patterns of Portugal's two Tridente class subs suggest shorter range, probably defensive, missions such as monitoring the approaches to the Strait of Gibraltar from both the Atlantic and Mediterranean sides.

With a good microscope you can see the submarines of the Marinha de Guerra Portuguesa berthed at Lisbon Naval Base (above) This map has been provided by my good friend and colleague Vasco .

---

Pedro

---

Truck Attack in Nice - French Carrier Redeployment Announcement as a Trigger

July 15, 2016, 12:32 am

≫ Next: Islamist Terror Tactics Used in Nice - Already Known

≪ Previous: Polite Portuguese Submarine Tangles With French Trawler

$

0

0

Did thoughts of French carrier Charles de Gaulle's (above) pending airstrikes on IS targets lead to this (below) in the mind of an IS inspired truck driver in the Nice attack?

There appears to be a strong link between French President Hollande, on July 13, 2016 (French time),  announcing France's only aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle would again be deployed against IS in the Middle East.

and

the (probably IS inspired terrorist) driven truck attack in Nice the next day (July 14, 2016 French time). The driver of the Nice truck may have been more conscious than most of the military importance of the Charles de Gaulle as that ship is based in Toulon only 149 km down the road from Nice.

WORKING OUT

France overtly considers its aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle, is a counter-terrorism weapon against IS in the Middle East. The Charles de Gaulle launches airstrikes against Islamic State (in Iraq and Syria) targets.

Usually the carrier redeployment with airstrikes are announced in response to IS terrorism on French soil. In this July 14, 2016 truck attack the carrier redeployment was announced the day before (on July 13, 2016).

Event 1 - After the Charlie Hebdo attacks January 2015 attacks Hollande announced a Charles de Gaulle redeployment to the Middle East for airstrikes against IS.

Event 2 - After the November 2015 attacks in Paris Hollande again announced Charles de Gaulle would again redeploy against IS in the Middle East.

Event 3 - I noticed that on July 13, 2016 (France time) French President Hollande announced that Charles de Gaulle would once more be deployed against IS.
On July 13, 2016 the Associated Press (AP) 7:22 PM EDT reported: PARIS (AP) -- President Francois Hollande has announced that France will redeploy the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier this fall to step up the fight against the Islamic State group and suggested an increase in ground troops for training and support to take back Mosul, in northern Iraq. Hollande...said "we must strike and destroy those who aggressed us here" in two sets of attacks last year...."

If the driver also linked Charles de Gaulle's activity with an attack on his Islamic State  "homeland" he may have followed IS's general worlwide social media instructions to drive into crowds with an event or time sensitive urge to drive a whole truck into crowds.  

Islamist Terror Tactics Used in Nice - Already Known

July 16, 2016, 2:01 am

≫ Next: UK vote on Trident Replacement due tomorrow, Monday July 18, 2016

≪ Previous: Truck Attack in Nice - French Carrier Redeployment Announcement as a Trigger

$

0

0

1.   RT reports 16 Jul, 2016  https://www.rt.com/news/351564-nice-attack-isis-claim/

The Islamic State terror group has claimed responsibility for the truck attack in Nice, France, that left 84 people dead, according to ISIS-affiliated Amaq news agency.

“The person who carried out the operation in Nice, France, to run down people was one of the soldiers of Islamic State,” Amaq said via its Telegram account.

“He carried out the operation in response to calls to target nationals of states that are part of the coalition fighting Islamic State.”

       

2.   The following two year old academic journal document reveals tactics strikingly similar to those used by the Islamist terrorist in Nice. That is driving into crowds and then using a gun:

Petter Nesser and Anne Stenersen, “The Modus Operandi of Jihadi Terrorists in Europe”, Perspectives on Terrorism, Vol 8, No 6 (2014)  http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php/pot/article/view/388/html and also at https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/186933/397-2679-2-PB.pdf

Abstract

This article provides the most thorough overview yet of how jihadis have plotted terrorist attacks in Europe. Drawing on a database of 122 incidents, we review trends in weapon types, attack types and target types in the period 1994–2013. The overall finding is that jihadi terrorism in Europe is becoming more discriminate in its targeting while attack types and weapons are becoming progressively more diverse. The most likely scenarios in the coming three to five years are bomb attacks and armed assaults against sub-national entities, communities and individuals. A majority of the terrorist attacks will be limited in scope, but mass-casualty terrorism cannot be excluded. Foreign fighters from Syria are likely to influence the threat level in Europe, but we do not expect them to alter patterns in modus operandi dramatically.

Under subheading: “Most Likely Tactical Innovations”

[Page 19] “Another scenario contemplated by jihadis is the use of vehicles as weapons. The method was first described in an infamous Inspire magazine article from 2010 entitled “The ultimate mowing machine.”[63 - “The ultimate mowing machine,” Inspire No. 2 (Fall 2010), pp. 53-57.] It suggested welding steel blades on a pickup truck and then ramming it into a crowd of people, and following up with a handgun attack if possible. Reportedly, the perpetrators of the “Pak-Bengali Plot Luton” in 2012 discussed ramming cars into crowds of people, while making references to the idea presented inInspire magazine.”

