Submarine & Other Matters

Anonymous has kindly supplied the following details and Table. The following is necessarally speculative about the future TKMS-Norwegian Type 212CD propulsion characteristics as the 212CD may not be launched until around 2023. One of the innovative technologies for 212CD is adoption of metal hydride for hydrogen source. This is designed to achieve safer operation of the fuel cell (FC) AIP (see Table 1). A hydrogen cylinder is used in the current conventional FC AIP on the TKMS Type 214 and 212A.

But, in the new generation FC AIP, waste heatfrom the FC is effectively used to generate hydrogen. This should be more discrete.

Part of a prototype TKMS/tkMS and SENER methanol reforming FC AIP process. (Courtesy slide 26 of this SENER Presentation.)

---

TKMS and Spain’s SENER (private engineering and technology group) are developing methanol reforming FC which is safer than hydrogen or metal hydride FC AIP (for Type 214, 212A or future 212CD).

But emissions from methanol reformer FC of carbon dioxide against the ocean’s water pressure limits a submarine’s diving depth to around 200m. In contrast hydrogen or metal hydride FC (used on Type 214, 212A and maybe future 212CD) produces water which does not limit diving depth.

(Above and below) Type 212A submarine cutaway indicating where the LOx tanks and hydrogen cylinders are. They are outside the pressure hull for greater safety. (These cutaways all over web.)

The diesel section of a Type 212A uses an outer light hull (diameter 6.8m) and a pressure hull (ca.5.6m?). The two LOx cylinders are arranged above the pressure hull. The LOx cylinder are shock resistant. These cylinder also and have an insulated “adiabaticstructure” meaning they do not transfer heat to surroundings. This is totally different than if the LOx cylinders were within the pressure hull (as in a current 214) as they may effect the temperature within the hull.

The Type 212A is equipped with 9 feul cells (8 x 34kW, and 1 x 34kW (auxiliary FC)). These are superior to the 2 x 120kW on a Type 214.

The hull diameter (8.4m) of a Type 212CD will be significantly larger than a 214’s (6.3m) which has single hull structure. The 214 has 2 x MTU396 diesels.

In contrast 3 x MTU (396 or 4000?)diesels could be installed in a future Type 212CD especially if it uses Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) to achieve a higher charge rate[2]. Or 2 x MTUs could be installed on a 212CD (especially those that retain existing Lead-acid Batteries (LABs). A relatively low charge rate using 1 or 2 loud diesels running a longer time (to charge LABs) may be less discrete than 2 or 3 diesels running a shorter time to charge LIBs quickly [6].

So, a double hull will presumably be adopted for the diesel section of the future Type 212CD, as with the current Type 212A. This suggests hydride cylinders will be installed between the 212CD’s light and pressure hulls.

Table 1Estimated Location of Cylinders and Submarine

Cylinder	Location		In Diesel section	Submarine type
	Inside pressure hull [1]	Between light and pressure hulls [2]
Hydrogen cylinder	Yes	No	No	214
Hydrogen cylinder	N	Yes	Yes	212A
Metal hydride cylinder [3]	Yes	No	No	Future 214? 218SG, Dolphin 3
Metal hydride cylinder [3]	No	Yes	Yes	212CD?
LOx cylinder	Yes [4]	No	No	214
LOx cylinder	No	Yes [5]	Yes	212A, 212CD?

[1] Simple structure consists of single pressure hull.

[2] Complex structure consists of ligh and pressure hulls.

[3] Electrochemical reaction between oxygen and hydrogen generates electricity and heat in FC. Heat is transferred to metal hydride to generate hydrogen for FC. Metal hydride cylinder has adiabatic stucture.

[4] Cryogenic cylinder is used for oxygen storage located inside of pressure hull.

[5] This cryogenic cylinder is totally different from an ordinary LOx cylinder and is shock resistant to explosions (eg. depth charges) near the submarine.

[6] Three 12PA V200 SMDS with similar dimension to MTUs would likely be installed in the enlarged SAAB-Damen A26 single hull submarine design for the Netherlands Walrus replacement competition. The enlarged A26 design has a smaller diameter (of 8m) than 212CD submarine.

COMMENTS

Pete comments:

- Dutch Walrus replacement competition? An enlarged SAAB-Damen designed A26 (once called the
612) might be offered. Naval Group might possibly offer some design sharing Scorpene and

Australian Shortfin-Barracuda characteristics.

