Submarine & Other Matters

The Indian K-4 SLBM (under testing) may, with a lightweight warhead, reach most of China, but this is only from launch points in the northern Bay of Bengal. Such predictable launch points, near land, are especially vulnerable to submarines - all partially Chinese manned - from nearby Bangladesh, Pakistan and from China itself. India sorely needs an SLBM with a range of 6,000 km to render its future SSBNs less vulnerable. (Diagram courtesy DRDO, H I Sutton, The Diplomat)

---

Following Indian submarine progress - Slow progress commissioning. of March 31, 2017 below are further comments from the same Anonymous.

On 1/4/17 2:31 AM Anonymous commented

"A number of things if I may add ( as the contributor anonymous :) )"

“1. Currently BrahMos is too big [at 700 mm diameter] to be fired from even 650 mm torpedo tubes. Range at 450 km initially while the eventual 800 km version will likely be considerably modified. One issue the IN I think still could face is in the realm of target tracking surveillance etc for effective use of the BrahMos as a land attack cruise missile (LACM). The Indian navy might need practice with networking of [Long Range Mission Planning?] “LRMPs etc to ensure 2 way link and updated target info for BrahMos and Nirbhay (subsonic can do TERCOM unlike supersonic missiles). Then they would be true force multipliers.”

“2. if I remember right Arihant has test fired K-4 ( whether to full range of 3500 km is questionable), however integration is still under progress apparently.”

[Wikipedia - In April 2016, it was reported that [a K-4] missile was successfully tested on 31 March 2016 from INS Arihant, 45 nautical miles away from Vishakhapatnam coast in Andhra Pradesh. The missile with a dummy payload was launched from the submarine in full operational configuration. The trial was carried out with the support of the personnel of Strategic Forces Command (SFC) and DRDO provided all the logistics. The missile was fired from 20-meter deep and covered more than 700 km before zeroing on the target with high accuracy reaching close to zero circular error probability (CEP).^{[13][16][17][18][19] ]}

“The YouTube video that is there in the public domain clearly shows Russian technical hand as the SLBM release resembles Russian launches uncannily.”

“3. INS Aridhaman will carry 8 K-4 missiles and will in all probability be in excess of 8,000 tons submerged. There is satellite picture of shipbuilding center Vishakhapatnam that shows a clear outline of a docked submarine. The length in excess of 100 m could be a strong hint that it could be the Aridhaman.” I will refrain from posting the link” [Pete has added this already published in early 2015 satellite photo of a docked small SSBN size at Vishakhapatnam. Unclear if the small SSBN is Arihant or Aridhaman!].

4. “Project 75i is in limbo as the strategic partnership issue apparently is not yet fixed at the policy level. TKMS with its Type 214 or even 209Mod would not be a bad choice and their PEMFC AIP is quite good. [With Manohar Parrikar abruptly departing his Defence Minister job on 13 March 2017], this area might go cooler. This is while [new Defence Minister (since 13 March 2017) Arun Jaitley] settles in to review this vexing strategic partnership issue... Apparently there are two differing opinions in the MoD bureaucracy. Nuclear subs with sufficient speed, diving ability and silent ops features might even clip [cancel] the need for [Project 75i] multiple ocean going AIP SSKs.

5. "PS: One theory I am recently liking to think about is that India could be going for a universal SSGN/SSBN. you might remember my comment on the validity of difference between the SSBN and SSN any longer. If the Russians help is going to be lukewarm in the future, a dual role. My personal opinion is a 3 tier sub solution of small subs ala type 210, AIP SSKs and SSBN/GN would be needed.”

Anonymous and Pete

Below Anonymous has constructed a hypothetical Table and Figure for situations involving lead-acid batteries (LABs).

Later this week (probably on April 5 and 7) Pete will publish Tables and Figures involving AIP and LIBs which Anonymous constructed.

By Friday this will amount to three articles which I will run together. This is noting that the blog publishing capacity does not appear technically able to publish 4 or 5 high capacity tables/figures in a stable way.

Table 1 (below) - Routines over 24 hours for a LAB-submarine:

- "Time/Snorting" The four coloured rows represent: 2 hours (in green) to snort at night -

when it is a dark night. Then 1 hour of snorting (in green) when it is still a dark night.

Purple represents fully submerged operation on LABs.

- The row "Shift" represents a three shift work system

In this system, each shift of submariners works for 6 hours then rests for 12 hours.

(red = shift A, yellow = shift B and blue = shift C)

Time/ Snor ting	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18- 24
00- 06
06- 12
12- 18
Shift

TheGreen Snorting timesin Table 1 (above) coincide pictorally (as closely as I can get them!) with the times in Figure 1 below).

MW
10.05
10.00
9.75
9.50
9.25
9.00
8.75
8.50
8.25
8.00
7.75
7.50
7.25
7.00
6.75
6.50
time	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17

Figure 1 (above) represents a LAB capacity of 10MW.

- For a LAB an average discharge depth might be down 35%. [Discharge depth means

ratio of discharged capacity to capacity of batteries. A discharge depth of 35% means that

35% of energy of battery is released. In LABs, a deep discharge depth such as 70% would

cause irreversible damage to the batteries. For LIBs a deep discharge depth may be as

far down as 90%]

- Just before the first recharge, high speed performance is limited by the shortage of

capacity of the LABs. Timing of snorting will be affected by large waves or storms

[Pete Comment - The need for greater flexibility in snorting times is a major reason why

Japan has developed snorkel generation equipment for higher "sea states" = larger waves

or more severe storms. Such a new snorkel may be included in 29SS, the first submarine of

a new class after the Soryu].

Anonymous and Pete

It would appear that supplying regional navies with Type 209s and/or 214s (and variants) makes the Mediterranean-Red Sea TKMS’s most lucrative market. TKMS’ competition have their work cut out breaking into this German near monopoly.

As has been recounted before in Submarine Matters TKMS' possession of probably the most advanced operationalair independent propulsion (AIP) technology may be TKMS' main marketing advantage.

Conventional diesel-electric submarines perform especially well in littoral-shallow seas and narrows. The Mediterranean and Red Seas are also target rich environments for electronic monitoring using conventional subs (which at 2,000 tons or less are small by nuclear submarine standards).