UK vote on Trident Replacement due tomorrow, Monday July 18, 2016

July 16, 2016, 9:02 pm

≫ Next: Excellent "South China Sea decision explained" with Map

≪ Previous: Islamist Terror Tactics Used in Nice - Already Known

$

0

0

Drawing from The Guardian's July 16, 2016 article by Paul Torpey and Paul Scruton "Trident: what you need to know before the parliamentary vote".

The UK Parliament (in the House of Commons) is due to vote whether the UK squadron of 4 SSBNs, that carry Trident missiles, should be replaced. The vote may be around

-  London time - 4pm Monday July 18, 2016 and
-  Australian Eastern time - 1am, Tuesday, July 19, 2016
   (see the BBC report on ABC TV Channel 24).

See the whole excellent Guardian article. Elements of article below:

The Vanguard-class UK SSBNs operate out of the deep-water naval base at Faslane on the Clyde, abive Glasgow, Scotland, UK. But the UK SSBNs also makes use of the US navy’s base at Kings Bay in Georgia. Lockheed Martin Space Systems manufactures the Trident missiles at its factory in Sunnyvale, California. BAE Systems, Babcock International and Rolls-Royce are the main industrial partners in the Successor-class project.

The UK MoD states that maintaining and sustaining Trident supports more than 30,000 UK jobs. Approximately 2,200 people across the MoD and all three companies are currently working on the (SSBN replacement) Successor programme, of whom more than 50% are engineers and designers. Jobs are expected to peak at 6,000 during the build phase and involve an estimated 850 British companies in the supply chain. Four Vanguard-class nuclear submarines carry the US-made Trident ballistic missiles that give the weapons system its collective name and which each have the capacity to deliver up to 12 thermonuclear warheads.

The UK has the smallest stockpile of nuclear warheads. The UK is one of five legal nuclear weapon (P5) countries under the "first pillar" concept of the NNP Treaty (NNPT). Among these countries, the UK is also unique in relying on a single nuclear weapons system – Trident. There are nine known nuclear powers, chief among them the US and Russia, which retain formidable stockpiles despite substantial disarmament programmes. Pakistan, India, Israel and North Korea are not legal nuclear weapon countries under the NNPT.

See the whole excellent Guardian article. 

Excellent "South China Sea decision explained" with Map

July 17, 2016, 11:20 pm

≫ Next: DefMin Marise Payne's Industry Power passed to Pyne - New Ministry List

≪ Previous: UK vote on Trident Replacement due tomorrow, Monday July 18, 2016

$

0

0

(The map above is by Arsana and Schofield, 2012. A larger, easier to read version, is here andhere).

 The Australian Naval Institute carrys an excellent article South China Sea decision explained by Clive Schofield, Professor of Geography at the University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia. He served as an independent expert witness (provided by the Philippines) to the Arbitration Tribunal in the case between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China. 

An inconvenient insight: "For example, the US claims 200-nautical-mile EEZs from several remote Pacific island territories that appear remarkably similar to some of the South China Sea features that the tribunal found could not generate extended maritime claims. The US welcomed the ruling, but it will be intriguing to see whether the US and other countries modify their practices in light of it."

Another interesting earlier overhead-slides presentation on how boundaries are measured is Professor Schofield's April 2013 Baselines Issues in the South China Sea: Challenges in Defining the ‘Boundary’ between Land and Sea [PDF, 10 MB].

Here is the Press Release for the Court at the Hague's, July 12, 2016, ruling on Philippines versus China.

Pete

DefMin Marise Payne's Industry Power passed to Pyne - New Ministry List

July 18, 2016, 12:25 am

≫ Next: Surprise Majority UK Labour Vote for Trident SSBN Replacement, Russia, Turkey

≪ Previous: Excellent "South China Sea decision explained" with Map

$

0

0

The most politically influential (industrial) part of Defence Minister Marise Payne's portfolio has been passed to a more senior politician. That senior politician is the new Defence Industry Minister, Christopher Pyne (below). Many instances of "Payne/Pyne" confusion will now occur.

---

1. Where I indicated in Australian Election and Shipbuilding (of July 13, 2016) that Prime Minister  Turnbull's imminent post Election Ministerial reshuffle would likely involve:

"However, [Defence Minister Marise Payne's] portfolio, with its domestically influential shipbuilding programs, is now attractive to others, including Abbott"..."Alternatively the centrist (and significantly South Australian) Christopher Pyne may take her position."

The message of a diminuation of Marise Paynes' defence industry power appears accurate. 