- Given the long trans-Atlantic distances a Walrus replacement would need to travel the Netherlands

may not want any type of AIP – AIP being of diminishing utility with distance and instead LIBs,

more than LABs, may stretch fully submerged travel.

- Western companies are interacting with China on methanol reformer fuel cell generator technology

for cars and trucks. Such technology is dual-use, China’s vast industrial base may easily reverse

engineer Western technology for submarine use.

MHalblaub kindly provided the following comments for the previous closely related Submarine Matters’ article:

“The Type 212A always had metal hydride storages for hydrogen.

Also I can't see a problem to use a methanol reformer and metal hydride storages together. I guess a reformer may outproduces most of the time the need of hydrogen so some kind of interim storage would be necessary.

The boat has its own hydrogen producing facility. So just methanol and oxygen is required for the fuel cells.”

Anonymous, Pete and MHalblaub.

See Singapore’s Straits Times, February 18, 2019 article

"Invincible, first of Singapore's biggest and most advanced submarines, launches in Germany"

at https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/singapores-first-type-218sg-submarine-launched-in-germany-named-invincible

This concerns Republic of Singapore "Ship" (RSS) Invincible - name allotted to the first of four TKMS 218SG's ordered by Singapore in 2013 and first launched in Germany on February 18, 2019.

Submarine Matters'coverage of the Type 218SG goes back to 2013 and 2015 (with specifications) with many other articles at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/search?q=218sg

Also see the wikipeadia entry quoting Submarine Matters at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invincible-class_submarine#cite_note-gentleseas-5

(Source Singaporean Ministry of Defence via Singapore's Straits Times February 18, 2019).

---

Tomorrow details on what Singapore's submarines do.

Pete

With February 18, 2019's launch of Singapore's first Invincible-class Type 218SG submarine I think it time to talk about some more general Singaporean alliance issues and some submarine aspects.

ALLIANCES

Singapore’s highly strategic geographical position (Map below) and political maturity means it is an integral member of the Western Alliance. Singapore is at one end of the Strait of Malacca choke-point and at the southern end of the South China Sea. So, despite its minute size, Singapore is a highly valued country in military, economic and intelligence terms. To top it off Singapore’s good command of English may make it the:

- the country in Southeast Asia most trusted by Fives Eyes (Japan, Germany and Israel might also
be associate members), and
- an associate member of the still loose US, Japan, Australia, India “Quadrilateral”
eg. a Singaporean frigate was at MALABAR 2007

Singapore is therefore a trusted owner of the (almost) most sensitive Western weapons:

- including the US tailor-made made Boeing F-15SG,

- In January 2019, Singapore announced its plan to buy a small number of F-35As for an evaluation
of capabilities and suitability before deciding on more F-35As to replace the aging F-16 fleet.
- Up to 4 x US Navy Littoral Combat Ships operate out of Singapore Harbour under US 7th Fleet,
Task Force 73 command.
- US nuclear submarines visit Singapore around every 2 years (eg. 2015 and 2017).
- Singapore has a close intelligence, including Special Forces, relationship with Israel
(given Israel, like Singapore, is a nervous member of a region of Muslim countries).
Both also face regional Islamic terrorism.

Singapore defense anxieties explain why it is the 5th highest defense spender, per capita, in the world.

SINGAPORE'S SUBMARINES

Germany’s TKMS has tailor-made Singapore's 218SG submarine with a more advanced than usual Atlas Elektronik Combat System as well as a special warm climate air independent propulsion (AIP) system. This is all highly sensitive and very expensive equipment.

Singapore has maintained a 4 submarine navy of Challenger class, part replaced by 2 x Archer class, for 22 years. As the first 2 x 218SGs are delivered/commissioned in 2021-2022 (see graphic) the remaining 2 Challengers will be retired. When the second tranche of 2 x 218SGs are commissioned in the mid-2020s the 2 x Archer class will be retired, thus forming an all 218SG force of 4. There are many tactical, logistical and safety advantages in having an all-the-same submarine force.

To prepare for the 218SGs Singapore has been given better access than usual to the Type 212A’s of the German Navy and I suspect access to Israel’s Dolphin 2 (AIP) submarines. This is given the Dolphin 2’s share very similar specifications and some tasks with the 218SG. While the Dolphin 2 has nuclear armed Tomahawk-like missiles (forget the "Popeye Turbo" cover...) the 218SG won’t have any, of course.