Arguably Israel is the most powerfulregional submarine navy - with the help of:

3 x non-AIP Dolphin 1s (TKMS Type 209 variants), and

2 x advanced AIP Dolphin 2s (Type 214 variants). A third Dolphin 2 is due to be commissioned in 2019.

It is the "Popeye Turbo" nuclear missiles the Dolphins carry that make Israel’s submarine force the most powerful.

On sheer numbers of submarines Turkey might have been considered most powerful, with:

6 x Ay class (40+ years old, maybe all inactive) Type 209s

4 x Preveze class, Type 209s

4 x Gür class, Type 209s, and

6 x Reis class, Type 214s to be built in Turkey.

But unlike Israel Turkey only has conventional missiles and other conventional weapons on its subs.

Not to be outdone Turkey’s near opponent, Greece, has;

3 x Glavkos class, Type 209s

3 x Poseidon class, Type 209s

1 x Okeanos class, a unique Type 209 fitted with AIP!

4 x Papanikolis class, Type 214s with AIP

TKMS is now building 4 x Type 209s for Egypt(suspicious of all). Egypt (different site) has just recieved its first Type 209 built at TKMS-HDW’s Kiel shipyard. The 209s will replace the Egyptian Navy’s four elderly Soviet/Chinese built Romeo class vessels which were delivered in 1983/84.

Three more 209s are on order. Unlike Turkey’s and Israel’s latest submarines Egyptian subs lack AIP.

Is Egypt looking for submarine owner prestige or do its submarines have useful missions? “The Egyptian military saidthe vessel will be used to protect Egypt’s national security, protect its economic interests and ensure safe and free navigation of the Suez Canal and other regions. According to a statement by the Egyptian military, the vessels have a range of 11 000 nautical miles...”

Electronic intelligence gathering and watching opponents' submarines (Russians leaving Tartus or Israeli missile Dolphins leaving Haifa?) might be added.

TKMS submarine central. Part of the Med and all of the Red Seas. (Map courtesy World Atlas).

---

A November 2016 Youtube of the re-equipping of Egypt's Navy:

- 43 seconds in is one of the 2 x DCNS designed and built Mistrals that Egypt bought (likely helped
by US aid money)

- 48 seconds in is a shot of Egypt's first Type 209 sub.

- 2:30 Egypt ordered a frigate from DCNS

- 2:42 the "aging [Romeo] submarine fleet is being replaced"

- 3:00 the main mention of the DCNS Mistrals and shot of the helicopter airwing.

Pete

In Part 1: LABs: Hypothetical Snorting times, Crew shifts & Battery discharge schedules of April 3, 2017 Anonymous illustrated a submarine operating on Lead-acid batteries (LABs) charged by diesels only. The mission might perhaps be patrolling a SOSUS line between Guam and towards norther Luzon and back.

This mission could be described as medium-dangerous. The main threats could well be Chinese sensors and weapons on many platforms (regular maritime patrol aircraft (MPAs), SSKs, SSNs, regular surface ship patrols, satellites, perhaps large UAVs). If the Chinese are really organised they may have strung their own SOSUS arrays along and/or across, our friendly submarine's path.

The friendly submarine's response may be greater discretion, in part achieved by some reliance on AIP to evade the fortunately regular Chinese MPA and surface ship patrols. Fuel-cell (FC) AIP was selected over other types because it may be more efficient if it (a usually gradual chemical reaction) can be prepared a few hours in advance of use.

Using FC-AIP, in grey on Table 2 and Figure 2 below, negates the need for two, relatively noisy, diesel snorts per 24 hours. Only 1 x 2 hour snort at night is required, perhaps 7 hours per day for several 16 days. A reserve of AIP propellants is retained for emergencies (maybe 5 days of use).

Table 2 (below) represents:

- the times, over a 24 hour period, for operation on LABs (in purple), snorting (green) and

FC-AIP (grey)

- in the final row, the Three Crew Shift Working system for FC-AIP/LABs-submarine. In

three shift working system, submariners work for 6 hours and rests for 12 hours. (red

= shift A, yellow = shift B, blue = shift C)

time	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
18-24
00-06
06-12
12-18
Shift

MW
10.05
10.00
9.75
9.50
9.25
9.00
8.75
8.50
8.25
8.00
7.75
7.50
7.25
7.00
6.75
6.50
time	18	19	20	21	22	23	24	01	02	03	04	05	06	07	08	09	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17

Figure 2 (above) Represents electrical chage or capacity changes over time for this friendly FC-AIP/LABs-submarine (with 3 working shifts working). The charge is at its lowest (6 to 7 MW) immediately before the 2 hours of snorting, which restores charge/capacity to 10 MW, followed by 7 hours on AIP.

Thanks very much to Anonymous.

While Australia is in the design phase of a revolutionary submarine class
it may pay to avoid the pitfalls of the past.

The following is an edited version of a very interesting and much longer Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter (APDR) articleby James Harrap, REFLECTIONS OF A COLLINS SUBMARINE CAPTAIN written in Perth, published May 4, 2012.

In 2012 James was leaving the RAN “...having completed almost 20 years in the Royal Australian Navy, 15 of them as part of the submarine force, culminating in Command of submarines HMAS WALLER and HMAS COLLINS.

[THE GOOD]

"Military and naval capability is not, as many believe, resident only in the specifications of the hardware employed. Capability is a much more complex equation depending on: weapons, equipment, personnel, communications, command infrastructure, training and experience to name but a few.

Despite the problems I [will highlight below] our submarines deliver a significant capability and that this is because of the whole package, not just the platform but all other components as well. This could not happen without a solid commitment and strong leadership by government and the most senior levels of defence to sustain the capability.

[THE BAD]

Submarines are highly complicated machines and being a submariner has always required a skilled blend of operator/technician unique within naval service; but the Collins Class has taken the technical arguments to a whole new level. The planned maintenance requirements are onerous enough but the constant stream of defects and operation control limitations makes getting to sea difficult, staying at sea harder and fighting the enemy a luxury only available once the first two have been overcome. The submarines have maintained an operational capability for most of the past 15 years, but that is often despite many aspects of the submarine’s design rather than because of it.