Mr Pyne has made unsolicited comments on submarine building policy for at least a year - as these articles on Submarine Matters reveal.

Just announced today (July 18, 2016) in Turnbull's post Election Ministerial reshuffle, is the extension of Industry Minister, Christopher Pyne's, role to:

"Defence Industry Minister(to work on the new defence plan). Pyne will work alongside Defence Minister Marise Payne."see Huffington Post (Australia edition), July 18, 2016.

2. The official New Turnbull Ministry List of 18 July 2016 (in WORD and PDF) is here. It was in WORD now in html (admittedly not perfect) below. Payne and Pyne are redded for emphasis:

TURNBULL MINISTRY  -  18 JULY 2016

Title	Minister
Prime Minister	The Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP
Minister for Indigenous Affairs	Senator the Hon Nigel Scullion
Minister for Women	Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Cabinet Secretary	Senator the Hon Arthur Sinodinos AO
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service	Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Counter-Terrorism	The Hon Michael Keenan MP
Minister Assisting the Cabinet Secretary	Senator the Hon Scott Ryan
MinisterAssisting the Prime Minister forCyber Security	The Hon Dan Tehan MP
Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation	Senator the Hon James McGrath The Hon Angus Taylor MP
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources	The Hon Barnaby Joyce MP
Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister	Senator the Hon Anne Ruston The Hon Luke Hartsuyker MP
Minister for Foreign Affairs	The Hon Julie Bishop MP
Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment	The Hon Steven Ciobo MP
Minister for International Development and the Pacific	Senator the Hon Concetta Fierravanti-Wells
Assistant Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment	The Hon Keith Pitt MP
Attorney-General (Vice-President of the Executive Council) (Leader of the Government in the Senate)	Senator the Hon George Brandis QC
Minister for Justice	The Hon Michael Keenan MP
Treasurer	The Hon Scott Morrison MP
Minister for Revenue and Financial Services Minister for Small Business	The Hon Kelly O’Dwyer MP The Hon Michael McCormack MP
Minister for Finance (Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate)	Senator the Hon Mathias Cormann
Special Minister of State	Senator the Hon Scott Ryan
Minister for Regional Development Minister for Local Government and Territories	Senator the Hon Fiona Nash Senator the Hon Fiona Nash
Minister for Infrastructure and Transport (Deputy Leader of the House)	The Hon Darren Chester MP
Minister for Urban Infrastructure	The Hon Paul Fletcher MP
Minister for Defence	Senator the Hon Marise Payne
Minister for Defence Industry (Leader of the House)	The Hon Christopher Pyne MP
Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Centenary of ANZAC	The Hon Dan Tehan MP The Hon Dan Tehan MP
Minister for Defence Personnel	The Hon Dan Tehan  MP
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection	The Hon Peter Dutton MP
Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection	The Hon Alex Hawke MP
Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science	The Hon Greg Hunt MP
Minister for Resources and Northern Australia	Senator the Hon Matt Canavan
Assistant Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science	The Hon Craig Laundy MP
Minister for Health and Aged Care	The Hon Sussan Ley MP
Minister for Sport	The Hon Sussan Ley MP
Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care	The Hon Ken Wyatt AM MP
Assistant Minister for Rural Health	Dr David Gillespie MP
Minister for Communications Minister for the Arts (Manager of Government Business in the Senate)	Senator the Hon Mitch Fifield Senator the Hon Mitch Fifield
Minister for Regional Communications	Senator the Hon Fiona Nash
Minister for Employment	Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Minister for Social Services	The Hon Christian Porter MP
Minister for Human Services	The Hon Alan Tudge MP
Assistant Minister for Social Services and Disability Services	The Hon Jane Prentice MP
Assistant Minister for Social Services and Multicultural Affairs	Senator Zed Seselja
Minister for Education and Training Assistant Minister for Vocational Education and Skills	Senator the Hon Simon Birmingham The Hon Karen Andrews MP
Minister for the Environment and Energy	The Hon Josh Frydenberg MP

      "Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there

      is one department in each portfolio.  However, there is a Department of Human Services in the Social

      Services portfolio and a Department of Veterans’ Affairs in the Defence portfolio. The title of a

      department does not necessarily reflect the title of a minister in all cases. Assistant Ministers in italics

      are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952." 

   

      Pete

Surprise Majority UK Labour Vote for Trident SSBN Replacement, Russia, Turkey

July 19, 2016, 1:43 am

≫ Next: On The Beach and Seeing Australia as a Last Post After Armageddon

≪ Previous: DefMin Marise Payne's Industry Power passed to Pyne - New Ministry List

$

0

0

Second or First Strike Cooperation

The light blue footprint reflects the limitations of the UK's Trident II D5 SLBM coverage, from the Atlantic Ocean launch basin. Half of Russia, most of China, and all of North Korea are not in the (likely 8,000-12,000 km) UK Trident range. This means the UK very much needs to launch in cooperation with the US, assuming US assumed global coverage (especially from the Pacific Ocean). 