Model of TKMS Type 218SG taken at IMDEX ASIA, Singapore, May 19-21, 2015 (Photo of model courtesy Defense Studies blog)

---

SUBMARINE GEOGRAPHY

The islands and undersea rocks on the approaches (like the Singapore Strait) to the Strait of Malacca provide many places for experienced Singaporean submarine captains to sit, hiding, on the shallow seafloor. (Map courtesy welt-atlas).

- Air independent propulsion (AIP), that Singpore has heavily invested in, is a major tactical and

safety advantage, when hiding motionless.

- Note the reinforced hull bottom of the TKMS built Israeli Dolphin 2 - much like the 218SG,

I expect.

- In the Photo and (official) Youtube above can be seen the 218SG’s X plane rudder. The rudder is

ideal for tight turning and gentle maneuvering in the tight seafloor spaces, rocks and holes.

The shallows increase the likelihood of Singapore's subs colliding with rocks, seafloor, ships and with other subs. Submarine sonar for navigation is more than usually distorted in the shallows, so the Singaporean Navy's decades of experience is very important.

See What the 218SG is used for? (Part 2) which includes weapons details, tomorrow.

Pete

The most official 18 February 2019 indicator of what Singapore's new Invincible class Type 218SG submarine will be used for is less controversial non-state threats: terrorists, pirates, smugglers of arms, drugs, [slave-prostitutes] and WMDs.

But much more should be added (below) including Singaporean submarines defending against and monitoring Chinese, Malaysian and Indonesian ship, submarine and land targets.

The emphasis given to AIP in Singapore's current 2 x Archer class (Stirling AIP) and 4 future 218SGs (fuel cell AIP) suggest short to medium range missions will be common. This is because AIP is heavy and of diminishing utlilty on longer range missions.

SENSORS

The 218SG's Atlas Elektronik combat system, with some US add-ons, will retain many existing capabilities and add new ones. Many missions around Singapore Island (map below) and the Malacca Strait will be on AIP (for around 2 weeks) only. Much of this short range work is (will be) for electronic warfare (eg. signals interception). Such interception "targets" can more publically include the non-state actors (eg. detecting short range terrorist/pirate/smuggler radio signals).

With only 28 officers-sailors needing accommodation on 218SGs, on special missions there may be space for:

- around 6 intercept operators/linguists with 6 work stations
or
- around 10 divers-special forces and their equipment (one mission fighting terrorists).

Networked with Singapore's submarines in combatting and monitoring threats includes other Singaporean, US and other allied platforms. Platforms include land based or connected sensors, seabed (long range SOSUS) broader ocean sensors and shorter range (RAP/FDS) sensors strung across the Malacca Strait seabed and nodes on/near Singapore main island and islets. On seabed sensors see https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2019/01/possible-sosus-rapfds-arrays-western.html .

Possibly networked with and informing subs are human intelligence/police/border/customs, overt press, patrol boats, frigates, LCSs, aircraft/UAVs, land-based radar and intercept stations and satellites.

PATROLS - TAILING

All these networked sensors can help cue submarines to tail Chinese submarines on surfaced "innocent passage" through the Malacca Strait and more so Chinese subs who decide to pass through submerged.

SSKs like the 218SG are too slow to shadow Chinese SSNs and SSBNs. But (with Japanese submarines doing the northern leg shadow) 218SGs could do the southern leg shadow of Chinese Song and AIP Yuan class SSKs.

Only at long ranges into the Pacific (including South China Sea) and Indian Ocean would Singapore's submarines be a little more autonomous of all this network help. Looking at Germany's Type 212A as a minimum, the 218SG may have a range of around 8,000nm at around 4 to 8 knots combined snorting and surfaced. Such a range would allow a 218SG to:

- patrol oil strategic lines of communication (SLOCs) between the mid-Indian Ocean
(eg. Diego Garcia or India's west coast bases) and Singapore.
or
- Singapore to Taiwan and return (maybe keeping an eye on the southern China
coast) using aerials extended from the fin/sail, tethered buoys or work-to-submarine UUVs.

Singapore's submarines (as with the surface navy) all the way to the Persian Gulf oil area, can contribute to longer range protection of the oil/gas/chemical tanker route. This includes tankers eastwards across the Indian Ocean to Singapore's refinery/chemical facilities.