[AND JUST PART OF THE UGLY]

“Lack of available stores inventory, increased equipment failure rates and submarines living with reduced capability is something I expect will persist for the remaining life of the [Collins] Class.

... The seagoing workforce currently consists of three submarine crews with a desire to stand up a fourth as soon as practicable, each crew consists of about 60 officers and sailors of various skill sets and experience levels.

... Skills shortages here also impact on submarine maintenance schedules, work quality, availability and ultimately capability.

Some components of the submarine are either not able to be changed or to do so would carry a prohibitive mix of risk and cost. The Collins Class has many components that we are simply stuck with for the life of the platform. For example the diesel generators fit into this category because of their size; unfortunately they are quite possibly the least reliable diesel engines ever built. They have been problematic throughout the life of the class and, despite some design modifications and improvements, are only kept running by ingenuity and sheer determination of the crews at sea and supporting contractors alongside. Because of components and immutable design issues such as these, Collins has a finite service life.

numerous advances have occurred in batteries, electric motors, air-independent propulsion, sonars and electro-optics – all of which have revolutionised submarine design even further...most advances can’t be retrofitted and the boat will most likely be so technically obsolete by 2022 that the credibility of the capability it offers will be seriously eroded.

China continues to build submarines at a rate unmatched anywhere in the world whilst the quality and capability of the Chinese submarine fleet increases faster than the nation’s GDP.

I don’t believe that the Collins Class are sustainable in the long term and many of the expensive upgrade plans which have been proposed would be throwing good money after bad. Though sustaining what we currently have is essential until we can get a replacement class of submarine commissioned.

Lack of platform reliability is the single most limiting factor for the Collins Class, let’s never repeat that mistake.”

See the whole ASIA-PACIFIC DEFENCE REPORTER ARTICLEby James Harrap.

James Harrap (Photo courtesy Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter)

---

COMMENT/QUESTIONS

1. Could constructing the Collins better in Adelaide have made a difference?

2. Can their propulsion systems ever be fixed effectively?

3. Was ASC industrial relations, unions, major issues during the Collins construction years or are strikes a more recent ASC phenomenon?

Pete

In Two Types of Japanese Lithium-ion Batteries Being Considered (by the Japanese Navy (JMSDF)) of February 17, 2017, the two types were:

- “NCA” that is Lithium nickel cobalt aluminium oxide ( LiNiCoAlO₂) LIBs made by GS Yuasa. For main traits of NCA scroll quarter way down at. The Japanese Navy will use NCA-type batteries. Retired Japanese submarine Admiral Kobayashi advised that for mobile operations, NCA batteries and diesel may be ideal.

and

- “LTO” that is Lithium-titanate ( Li₄Ti₅O₁₂ ) LIBs made by Toshiba. For main traits of LTO scroll a third way down at. Kobayashi believes LTO types were offered to Australia for its SEA 1000, Future Submarine proposal. An ambush submarine would operate better on fuel cells, LTO and diesel.

Figure 3 (below) illustrates the time (the horizontal axis over 24 hours) and (vertical axis as MW) electrical charge/capacity changes for various types of LIB arrangements, including :

- (A) 672 LIB-NCAs batteries in the submarine. These have a recharge life of 500 cycles

- (B) rather than FC-AIP, Stirling AIP+480 NCAs, (will be considered in Part 3) and

- (C) 480 LTOs 7000 to 15,000 cycles

The operational needs of the submarine and the number of recharge cycles (that is, the frequency of snorts) of the 3 different arrangements over a 24 hour period.

51
50
49
48
47
46
45				(A) 672 NCAs
44
43
42
41					NCAs
40
39
38
37
36
35
34
33
32
31
30-				(B) Stirling AIP+480 NCAs
29
28
27
26
25
24
23
22
29
28
27
26
25
24
23				(C) 480 LTOs
22
21
time	18	20	22	00	02	04	06	08	10	12	14	16	18	20	22	00	02	04	06	08	10	15	16	17

A big thanks to Anonymous.

Indonesia's new sub KRI Nagapasa- with Pennant Number 403.

It is an Improved Chang Bogo (Type 209 variant).

---

Hi Donors

I've just emailed Submarine Matters' April 2017 Report: Indonesian Sub Buys a Puzzle out to you, as a WORD attachment.

Please check your spam bin if you don't see it in your IN box.

Regards

Pete

Director

Submarine Matters International

The Carl Vinson Group's display of military hardware is hopefully increasing the pressure on China to be more creative in restraining North Korea's nuclear and missile test march toward nuclear blackmail of:

- South Korea

- Japan

- US forces in the region, and

- (I hope not) other regional country targets.

Military Hardware

Near North Korea (NK) the Carl Vinson carrier group, to which Japanese destroyers have been added, is an interesting development which prompts many questions.

The Carl Vinson Group probably/currently consists of Arleigh Burke Destroyer Squadron 1 (USS Stockdale, USS Sterett, USS Gridley,USS Higgins, USS Benfold andUSS Russell.) It also may consist of destroyers USS USS Michael Murphy,USS Wayne E. Meyer and missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain.

One SSN or two (with Tomahawk land attack missiles) would normally accompany the Carl Vinson Group. To enhance the option of a first or second strike of Tomahawk SLCMs onto NK targets a US Ohio SSGN might also be on hand in the region. Submarine fired Tomahawks all have the advantage of a greater element of surprise because they can emerge from unexpected undersea launch points.

US B-2 stealth bombers and F-22s could also use stealth early on to "take out" NK anti-air and other key facilities.

The aircraft on Carl Vinson itself and destroyer launching Tomahawks would be better suited as follow on launch platforms for a wide range of targets that no longer are defended by radar and SAMs.

I assume the Japanese destroyers (perhaps Atago and/or Kongo Aegis SM-3 classes) are not just involved in “joint drills”, or symbolic power projection. The US cruisers and destroyers in the Carl Vinson Group and the Japanese destroyers are likely Aegis SM-3 (?) equipped. This would make them important, mobile, Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) platforms that could participate in shooting down NK missiles.