If France's newish M51 SLBMs (at 8,000-10,000 km) have a 2,000 km shorter range - then that restricts France's deterrent reach even more. But then again France's deterrent is mainly to make Russia's losses unacceptable. (Map-Diagram courtesy FAS, UK Defence Review via BBC, 2016).

_____________________________________________________________

UK Trident Vote

On Monday night, July 18, 2016, a majority of UK Members of Parliament (in the House of Commons) voted to replace the 4 Vanguard class (Trident firing) SSBNs with the 4 new (Trident firing) Successor class SSBNs. 472 (including 322 Conservative) voted to replace versus 117. This  represents more than 80% in favour - a sound mandate to replace Trident.  

While it was not a surprise that most MPs voted for the replacement - because most MPs in the Commons are of the ruling Conservative Party - it was a surprise that a majority of Labour Party MPs voted for the replacement. 140 of Labour's 230 MPs voted for replacement (a total of 47 Labour members voted against replacement, while others abstained). 

This Labour Party result represents a divisive thrashing of the Labour Party Leader's authority. Labour Party Leader Jeremy Corbyn is a very leftwing pacifist, so having most of his party in the Commons vote for a replacement of the SSBN's (the UK's only active nuclear weapons launch platform) is a bitter development for him. Corbyn's removal as Labour Leader is probably imminent.

Successor Class Basing and Cost Problems Remain

Problems of uncertain basing (ejection from Faslane submarine base in Scotland) and guaranteed rapidly escalating costs of the Trident replacement fleet remain. This is evinced by all but one of the MPs from Scotland voting against replacement.

A side note is that UK commentators seem to harbour a sexist surprise that the new female Prime Minister, Theresa May, says she would be willing to press the nuclear button without hesitation in a nuclear exchange. The effectiveness of a nuclear deterrent relies on assurance to an enemy that they would be destroyed in a SSBN/SLBM first or second strike situation.

Successor is probably a temporary name with a name more historical and British likely to replace it in years to come. The up front build cost of the 4 Successor class is currently estimated at UK £31 Billions total. This represents an injection of money into needy UK regional areas - a financial argument on top of national defence arguments for the Successors.

Russia Unhappy at Trident Vote but Happy With Turkey

Russia, under Putin, would not be happy. Russia would have preferred that its long moral/propaganda  (and perhaps financial) campaign that the UK undergo a process of unilateral nuclear disarmament has been frustrated once again. A disarmed UK would weaken NATO - a weakened NATO may be less threatening. A weaker NATO would permit lower Russian defence spending.

Nevertheless, this week has not been all bad news for Russia. With the near coup in Turkey, the important Turkish component of NATO is in temporary factional disarray. The Russians and US would be busy researching Turkey's latest troubles, separately.

BACKGROUND

Main reference the Members vote to renew Trident weapons system, BBC, July 19, 2016. Also see:

§  A guide to Trident

§  Trident replacement: What next?

§  What are the letters of last resort?

§  Does Britain need nuclear weapons?

See the Submarine Matters articles on UK-Trident Replacement and Brexit.

Pete

On The Beach and Seeing Australia as a Last Post After Armageddon

July 20, 2016, 5:09 am

≫ Next: The US "Third Offset Strategy" overlaps with the SeaWeb Concept

≪ Previous: Surprise Majority UK Labour Vote for Trident SSBN Replacement, Russia, Turkey

$

0

0

Bombs are tested (1). Some may eventually be used (2) and the end of human existence may result (3). Step 1 has already happened to Australia and 2 and 3 may be to come. See the steps below.

1. Australia was the testing ground for British fission "A" bombs at Emu Field and Maralinga 
     (map above) and then fusion boosted fission bombs in the Montebello Islands off Western 
     Australia.

     

2. Australia in reality is a fall back option for US and British SSNs and SSBNs to finally move to 
     after a nuclear exchange. 

Drawn  from an article by Garrett M. Graff in the UK’s Politico Magazine July 14, 2016,  http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/the-grim-task-awaiting-teresa-may-preparing-for-nuclear-armageddon-214049

Theresa May, the new British Prime Minister has, by now, performed the melancholy duty of handwriting what is known as a “Letter of Last Resort”. The letter is secret instructions, to be remain sealed until after Armageddon, about what the UK’s SSBN commanders should do with their Trident missiles if the UK has been destroyed. Theresa May would have written four letters - one to each submarine commander of Britain's 4 SSBNs, HMS Vanguard, HMS Victorious, HMS Vigilant and HMS Vengeance.

The letters are then placed inside of a safe inside another safe, sitting in the control rooms of each SSBN. The safes will only be accessible to the sub’s commander and deputy, who must decide together when Britain has been entirely destroyed.