Map of Singapore. Consisting of one main island and 62 islets. Since independence in 1965, extensive land reclamation has increased its total size to 130 square km (50 square miles). This geography provides many places for 218SG to sit waiting on the seabed, between islets while monitoring many things. (Map courtesy Geology(dot)com)

---

Broader map of the Strait of Malacca/Malacca Strait (of great strategic and economic value) and the much smaller Strait of Singapore. (Map courtesy welt-atlas).
---

WEAPONS HELP

Another way to estimate what the 218SG may be used for is to look at the Combat System - Weapons suite.

Singapore does not appear to be using the submarine weapons of its main ally, the US, other than possibly the US made Harpoon anti-ship and land attack missile. Singapore’s Air Force and Navy use the Harpoon. In the submarine launch mode the Harpoon is called UGM-84 with a range of up to 140 km (75 nm) against ship and land targets.

Other than the Harpoon it is more likely that Singapore is using weapons compatible with its Atlas Elektronik Combat System. Judging by the weapons on the top of the TKMS line German Navy Type 212A, Singapore’s Type 218SG will use:

- the Atlas Elektronik developed DM2A4 "SeaHake mod 4" 533mm heavyweight torpedo(HWT).

This is noting Singapore is not listed as a US Mark 48 HWT operator.

- With 8 torpedo tubes this provides room for deployment of at least 16 naval mines and/or

- 8 or more medium sized UUVs (which can be weaponised, making them highly mobile very smart

mines to defend Singapore or to block Chinese access to the Strait of Malacca and other

chokepoints).

- Germany (including TKMS) is developing the small short (20km) range missile known as

the IDAS (Interactive Defence and Attack System for Submarines) used for surface to air,

anti-ship (eg. anti-pirate smuggler boats) and (light) land attack.

I see no evidence Singapore is using the US made Tomahawklonger range cruise missile, for submarines and other platforms (yet). There is a possibility the 218SG already has, or can be retrofitted with, a vertical multi-purpose lock (VMPL). This could vertically launch 6 Tomahawk cruise missiles (or similar), launch a large UUV, diver delivery vehicle or be used for special forces equipment storage.

SOME USEFUL SOURCES

- Submarine Matters' February 19 and 20 2019.

- Singapore's Straits Times, Feb 18-20, 2019.

- Wikipedia to Feb 19, 2019 including

- Janes Feb 19, 2019.

- The Independent, Feb 19, 2019.

Singapore’s Ministry of Defence, February 18, 2019, including:

- Singapore Navy's First Invincible-Class Submarine Launched

- Fact Sheet: Invincible-Class Submarines

-Speech by Minister for Defence, Dr Ng Eng Hen, at the Launch of the First Type 218SG Submarine

Pete

After use since the early 1980s of MTU 16V 396s on TKMS built submarines and even non TKMS (Chinese Ming and Song class subs?) the MTU 4000 may at last being introduced on TKMS subs.

Since 1996 more than 37,000 MTU 4000s have been sold for surface ship, train, mining, industrial and energy-pump uses.

Lower range 600 kW MTU 12V 4000s may already serve as emergency backup/return-to-port diesels on nuclear powered Astute class SSNs.

The MTU 4000s for submarine are reportedly more fuel efficient and have higher peak power than MTU 396s.

The TKMS future Type 212CD may use 2 x MTU 4000s.

Two MTU 4000s may be used in Singapore's new Invincible class Type 218SG. Anonymous in February 21, 2019 noticed2 x MTU 4000s on a Type 218SG youtube diagram 42 seconds in, here https://youtu.be/I_poBnLJMew?t=42s.

As MTU 4000s are mass produced in Yulin, China they may be used about China's latest Yuan class conventional submarines.

MTU 4000s may possibly be used for the major 2020s Collins mid-life upgrade (also see) and Australia's future Attack-class submarines.

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

On the MTU 4000 for submarine, see Arndt von Drathen’s, Applications Battery Charging Technologies for Advanced Submarine Requirements, MTU, 2011 https://mtu-online-shop.com/print/3100721_MTU_General_WhitePaper_SubmarineChargingUnit_2011.pdf see page 2:

"Since the introduction of the Series 396 in the early 1980s into the submarine application...Conventional submarines have grown in size over the last decades to meet increased transit distance requirements to the operational areas and to accommodate various Air Independent Propulsion technologies into the hull.