How China and NK react are crucial issues.

1. Even though China may see NK as a problem child does China still think NK is valuable as a

buffer zone preventing SK and US ground forces advancing north to the Chinese border?

2. If so how might China react to the current US and Japanese naval actions?

3. If NK fires even test missiles could South Korea (SK), the US or Japan shooting them down

indicate to NK that NKs nuclear missiles might be useless in future.

4. Might such percieved NK missile ineffectivenes tempt NK use nuclear tipped missiles first (on
less provocation) while they are still effective?

5. Alternatively iff US, SK and Japan fail to shoot down an NK test missile/missiles might this signal
to NK that NK nuclear tipped missiles probably would get through and be effective?

6. Might an NK approach of destroying ABM defences in SK using NK artillery or NK cruise

missiles decapitate SK/US ABMs including THAAD? and

7. Does NK have a chance that one of its ballistic missile submarines could move close enough to

the continental (48 States) US to fire an SLBM (say at San Francisco, LA or San Diego?).

Even North Korea's long tested Rodong (or Nodong) missiles have sufficient 1,500km range to reach all of Japan.

---

Highly relevant Youtube (dated 8-9 April 2017) about the Carl Vinson carrier group approaching the Koreas.

Pete

Australia is emerging as an alternative source of tech metals/rare earth elements including Lithium.

Yet it seems China is doing most of the investing in tech metals/rare earth elements in Australia, as economic amounts are discovered in Australia.

Most “tech metals” overlap with the more established term “rare earth elements”. ABC advises “There are 17 rare earth elements on the periodic table, falling into the heavy rare earths or light rare earths depending on their atomic weight." Tech metals are essential for making mobile phones, solar cells, large battery autonomous vehicles, submarine batteries? and large on-site batteries to store renewable energy (eg. solar, wind and hydro).

It is important economically and strategically that China is not the dominant supplier of tech metals “rare earth elements” to the Western world.

PHOTO: Vanadium "redox" flow battery, Vanadium, is a tech metal found in Australia (Photo courtesy Vanadium Australia).

---

Lithium, vanadium and cobalt are all available in Australia and useful for “redox flow batteries”.

Might such large batteries be used in South Australia to store renewable energy?

Melissa CHAN :) at 3:30 in the Youtube seems quite happy China runs the world rare earths supply!
---

China, already dominating international supplies from its own Chinese mines, should not have supply and pricing control over Australia's emerging "tech metal" rare earth element mines.

Pete

Following last week's articles (here, here and here) Anonymous continues representation of electricity discharge and generation using combinations of Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs), Lead-acid Batteries (LABs) and Air Independent Propulsion (AIP). An extra variable is use of Diesels on full or half power.

Tables 1 and 2 present extra comparative information.

Figure 4 (below) is the output of diesel generators for model submarines:

Diesels in LIBs-sub operate once every two-days (no operation on Day 2) using diesel on full power.

(a) LIBs + new diesel generator (GE), Power of new Diesel increases to 125% compare to old Diesel. This is noting LIBs require (or benefit from) more powerful Diesels.

(b) LIBs + full power Diesel,

C-rate of LABs is 0.2C. Output of each Diesel is 2 and 4M in half and full power, respectively.

(d) LABs + half power Diesel, Operation cycle of LABs-sub is once a day.

Grey represents no generation using Diesel;

Green represents Diesel generation;

Purple represents AIP generation;

Lower axis Figure 4 represents electricity discharge and generation according to which team of the 3-watch crew roster are on duty. Where:

- Red represents team 1;

- Yellow represents team 2;

- Blue represents team 3;

Figure 4

8

6

4		Snorkeling/Diesel				(a) LIBs+new Diesel (day 1 of 2 days)
		Snorkeling/Diesel
2	Discharge				Discharge to day 3, 20:00
	Discharge				Discharge to day 3, 20:00
0

8

6

4						(b) LIBs +full power Diesel (day 1 of 2 days)
		Snorkeling/Diesel
2	Discharge	Snorkeling/Diesel				Discharge to day 3, 20:00
	Discharge					Discharge to day 3, 20:00
0

8

6

4						(c) LABs + half power Diesel + AIP (every day)

2	Discharge	Snorkeling/Diesel									Discharge
				AIP mode (240kW)

0

8

6

4						(d)LABs + half power Diesel (every day)

2	Discharge	Snorkeling/Diesel		Discharge							Snorkeling /Diesel	Discharge
	Discharge	Snorkeling/Diesel		Discharge							Snorkeling /Diesel	Discharge
0
MW
time	19	20	21	22		23	00	01	02	03	04	05	06

Table 1 - Performances of models

Model	Indiscretion ratio, IR [1] %	Submerge at max speed [2] h	Capacity of battery MW	Output of Diesel [3] MW	Rotation of Diesel rpm	C-rate
Model	Indiscretion ratio, IR [1] %	Submerge at max speed [2] h	Capacity of battery MW	Output of Diesel [3] MW	Rotation of Diesel rpm	Current status	Limit [4]
LIBs + new Diesel	5.2	10	50	5	1200	0.1	1
LIBs + full power Diesel	6.3	10	50	4	1200	0.08	1
LABs + half power Diesel AIP	8.3	1	10	2	600	0.2	0.4
LABs + half power Diesel	12.5	1	10	2	600	0.2	0.4

[1] LIBs, IR=operation time (green)/48 x 100; LABs, IR= green/24 x100.

[2] Max speed is 18 knots; Energy consumptions are 4.5 and 40.5MW for LABs and LIBs,

respectively.

[3] Data is total output of 2 Diesels. Model sub is equipped with 2 Diesels operating

simultaneously.

[4] C-rate of LIBs is general data. Value of LABs is for high speed charge/discharge rate.