The letters would probably present options, depending on what has occurred in a nuclear exchange. The actual (one-way to the submarine) intelligence provided to a deep diving submarine during a nuclear exchange might be very limited. It is known, at least, that submarine commanders must check whether BBC’s Radio 4 is still broadcasting. If BBC’s Radio 4 is off the air then it is assumed all of Britain is.

A nuclear exchange would probably mean most bases and ports in the Northern Hemisphere would  be devastated. After checking what signals are received, surviving US and British submarines would see New Zealand or Australia as a place to go.

3.  On The Beach.  The "Famous 1959 film set in Australia. During 1964, in the months following World War III, the conflict has devastated the Northern Hemisphere, polluting the atmosphere with nuclear fallout, killing all life there. Air currents are slowly carrying the fallout south; the only areas still habitable are in the far reaches of the Southern Hemisphere. From Australia survivors detect an incomprehensible Morse code signal coming from the West Coast of the United States. The last American nuclear submarine, USS Sawfish, under Royal Australian Navy command...[see the rest of the plot]"

On The Beach (1959)(below)  - the submarine USS Sawfish is 2 minutes 55 seconds in and a sanitised End of the World (with no bodies or rusty metal on the windy streets). 

THE END

---

The US "Third Offset Strategy" overlaps with the SeaWeb Concept

July 21, 2016, 1:26 am

≫ Next: Mr Pyne, Minister for South Australian Defence Industry, Bottom Lips

≪ Previous: On The Beach and Seeing Australia as a Last Post After Armageddon

$

0

0

The SeaWeb Network overlaps with other names such as Fixed Surveillance System (large PDF file - see pages 128-129). Older terms are IUSS and the most familiar (SOSUS). SeaWeb not only includes sonar, but LIDAR, LED, optical CCTV, motion-wake, infrared, chemical sniffing, radiation sensors and SIGINT amongst others. The revolution in sensor technology and big data management and storage has made SeaWeb a major unsung Western asset. (Diagram courtesy USN 2006). 

SeaWeb Concept

Different sounding military concepts are often very similar because of inter-service rivalries, different technical disciplines, different approaches, politics and new product packaging. It is notable that "Third Offset Strategy" is similar to the more naval aligned "SeaWeb" (frequently described by Submarine Matter's) ie. advanced sea orientated sensor platforms, big data and targeting. 

Japan, with its financial and high-tech resources, is a foundation participant with the US in the northwest Pacific SeaWeb branch. South Korea works with the US in a smaller branch network, which can be conceptualised as part of South Korea's Kill Chain strategy and infrastructure.

Major targets for the US, Japan and South Korea are Russian, Chinese and North Korean submarines. SeaWeb is being fine-tuned with more sensitive sensors to track enemy UUVs (smaller, quieter than subs and having the advantage of being expendable). 

Third Offset Concept 

Here's a great article by Steven Stashwick, appearing in The Diplomat, on July 21, 2016

...Perry’s demonstration of force put Japan’s defenselessness against modern military technology in stark relief and motivated a period of stunningly rapid Japanese economic, societal, and military modernization and expansion. That trajectory also led an ascendant Japan into violent conflict with the United States in World War II, a history with worrying parallels today. China too has been shocked by displays of U.S. military might into rapid military modernization paired with unprecedented economic growth. Today, the United States commonly describes China’s military intentions as“opaque.” China decries what it calls the U.S. pursuit of hegemony and a Cold War mindset. 

...China is well on its way to “offsetting” the U.S. “second offset” technologies and concepts that spooked it in the 1990s.In response, the U.S. is already working on a third offset to counter China’s anti-access/area denial capabilities... 

Also see this fine Australian discussion of "The third offset".

The invaluable Wiki advises:

"An offset is some means of asymmetrically compensating for a disadvantage, particularly in a military competition. Rather than match an opponent in an unfavorable competition, changing the competition to more favorable footing enables the application of strengths to a problem that is otherwise either unwinnable or winnable only at unacceptable cost....The U.S. Department of Defense's Defense Innovation Initiative was announced in November 2014.^[5] A core component of the initiative...will purportedly target several promising technology areas, including robotics and system autonomy, miniaturization, big data, and advanced manufacturing, while also seeking to improve the U.S. military's collaboration with innovative private sector enterprises.^[6]

The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments released a report outlining the potential components of a Third Offset Strategy in October 2014, shortly before Secretary Hagel's announcement. The report emphasizes the development of next-generation power projection platforms like unmanned autonomous strike aircraft, the acceleration of the [B-21] LRS-B, additional investments in undersea warfare systems like Unmanned Underwater Vehicles, and steps to reduce U.S. and partner vulnerability to the loss of space-based communications.^[7]"

Not to be outdone China and Russia have had their own SeaWeb networks for decades. Both nations are jointly developing increasingly sensitive and extensive networks, particularly in the Sea of Japan. If the pink submarine (in the diagram above) is a daring Western submarine moving within X kms of the Chinese coast - things may not end well. Chinese undersea SeaWeb sensors may alert (lightweight torpedo carrying) YU-8 anti submarine rocket batteries or CY-2 cruise missile batteries that the sub is encroaching where it shouldn't and is in range. Also Chinese smart and mobile seafloor mines, sown among the sensors, are another threat. The diagram above is on page 16 of American ex-submariner, Bryan Clark’s important paper The Emerging Era in Undersea Warfare, January 22, 2015.