Despite hydrodynamic improvements of the hull shapes, the larger displacements have led to higher power demands. This trend for more power will be even further accelerated by new Li-Ion battery technologies. Li-Ion batteries are going to increase underwater endurance and performance of submarines significantly. However, the diesel engine driven charging unit technology needs to adapt to the new requirements: firstly, more electrical power and secondly, provide rated power almost the entire operational time to fully utilize the Li-Ion advantages."

Looking at the red "submarine-specific" portion on the page 2 diagram of the MTU 4000 is the portion on top, showing a large cylinder. Is this a muffler for quieter operation of the diesel engine?

The available photo below of an MTU 4000 for submarine shows muffler? cylinder in unpainted metal color.

Pete

USS Santa Fe following the 4 Collins class subs.

---

The US Government Defense Visual Information Distribution Service (dvids) reported February 26, 2019 that https://www.dvidshub.net/news/311919/uss-santa-fe-arrives-stirling-australia

“The Los Angeles-class fast-attack submarine USS Santa Fe (SSN 763) [above] arrived at HMAS Stirling, Australia for a scheduled port visit this week”

“Santa Fe’s port visit followed the completion of a joint training exercise with four Royal Australian Navy Collins-class submarines, HMAS Collins, HMAS Farncomb, HMAS Dechaineux and HMAS Sheean [see photo above], in waters around Australia.

The exercise, which was designed to enhance anti-submarine warfare abilities, gave the crews of both navies the opportunity to employ and experiment with real world tactics. Pulling into port, however, gave the crews the opportunity to meet each other face-to-face and forge greater ties.”

SEE WHOLE DVIDS ARTICLE

PETE COMMENT

HMAS Stirling is an Australian naval base, known as Fleet Base West, at which all 6 of Australia’s Collins class submarines are home based. HMAS Stirling is situated at Rockingham, near Fremantle, near Perth, Western Australia.

USS Santa Fe (SSN 763) is home ported at Pearl Harbour.

It is heartening that 4 of the 6 Collins class submarines (given past crew shortages and past maintenance issues) were available for the exercise with USS Santa Fe.

Pete

The US Boeing - Australian Loyal Wingman Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle (UCAV) has been unveiled Avalon Air Show near Melbourne, February 26/27 2019. It is also being called the "Boeing Airpower Teaming System". Their is stiff US, UK and European competition to it.

Loyal Wingman is a fighter sized "drone" that can work with manned aircraft (eg. Australia's
F-35As, P-8A Poseidons, Super Hornets and AEW&C E7 Wedgetail aircraft) and can operate individually as a remote guided drone or as a loitering missile.

Until the February 26/27, 2019 unveiling its development was secret. Joint development is by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF), Australia's DoD, Boeing operating in Brisbane, Australia. Also US Kratos Defense & Security Solutions is involved.

Having no onboard pilot or life-support systems Loyal Wingman's projected range may be twice that of an F-35A with a similar weapons load. Specifications for the prototype are few but Loyal Wingman may be currently 11.7 metres long and have a range of 2,000+ nautical miles (3,700+ km).

Loyal Wingman's uses could include:

- electronic warfare, ie "jamming" which makes F-35s even more difficult to detect

- optical and radar reconnaissance and sigint intercepts

- on remote human orders dropping guided bombs, air to ground missiles, and firing air-to-air
missiles, and as

- a loitering kamikaze "cruise" missile which, with a large warhead, could be ordered to crash itself
into high value targets (hopefully not being 5G hacked to crash into Australian "targets").

As there is no onboard pilot it can operate in higher risk environments, read China and China's SAM armed South China Sea islands. The US could also use it against Russia and Iran.

Apparently no figures on project cost have been published but it is supposed to be Boeing's largest investment in drones outside the US.

Fullsize mock-up (Courtesy Boeing via FlightGlobal) of Loyal Wingman at Australia's Avalon Air Show (?) February 2019. It looks swept back enough to go supersonic, maybe cruise supersonic(?). Drone maker Kratos Defense & Security Solutions (see Kratos website) is also working with Boeing on Loyal Wingman.

---

Artwork of the Loyal Wingman UCAV (Courtesy Boeing and the Australia's DoD via Australia's ABC)

---

AUSTRALIA ALSO BUYING OTHER DRONES

Australia is also buying 2 other cutting edge US drone types, including:

- 6 x Triton (Global Hawk derivative large long range, unarmed UAVs) for a $7 Billion project.
The Tritons will be capable of flying over China’s South China Sea islands where (given the
Triton’s unmanned nature) they may be shot down by China in times of tension. and

- 12 to 16 x Reaper armed UAVs in a $400 million project. These may be particularly useful to

Australian forces in the perpetual Afghanistan and Middle East conflicts.