Table 2 - Important factors

Term	Discussion	LAB	LIB
C-rate	As C-rate of LAB is small (0.1C, 0.2C) and capacity is low, C-rate dominates charge/discharge rate. Higher C-rate (0.4, 0.5C) is possible, but, it shortens life of LAB. Half power of Diesel can satisfy C-rate of 0.2C.	Dominative	-
Output of Diesel	As C-rate of LIB is large (0.5C, 1C) and capacity is high, output of Diesel dominates charge/discharge rate. To get low indiscretion ratio, output of Diesel needs to be increased. In Fig.4 (a), C-rate is only 0.1C. Higher rotation of Diesel or increase of Diesels is possible measure, but it increases noise or vibration.	-	Dominative
Snorkel capacity	To realize high performance of LIBs, improvement of Diesel will be conducted within framework of snorkel system capacity to provide air (oxygen) to Diesel. To achieve C-rate of 1 for LIBs, Diesel requires 10 times larger amount of oxygen from snorkel system. As increasing the flow rate ten times is difficult (max. two- or three-fold increases?), C-rate of 1 is difficult to achieve (max 02-0.3?).	-	Dominative
Propulsion motor	To achieve high speed performance by LIBs, improvement of propulsion motor is required.	-	Important
Conclusion	To realize high performance submarine equipped with LIBs, comprehensive improvement of power system including Diesel, snorkel system and propulsion motors as well as development of LIBs are required. Also, improvement and establishment of peripheral technologies including safety system and further reduction of noise/vibration are needed.

Anonymous

I’ve been doing a bit of research on Japanese and US submarine building industries.

Japan has built submarines almost uninterrupted since 1906. That interruption occurring 1945-1957 when Japan was devastated by bombs and a US submarine blockade.

Japan has two large submarine building companies:

- the conglomerate Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) (see a MHI built submarine), and

- Kawasaki Shipbuilding Corporation (KSC) of the KHI conglomerate, See a Kawasaki submarine website.

They form a submarine building duopoly in the port city of Kobe, with each company continuous building one submarine every two years with launches occurring alternatly and rigidly every October to December. For the on-time, on-budget, schedule see the SORYU-Oyashio TABLE.

The structure of Japanese shipbuilding unions is quite complex, starting with likely extinct Japanese shipbuilding union "Zenzosen". Ztev Konrad advises (comments 25/4/17 8:12 AM below) from Wikipedia "Zenzōsen [the All Japan Shipbuilding and Engineering Union] is a federation of individual, enterprise-level unions - the normal model of trades unionism in Japan. It was initially the dominant union in the Japanese shipbuilding industry, but was [dissolved on September 9, 2016] eventually eclipsed by the Jūki Rōren (Japanese Federation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Workers' Unions). Zenzōsen was the more militant of the two unions, and was more strongly represented at the smaller shipyards. Zenzōsen was affiliated to the Japanese Socialist Party."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenz%C5%8Dsen "Pete was on the right track with likely company unions dominating the sub shipyards."

In that direction S advises (comments 25/4/17 9:24 PM) that there are two worker’s unions (KHI Worker’s Union, Federation of Worker’s Union of the KHI Group of companies). The KHI Worker’s Union consists of 9 branches. Workers of KHI Kobe Shipyard belong to KHI Kobe branch.

S continues that information on MHI workers’s unions is not clear. Workers of MHI's Kobe Shipyard belong to the MHI Kobe Shipbuilding Branch.

The workers’s unions of KHI and MHI both belong to the Japanese Federation of Basic Industry Worker’s Union (JBU). JBU is an industrial union confederation of 400 worker’s unions with 251,965 members (source is Japanese wikipedia)."

I am guessing the submarine building workforces of MHI and KSC are around 1,000 each (2,000 total). Perhaps the Japanese Ministry of Defense and ATLA (a sub example) have 1,000 staff total dedicated to submarine research, contracts, production and availability?

Along with the US Japan might be the most efficient submarine builder in the world. This comes from:

1. duopoly conditions (a government can always favour the competing company)

2. continuous build (Japan building one SSK every year and the US building 1 to 2 SSNs)

3. long runs of submarines with relatively few changes eg. few differences between the 10 Soryu
Mk. 1s (see TABLE) and between the first 39! Los AngelesSSNs, and

4, only building subs for one customer (US or Japanese) in their own navies.

Or perhaps other counties are more efficient by other measures such as:
- country A achieving greater economies of scale, through production for foreigners, than A's
domestic demand can provide, or
- raising foreign exchange through sales to foreign customers.

It takes the large, wealthy US economy to build an SSN or two each year (and eventually one Columbia class SSBN as well). The USSR used to churn out nuclear submarines at that rate but this was a major contributor to the ruination of its economy. China still cannot afford it or is dissatisfied with its SSNs' quality, prefering to mass produce SSKs instead.

A Japanese Soryu submarine being launched, with much fanfare, in Kobe.

---

A Virginia class SSN under construction at Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc - Newport News. Note the propulsor about a mile back, in the distance :)

---

Pete

On April 13, 2017 Submarine Matters published an article, US & Japanese ABM - BMD forces slowly approaching North Korea, which stated:

"Submarine-wise one SSN or two (with Tomahawk land attack missiles) would normally accompany the Carl Vinson Group. To enhance the option of a first or second strike of Tomahawk SLCMs onto NK targets a US Ohio SSGN might also be on hand in the region. Submarine fired Tomahawks all have the advantage of a greater element of surprise because they can emerge from unexpected undersea launch points."

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

This suspicion was confirmed 11 days later on April 24-25, 2017 when Fox News reported:

"The USS Michigan, a nuclear powered Ohio class submarine will pull into the South Korean port of Busan for a hull check in the coming hours, military sources confirmed Monday to Fox News...The USS Michigan is one of four Ohio-class guided-missile submarines, originally designed to launch nuclear missiles, that were converted between 2003 and 2007 to be able to fire Tomahawk cruise missiles....The USS Florida (SSGN 728) was converted in August 2003, the USS Michigan (SSGN 727) in October 2004, the USS Ohio (SSGN 726) in December 2005, and the USS Georgia (SSGN 729) in December 2007."

A US Ohio class SSGN is very large (around 17,000 tons (surfaced) and 19,000 tons (submerged)). Its size can be judged from how small the crew look standing on the hull.
Can astute readers spot the (non-Asia Pacific) location?

---

Pete

Anonymous has kindly provided the following figure and description. This is in the context of Anonymous's previous article Submarine electricity discharge & generation using combinations of Diesels, LIBs, LABs & AIP of April 20, 2017.