So, depending on your interests, Third Offset Strategy or SeaWeb has the most resonance.

Pete

Mr Pyne, Minister for South Australian Defence Industry, Bottom Lips

July 21, 2016, 8:04 pm

≫ Next: Intelligence on Russia's SOSUS System

≪ Previous: The US "Third Offset Strategy" overlaps with the SeaWeb Concept

$

0

0

Christopher Pyne, Minister for (South) Australian Defence Industy puts on a brave face in Federal Parliament during criticism that he is merely South Australia's boy.

---

The South Australian Adelaide Advertiser has gone the full ten yards in arguing that Defence Industry Minister, Christopher Pyne, is interested in states outside of  South Australia.

Mr Pyne, Member for the Adelaide, South Australian electorate of Sturt, has been valiant in co-opting the media in his attempts to appear a national politician.

The Adelaide Advertiser, on July 21, 2016 argued:

"Mr Pyne’s immediate priorities will include finalising the contract with French shipbuilder DCNS to act as the design partner on the submarine project that will create thousands of jobs in Adelaide and around Australia.

His appointment was met with sneers from some critics, who suggested there was something wrong with a minister being responsible for major defence procurements that will benefit his state."

Criticism of a federal politician who has been known to venture outside Adelaide and Canberra, is unbecoming.

As Submarine Matters gallantly argues, Mr Pyne is believed to have represented the interests of Whyalla, South Australia, which is not in Adelaide.

Pete

Intelligence on Russia's SOSUS System

July 22, 2016, 1:56 am

≫ Next: Submarine Matters Articles - Excellent Opinion Piece

≪ Previous: Mr Pyne, Minister for South Australian Defence Industry, Bottom Lips

$

0

0

The following are slides describing Russian research company, Morinformsystem-Agat's 

MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System

   The MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System in a satellite, strike fighter and surface ship surveillance     network (above).

---

   The MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System used for Harbour Protection.

The MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System used for anti-submarine detection with the potential for destruction.

---

In researching evidence of Chinese or Russian SeaWeb systems I thought I'd have to rely on obscure, fragmentary mentions. Instead the Russian SOSUS (fixed passive sonar) system is comprehensively described in slides (above) and description (below).

Instead a Russian arms research and sales company (with online sales brochures in English and other languages) is selling SOSUS systems to foreign customers - which could easily include the Chinese Navy (PLA-N).

That Russian company is the Morinformsystem-Agat Joint Stock Company (JSC). Morinformsystem-Agat has been developing electronics systems for submarines and naval ships for over sixty years. More see http://concern-agat.ru/en/about-us and http://concern-agat.ru/en/about-us/enterprises/morinsis-agat-kip

Here is a Morinformsystem-Agat sales brochure that I retrieved on July 22, 2016]  

MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System

http://concern-agat.ru/en/production/hydroacoustics-hydroacoustic-equipment/mgk-608e-passive-stationary-sonar-system

MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System is a group of linear phased arrays of hydrophones mounted on the sea floor at a distance from dozens to several hundreds of kilometers from the coastline.

The signals received by the hydrophones are additive combination of signal-independent noise interference of distributed long-range vessel and local source noises that are located within the system detection range. Having been filtered and amplified the signals are transformed into digital form and are transmitted to the coastal post via the fiber-optic cable channel.

MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System is designed for sea surveillance in the predetermined area of responsibility. The system performs the following tasks:

-          detection of underwater and surface objects using their hydroacoustic field parameters;

-          hydroacoustic monitoring of detected underwater and surface objects, as well as determination of their heading, speed and behaviour;

-          computer-aided object classification according to object noise emission;

-          record and archiving of detected object data;

-          computer-aided diagnostics of the technical state of MGK-608E Passive Stationary Sonar System at startup, and performance monitoring during system operation;

-          automated output of data on detected objects.

MGK-608E system includes:

1. Underwater equipment:„

·            long hydroacoustic antenna groups;

·            signal collection and analogue-to-digital conversion equipment;

·            digital cable data links;

·            mounting kit;

·            single SPTA set.

2. Coastal-based equipment:„

·            computing system with display devices;

·            power supply system;

·            single SPTA set;

·            mounting kit;

·            user manual.