Figure 5 Relationship between output of a Diesel generator (DE) and Indiscretion Ratio (IR) during a LIB submarine’s patrol.

---

The Vertical axis (above) is output of the is in kW.

The Horizontal axis is Indiscretion Ratio (IR) expressed as:

time for snorting /time for snorking + time for operating AIP or batteries) x 100

Power required (PT) is: Propulsion Load (PL= 60kW) and Hotel Load (HL)

Blue, PT=250kW (HL=190kW) based on current submarine; red, PT=300kW(HL=240kW); green, PT=350kW (HL=290kW); violet, PL=400kW(HL=350kW). IR=indiscretion ratio.

With the combat system requiring large amounts of electricity, Lead-acid Batteries (LABs) frequently cannot satisfy the electrical requirement because of its poor capacity. As a result, the capability of the sonar system of a LAB submarine is inferior to that of an SSN.

In contrast, Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) can meet the high electical requirements. Utilising higher kW DEs, LIBs can supply more electricity for the HL, remembering that the PL also requires large amounts of electricity in a large conventional submarine.

If the output of DE is 6000kW within the framework of snorting ability, there is an excellent Indiscretion Ration of 6.25% where expected PL is 400kW and HL is 350kW..

A well-developed LIB-submarine has the following advantages:

i) a reduction in indiscretion ratio,

ii) improvement of high speed performance, and

iii) enhancement of sensors and processing systems.

Anonymous

In “Japan selling its P-1 and C-2 military aircraft to NZ at low prices?” of January 110, 2017 I wrote that:

“I think New Zealand (NZ) plays it safe and traditional in its military hardware buying patterns. This will work against Japan's: P-1 MPAs. Instead, I think NZ buying
4 x P-8 Poseidon MPAs is more likely.”

The prediction of 4 x P-8s seems to be working out.

I don’t know if the US Government ordinarily publishes documents like this on the US Government’s decision to clear the possible sale to New Zealand of 4 x P-8 PoseidonMPAs.

New Zealand has not yet decided which MPA it will buy in coming years given there are competing offers of the Airbus DS C295 and Japanese Kawasaki P-1.

New Zealand sees the P-8 as expensive and seems to want to bargain down the price. One way to do this is for NZ to buy the P-8s with a bargain from the same company (Boeing) on long range transport/VIP aircraft. The Royal NZ Air Force (RNZAF) is currently using 2 x Boeing 757s due for replacement in 2020.

As commentedon 12/1/17 2:25 PM [in a discussion of NZ Hercules replacement that may also apply to 757 replacement] "There may be an essential requirement for NZ's Transport aircraft to have the safe range to fly from Christchurch (NZ) to NZ's Scott (Antarctic) Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Baseand Back unrefueled....So a range of at least 8,000 km and probably 9,000 km or more (headwinds, circling times, need to fly to alternate airports/ice landing zones) might be necessary."

So a NZ purchase from Boeing–US may be in a package of:

- 4 x P-8s (for delivery in 2026) with at least

- 2 Boeing price reduced (new or used) 777-200ERs(for delivery earlier in 2021).

The Australian Air Force has bought P-8s (note the little Kangaroo decal on the P-8) increasing the likelyhood ally and neighbour New Zealand will do likewise (with a Kiwi decal). (Photo courtesy Boeing via Australian Aviation magazine).

---

One of RNZAF's two transport/VIP 757s on ice in Antarctica - in need of replacing around 2020. (Photo courtesy NZ military).

---

Pete

Thailand’s ruling military junta has been talking about the pending Chinese built submarine purchase for just under two years. However the latest media coverage appears to have been whipped up by the Thai Army in part to remind the Thai Navy of the Army's dominance in the junta-government.

Thailand’s most influential English language newspaper, the Bangkok Post, reports Army General (“retired”) Prayut, who is also the Prime Minister, expressed disapproval of the Navy's openness. He accused the Navy of divulging too many details of the Thai Government's submarine decision-making in the Navy’s early May 2017 press briefing on the 3 Chinese S26T submarinesfor Thailand project.

“According to the prime minister, no other country has ever had to disclose this much information about military hardware procurement as Thailand just did.” This is hardly correct. The US government releases 1000s of pages of detailed costs and technical details for acquisition and building its much more sensitive nuclear submarines (SSNs, SSGNs and SSBNs).

The Army rulers of Thailand may also wish to distance themselves from the public criticism and accusations of corruption the Navy is receiving over the pending submarine purchase.

The Thai Army see themselves as the elite saviours of Thailand when civilian governments fail to govern effectively – which the Army sees as occurring often - gauged by the number of Army coups in Thailand. The Washington Postreports that Thailand has had 11 + (1 in 2014) = 12 successful coups and 7 attempted coups since 1932.

The Thai Navy may see submarines as high priced assets (costing US$ 1 Billion total) that signify the Navy’s importance. The subs could one day be seen as replacing the basically unused Thai carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet as symbols of prestige.

But who can legitimately judge Thailand? The US has been critical of the latest Thai coup (of 2014) and the US has frozen just under US$5 million aid money to Thailand. With an unscrupulous property developer for a President the US can hardly claim moral exceptionalism or superiority over any country the US criticizes.

China’s mass productions of submarines and part Chinese government funded price reductions allows China to produce submarine cheap enough for non-wealthy governments, like Bangladesh, Pakistan and Thailand to buy. But it is in Chinese political influence over these countries and extra downstream costs (like spares, maintenance and overhaul) that reaps benefits for China.

Anonymous has located interesting comments in http://www.bbc.com/thai/thailand-39754830that:

"The “submarines from China are inferior to submarines competing in almost every dimension."

- The size of Taiwan's Yuan class variant S26T hull will be too big. It is designed for a minimum of depth of 60 meters, while the average depth of the Gulf of Thailand is 25 to 40 meters.

- the “speed and operating distance of the Chinese submarines is 18 knots maximum for only 10 minutes and operating distance of only 8,000 miles. While other subs of other nations have maximum speeds greater than 20 knots for approximately one hour and operating distances of more than 10,000 miles.

- Chinese submarine operational lives are only 25 years - less than the 40 years lives of subs from other nations.

- Along with Chinese submarines being lower priced than competitors comes questions whether the quality of Chinese subs is also low.

In terms of possible usefulness of Thailand's future submarines, according to the esteemed South Pacific island publication, coconuts.co:

“Thailand is not involved in disputes with China and other Southeast Asian countries over the South China Sea but it does have a dispute with Cambodia over their maritime border in a gas-rich part of the Gulf of Thailand." Thailand also has maritime borders in the Indian Ocean - an Ocean with more usefully deeper waters than the too shallow waters of the Gulf of Thailand.

Above and below are images of the Thai S26T submarine - future variant of the Yuan class.

By Pete and Anonymous

HMAS Collins launch in August 1993. In terms of industrial relations the construction was a success.

-----

Hi Donors

I've just emailed Submarine Matters May 2017 Report The Union and Australian Submarine Projects out to you, as a WORD attachment. Please check your spam bin if you don't see it in your IN box.

Leadin to report:

"Submarine construction is a vast human enterprise with many aspects. One aspect is labour, the contribution of workers, who build the submarines. Australia has shipbuilding unions, including the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union (AMWU), that played a key role in the Collins’ submarine construction project. From the early 1980s Australian shipbuilding unions exhibited a high level of cooperation with the Australian government on the project. Things..."

For the whole report (and 11 future reports) please donate A$50 using the Donate Button on the right sidebar of Submarine Matters.

Regards

Peter Coates
Director

Submarine Matters International

At work at the NSA where cyber-defensive software is assessed and developed and also malware.

---

Combining the current international ransomware scare and nuclear missile submarines (SSBNs) is the following:

GLOBAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

Graham Vanbergenfor Canada based Global Research, May 14, 2017 reportsin part:

“British Nuclear Submarines, Microsoft and That Ransomware Attack”

[The BBC has reported that the recent ransomware attack hit 100 countries. Cyber-security firm Avast said it had seen 75,000 cases of the ransomware worm– known as ‘WannaCry’ and variants of that name – around the world. The ransomware worm parasitically spreads by itself between computers with alarming speed and effectiveness. So fast, that this cyber-attack had the potential to hit critical infrastructure that supports human life and disable it.] “Microsoft was[and is] the only fully vulnerable operating system...”

"“Who are culprits? The BBC blame hackers known as ‘The Shadow Brokers’, who made it freely available in April, saying it was a “protest” about US President Donald Trump... The NSA in America lost all of these hacking tools, specifically the one that caused this attack and subsequent mayhem across the world. The hackers exploited a piece of NSA code known as “Eternal Blue.”...This extraordinary collection, which amounts to more than several hundred million lines of code, gives its possessor the entire hacking capacity of the CIA. The archive appears to have been circulated among former U.S. government hackers and contractors in an unauthorized manner, one of whom has provided WikiLeaks with portions of the archive.”

From a 2008 article by The Registerreported:

“[Britain’s Vanguard class SSBNs use Microsoft’s Windows for Submarines] The programme is called Submarine Command System Next Generation (SMCS NG), and uses varying numbers of standard multifunction consoles with two LCD screens, hooked up on an internal Ethernet network installed on each sub. Initial reports as the programme developed suggested that the OS in question would be Windows 2000, but those who have worked on it have since informed the Reg that in fact it is mostly based on XP.”

Windows were so chuffed at “Windows for Submarines” they even advertised the fact to the entire world (HERE)

“Windows for Submarines is the programme undertaken by the Royal Navy and BAE Systems to equip the nuclear-propelled and nuclear-armed warship fleet with a Windows-based command system. The transition to the Windows for Submarines command system on HMS Vigilant, a Trident nuclear missile submarine, was completed in just 18 days.”

PETE’S COMMENT

The ransomware used in this current crisis may have been adapted by well organised hacker networks from the almost decade old Stuxnet worm:

“Stuxnet functions by targeting machines using the Microsoft Windows operating system and networks...”

Stuxnet became most famous in 2010 for causing thousands of centrifuges (used for boosting levels of bomb-grade Uranium-235) to spin erratically and destructively at Natanz and other Iranian sites.

The three country organisations that may have Stuxnet were the US NSA and Israel’s Unit 8200 with Middle Eastern and Iranian targets in mind.

All developed countries have their NSA equivalents, including Russia (FSB-IT but mainly GRU-IT) and China (including PLA Unit 61398 within the broader PLA Third Department).

Pete

COMMENT

Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) for submarine use is not a Japanese monopoly. Other countries are developing LIBs for submarine, including European, South Korean, US, Russian, Indian and Chinese.

The world LIB development market is very complex with:

- major companies supplying batteries to other companies for resale

- various types of joint ventures between companies, and

- companies developing batteries for civilian uses (eg. cars) that also may decide to break into

the LIBs for submarine market.

Table of Submarine LAB/LIB suppliers

Company	Country	Lead-acid Batteries (LABs)	LIBs
GS Yuasa	Japan	LABs for Japanese Navy (“JMSDF”) only	Developed
Toshiba	Japan	None	Developed
Sunlight Systems	Greece	Major LAB producer	Developing
Saft	France	LAB producer.	“Investigating” use in Scorpenes
Kokam	S Korea	?	Developing
Arotech	USA	?	Developing
EnerSys	USA	Major LAB producer	?
Exide Technology	USA	Exide Technology is a major LAB producer that supplies LABs to other battery companies.	?
EverExceed	China	Major LAB producer. Listed as supplier to U206, U209, U212, U214, U209P, U210, Scorpène, Agosta, Sauro, Walrus, Kobben, Vastergotland. Eastern type subs: Romeo, Foxtrot, Kilo. “EverExceed” may be related to “EverSpring” (covered in a Submarine Matters article of February 2, 2016).	?
HBL Power Systems Ltd.	India	Major LAB producer	?

Anonymous located this Business Wire article of September 15, 2016 which is the main source for the information in the Table above:

More detail: EnerSys, EverExceed , Exide Technology, HBL Power Systems Ltd., and Sunlight Systems are the major lead-acid battery [LAB] vendors in the market.