Main specifications
Number of hydroacoustic antennas in the system	up to 60
Antenna offshore distance	200 km
Deployment depth	up to 1000 m
Underwater object classification probability	0.9
Object positioning inaccuracy	1.5–2 km
Underwater object velocity determination inaccuracy	2%
Underwater object heading determination inaccuracy	6 deg
Maintenance crew	2 persons/shift
Service life	10 years
Special features
Efficient detection and output of hydroacoustic data to the operator.
Maximum antenna offshore distance – up to 200 km.

It is interesting Russia is marketing the system so openly.

I'm unaware of a Western SOSUS system being offered like this.

Pete

Submarine Matters Articles - Excellent Opinion Piece

July 23, 2016, 2:28 am

≫ Next: Background on Submarine Pens (WWII and Cold War)

≪ Previous: Intelligence on Russia's SOSUS System

$

0

0

Great minds think alike :)

This Opinion Piece of July 23, 2016 provides an excellent discussion on Turnbull electoral and  shipbuilding strategy, as well as steel and original Australian content issues for the DCNS Shortfin submarines.

I’d like to think there was some inspiration from my special report “Australian Election and Shipbuilding” (to donors) and Submarine Matters’ articles (written for free) over the last few days, weeks and months.

Before each of the paragraphs of the Opinion Piece below I will provide a quote or link to “Australian Election and Shipbuilding” (of 13/7/2016) and the relevant Submarine Matters article(s) with the date(s).

Great minds think alike.

Submarine Matters Articles and a Comment	From Opinion Piece
My comment of 19/7/2016 "This new Turnbull Ministry contains an unusually high number of Cabinet Ministers and junior Ministers. The reason for that is Turnbull is insecure. He feels compelled to bestow positions on all the factions and personalities of the Liberal National Party Coalition Government who can bring him down."	“…An unwieldy cabinet of 23 …underline Turnbull’s weakened position and the fact he can’t afford to make more enemies.”
My article of 18/7/2016 “Where I indicated in Australian Election and Shipbuilding (of July 13, 2016) that Prime Minister  Turnbull's imminent post Election Ministerial reshuffle would likely involve: "However, [Defence Minister Marise Payne's] portfolio, with its domestically influential shipbuilding programs, is now attractive to others, including Abbott"..."Alternatively the centrist (and significantly South Australian) Christopher Pyne may take her position." The message of a diminuation of Marise Paynes' defence industry power appears accurate.  Mr Pyne has made unsolicited comments on submarine building policy for at least a year - as these articles on Submarine Matters reveal. Just announced today (July 18, 2016) in Turnbull's post Election Ministerial reshuffle is Christopher Pyne's new role of Minister for Defence Industry.	“Central to the promise to deliver an economic transformation and the most significant change in cabinet was the gutting of Marise Payne’s defence ministry and the huge portfolio promotion for Christopher Pyne as Defence Industry Minister.”
My article of 21/9/2015 "While the promise of 70% of submarine work in Australia has been mentioned by the outgoing defence minister Andrews in Parliament this is not yet a formal commitment. 70% involves complex costings over a 20 year period. The new Australian Defence Minister, Marise Payne, will be faced with a highly complex $90 Billion shipbuilding situation.  She and the whole Australian Federal Cabinet will have to: plan, conduct and complete submarine/ship selections which heavily rely on the knowledge/designs/industrial capacity/contractural clarity of overseas companies…"	Yet on every count there are signs Turnbull’s strongly stated intentions may not be fulfilled, and that includes the central economic transformation of $90bn in defence spending. “…Yet at the same hearing she would not commit to giving a percentage of how much of the subs would be built in Adelaide, refused to say a minimum would be 70 per cent and said the aim was “to maximise Australian industry involvement”.”