Companies, such as GS Yuasa, Saft, Kokam, Arotech, and Toshiba, are aggressively developing Li-ion batteries [LIB] for submarines and investing in R&D to reduce the cost and match the LAB specifications for the submarines.

The report also states countries, such as Japan, China, and Russia, are focusing on the Li-ion battery technology for the submarines. Russia is also planning to develop Li-ion battery technology for Kalina submarines in collaboration with China.

Anonymous also provided more information on Exide Technologies in comments at 11/5/17 9:12 AM and 13/5/17 9:23 AM.

Anonymous and Pete

BACKGROUND

Originally TKMS broke a complacent Kockums' monopoly when Singapore ordered TKMS subs in November 2013. This was the first batch of 2 x TKMS Type 218SGs (covered bySubmarine Matters at the time).

By September 3, 2015 enough details emerged on the 218s to write quite a long Submarine Matters’ description.

On May 15-16, 2017 Singapore announced the order of 2 more 218s.

The first two 218SGs (in 2021-2022) will replace the two ex-Swedish subs, renamed RSS Chieftain and RSS Conqueror of the Singaporean Challenger class

The second batch of the 218s (in the mid 2020s) will replace two more modern ex-Swedish subs, renamed RSS Archer and RSS Swordsman, of the Archer class.

COMMENTS

Singapore has long maintained several advanced submarines to:

- work with nearby sensor arrays, surface and aircraft and allies to monitor activities of non-state

actors (Islamic terrorists, drug and arms smugglers, pirates etc)

- monitor Chinese SSNs and SSKs transiting the Malacca Strait

- protect the small city-state of Singapore against much larger neighbours (Malaysia, Indonesia and

Vietnam) that also own submarines, and

- for intelligence gathering (electronic and special forces, etc)

PROPULSION

Its interesting to guess what propulsion types the first and second batches of 218s will have.

AIP

All four 218s may feature more efficient, more available, Reformer fuel cell (FC)/Air Independent Propulsion (AIP). On this type of AIP see page 42. Spain’s Sener company may be still helping TKMS develop this AIP. Sener indicates http://www.revistanoticias.sener/en/news/aip-system-for-submarines/50/:

“To solve this problem, and given that the general market trend is to build ever larger submarines, SENER has partnered with ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS), the European leader in submarine construction, to develop an AIP based on the methanol reforming process, which allows the hydrogen needed to feed the fuel cell to be produced on board.”

Or the first two 218s may begin with existingHDW PEM fuel cell AIP and be later retrofitted with Reformer FC/AIP.

BATTERIES

German battery companies may be working with US EnerSys and/or General Atomics to develop more efficient and advanced Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) for the 218s. EnerSys supplies batteries for diesel-electric (batteries are essentiall day-to-day) and nuclear subs (for backup). General Atomics may be supplying the LIBs used by US Special Forces mini-subs.

DIESELS

The first two 218s may be fitted with MTU 16V396 SE (3.96 MW) diesels [1]. This would make it easier to retrofit more modern MTU 12V4000s. MTU 12V4000s may be fitted to the the second two 218s.

[1] In the spirit of some European companies sharing sensitive military equipment. "The beating hearts of [China's Yuan and Song submarines] are state-of-the-art diesel engines designed by MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH of Friedrichshafen, Germany."

A Type 218SG model first displayed at IMDEX ASIA in Singapore, May 19-21 2015.

---

The 218's X-plane tale (Courtesy Coffee and Bullets)

---

Pete

Nineteen people have been killed and more than 50 injured in the suspected terror attack on the Manchester Arena. The explosion happened just after the end of a pop concert by the US singer Ariana Grande, who is popular among children and teenagers.

Police say the blast - which unconfirmed reports from two unnamed US officials suggested had been carried out by a suicide bomber - occurred in the arena's foyer.

Prime Minister Theresa May has suspended election campaigning and will chair a meeting of the Cobra emergency committee. She called the explosion an "appalling terrorist attack", with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn describing it as a "terrible incident".

"The whole building shook," said Emma Johnson, who was waiting to pick up her children from the concert when it happened. "There was a blast and then a flash of fire afterwards. There were bodies everywhere."

COMMENT

Witnesses said that the attack appeared to involve the use of a nail bomb. Nail bombs (often also including nuts, bolts and ballbearings) are used to increase the destructive power of explosives, as the shrapnel increases the bomb’s ability to wound its victims.

The Manchester police are working on the assumption of terrorism. If so, it would be the worst act of terrorism in Britain since the "7/7 bombings" in 2005 on London Transport, which killed 52 people.

Ambulance after Manchester bombing (Photo courtesy Reuters).

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

Manchester's location (in red) in the UK. (Map courtesy Pinterest).

---

Pete

India's Submarine Project 75i reportedly in "limbo"

LABs: Hypothetical Snorting times, Crew shifts and Battery discharge schedules

Egypt, the Med & Red Seas - TKMS Submarine Lakes?

Part 2: FC-AIP is added to the LABs used in Part 1.

Was the main failing of the Collins submarines in their Construction?

Part 3 - three LIB Arrangements - Recharging and Snorting Cycles

April 2017 Report to Donors: Indonesian Sub Buys a Puzzle

US and Japanese BMD and Potential Strike naval forces approach North Korea

China's strategic dominance over "Tech Metals" - Rare Earth Elements.

Submarine electricity discharge & generation using combinations of Diesels, LIBs, LABs & AIP

Japan & US - No submarine building Unions? But the Most Efficient?

Submarine Matter's expectation of an Ohio class SSGN now confirmed

Figure 5 Relationship between output of DE and IR for a LIB-submarine on patrol.

SubMatt's Prediction of 4 x P-8s for New Zealand's MPA Buy Seems on Money

Thai Army versus Navy Controversy over the Chinese Submarine Purchase

May 2017 Donors Report - The Union and Australian Submarine Projects

Ransomeware Threat to SSBNs' Microsoft "Windows for Submarines"

Table of Developers of Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) for Submarine

Singapore’s submarines, particularly 218SG Propulsion

Manchester, Terrorism likely - Nail Bomb?