Further from Submarine Matters Articles

From Opinion Piece

From my “Australian Election and Shipbuilding” in WORD that I emailed out to donors on 13/7/2016. “The Australian July 2, 2016 Election result confirms the Government was on the right political track pursuing a South Australian-centric shipbuilding strategy. But it also leaves scope for much instability… The result appears to re-affirm that the Government followed the right electoral strategy in its April 2016 announcements (here and here) that most of the surface shipbuilding tonnage and all of the new submarines should be built in South Australia (SA)… Turnbull in Opposition proved he was not a stayer when confronted with the frustrating grind of negotiation and conflicting interests. The clash of interests now include centrists and conservatives in his own Government. The election results have proven Turnbull does not have the sure hand (that many expected him to have) to win elections.” My article on Arrium of 4/April/2016 “The steel plant at Whyalla, owned by Arrium, makes “long steel” products - mainly steel reinforcing bars and beams for homes and buildings.  It is possible that Arrium could gear up to make the few hundred tonnes of steel beams needed in Australia's Future Submarine project. But this would only be needed in the mid 2020s based on the Turnbull Government's plans to delay the Future Submarines build until the late 2020s. For an Australian submarine build, first steel might only be cut in 2028. The example of any Australian company making submarine steel overwhelmingly involves a fundamentally different type of product, that is flat steel for submarine hulls.  The precedent of an Australian company producing submarine steel seems limited to Port Kembla-Wollongong based Bisalloy Steels Pty Ltd. This only involved Bisalloy making 8,000 tonnes of steel in the 1980s-1990s for the Collins submarine program. There was research and development involvement from BHP.  Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) was also involved - see "High-strength steel and welds" here.  My article of 26/4/2016 “Collins steel mainly made in Port Kembla,-Wollongong, NSW” My article of 20/1/2015 “Australian companies approached by Japan may include BHP-Billiton and BlueScope Steel. However the main company Japan approaches is likely to be current naval steelmaker Bisalloy Steels Pty Ltd based in Port Kembla-Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.  In the 1980s-1990s Bisalloy supplied 8,000 tonnes of hardened steel for the Collins submarine program with research and development involvement of BHP and the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO). Bisalloy Steels Pty Ltd (company website) has connections to Indonesia (PT Bima Bisalloy), Thailand (Bisalloy Thailand) and from July 2011 investment in the Chinese CJV - Bisalloy Jigang (Shandong) Steel Plate Co. Ltd. It would be crucial that Japanese-Australian submarine steel technology does not find its way to foreign affiliates - particularly China.”

“Turnbull’s announcement of the successful French bidder for the subs on the eve of the election to “see Australian workers building Australian submarines with Australian steel” was at the heart of the Liberal attempts to stave off defeat in several seats in South Australia.” “What’s more, naval chiefs said the strength of the steel needed for submarines was not produced at Whyalla’s Arrium and only Bisalloy, in Wollongong, NSW, had produced the necessary grade of tensile steel used in the Collins-class submarines.”

More from Opinion Piece of July 23, 2016.

“They also said the same steel had to be used in all parts of the submarine, which could include bits produced in France. Evidence was also given that by Turnbull’s prediction of 2019 for the next election, the design process for the new Barracuda Shortfin French sub would be only three years into its five-year starting phase.

It is possible that even by 2019 it won’t be certain as to what steel will be needed for the hull and the government will again run the risk of going to an election with an unresolved promise to South Australia on submarines.

The government has already given the impression of an all-Australian build, with Australian workers using Australian steel, when it cannot possibly be known what percentage will be Australian made and neither the builders nor the Australian navy can give any real assurance.

But Pyne kept boosting the benefits after his first official meeting as Defence Industry Minister with the leaders of the Future Submarine program on Wednesday, saying it “will bring unprecedented economic benefit to Australia, driving jobs and growth across the country”.

The appointment of Pyne as a South Australian “fixer” to ensure promises are kept is a sign that Payne was not seen as assertive enough and that her cabinet colleagues were anxious. Having made a great deal only nine months ago of appointing Australia’s first female Defence Minister as part of a promotion of women into cabinet, Turnbull could do no more to address the concern….”

See WHOLE EXCELLENT OPINION PIECE

Pete

Background on Submarine Pens (WWII and Cold War)

July 24, 2016, 2:00 pm

≫ Next: North Korea building new submarine pens (probably)

≪ Previous: Submarine Matters Articles - Excellent Opinion Piece

$

0

0

A submarine pen (U-Boot-Bunker in German) is a type of submarine base that acts as a bunker to protect submarines from air attack. The term is generally applied to submarine bases constructed during World War II. Note the open sides.

The Nazis built submarine pens with thick concrete roofs in France (photo above), Germany and Norway. These proved almost impervious to common, garden, Allied bombs. Explosions were fine but penetrating thick concrete was the difficult part.

This is where deep penetrating 12,000 lb "Tallboy" bombs dropped by the "Dambusters" of No. 617 Squadron came in (in 1944 - 45). They penetrated the thick roofs of the pens - destroying the subs and all inside. Near misses resulted in mini-earthquakes - also sub-wrecking. 

In the Cold War (about 1948 - 1992) new build submarine pens needed to be WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) Resistant. Due mainly to the danger of deep penetrating nuclear weapons pens-bunkers were preferably dug from harbours into mountains. Doors, were also needed, to shield from sideways flash-blast and fallout.

Hence the youtube below features not just a sturdy roof but a whole town/base complex under the ground, behind heavy doors.

Youtube uploaded by Seth Miller Sep 6, 2012. In the 1950s the Soviets built the Balaklava (in Crimea) submarine pen and nuclear weapon bunker complex (above). The complex was surrounded by base worker accommodation in what was yet another Soviet "secret city" (only authorised entry and not marked on map). The base was decommissioned in the 90s for various reasons including Russia terminating almost all SSN and SSBN patrols. 

Balaklava complex become a nuclear museum with a small surrounding community. But I don't know whether the museum is still open to the public after Russia's takeover of Crimea in 2014?

Pete