It is likely Australia’s purchases of the Reaper, and especially the far more expensive Tritons, eased US Government permissions to transfer highly sensitive Loyal Wingman technical details to Australia.

COMPETITION

As I guess-stimate the Australian domestic market would be less than 100 Loyal Wingmans in the 2020s it will need to be exported to other nations. This is especially to the US Airforce and maybe USN, to be commercially viable and to enjoy the most advanced US software and hardware sensor and avionics upgrades. By restricting Loyal Wingman to Five Eye customers there may, or may not be, some commercial advantage.

Some more technically mature(?) competitors include:

- the USKratosXQ-58 Valkyrie - first flight may be 2019. US Airforce interested. May just beat

Loyal Wingman to market or it may be rolled into the Loyal Wingman Project?

- the US Northrop Grumman X-47B that first flew in 2011. The US Navy has been interested in

using the X-47B for carrier operations.

- US General Atomics Avenger - first flew 2009. Hot competition as General Atomics is already the

popular and trusted Predator A and Reaper builder.

- the British BAE Systems Taranis (aka "Raptor"). France may also supply some components.

Flight testing has actually taken place in Australia, in South Australia's Woomera Test Range in

2013.

- Boeing's own Phantom Ray, first flew 2011. Also Boeing's X-45, flew 2002.

- France's Dassault eEUROn - first flew 2012, and

- Germany and Spain's EADS Barracuda - first flew 2006.

- China and Russia and Israel would be working on their own project, although Western customers

are unlikely.

SOURCES

I looked at media reports including Australia's ABC, DefenceConnect and FlightGlobal February 26/27, 2019 and many of my own ideas.

Pete

For business, political and technical reasons it appears that the Dutch have dropped Germany's TKMS and Spain's Navantia from the Walrus submarine replacement competition. This is for 4 new medium-large conventional submarines, for delivery by the late 2020s-early 2030s.

Supporting this contention my thanks to Anonymous for the February 20, 2019 comment which provides this link. This is further supported by this Dutch article (right-click mouse to translate).

POSSIBLE DUTCH REQUIREMENTS

For the Walrus replacement I'm estimating the Dutch want to continue to retain performance achievements of the Walrus, which include:

- a 2,200+ tonne (surfaced) submarine for oceanic travel. This is larger than the normal European

1,600 tonne (surfaced) mid-size submarines (adequate for European waters).

- long range 10,000+nm (18,500+km), up to 70 day mission endurance. adequate for:

: Netherlands to the Dutch Caribbean and Return missions and

: Netherlands through the Mediterranean or even around Africa. This is to monitor Middle

East/North African nations/pirates/smugglers/terrorists and Return missions. This is on behalf of

the Western alliance eg. NATO). Such monitoring might be closer inshore than already

over-tasked US SSNs are willing to go.

- submarine size, range and possibly Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) supported by a

3 x diesel solution instead of Euro subs 1 or 2 diesels. Three diesels increase safety if one breaks

down on a long mission.

- Complement of 50 to 55 officers and "men" to operate on a 3 watch system to reduce long mission

fatigue, handle some illness, and increase safety by providing larger damage control crew

measures.

- More living space is needed. Some female submariners are expected from 2019 ie. "mixed

crews". The hardship of hot bunking (aka hot racking) is increasingly unacceptable. Also Dutch are

statistically taller - all meaning greater facilities for bunks/showers/toilets are required.

- perhaps retaining the Walrus's no AIP characteristic. The replacement may have no AIP due to

AIP's diminishing utility on long missions. Even the Collins and the newest Soryus fave no AIP.

AIP's LOx and especially Hydrogen are fire/explosion hazards. Buoyancy changes are more major

than usual as LOx is expended. There would be little or no AIP chemical refueling facilities on long

range missions (eg. in the Dutch Caribbean).

So for Dutch requirements the AIP (even the most advanced working AIP that Germany-Spain provide) isn't so important. This might explain why TKMS and Navantia have. according to rumour-int, been dropped.

Also the rumoured or actual corporate change in ThyssenKrupp effecting the status of its submarine divisionis unsettling. Lack of spare parts and perhaps underbudgeting of Germany’s own Type 212A squadron would not have boosted Dutch courage. Concern is even greater in that the Netherlands wants an extended joint venture with a winning main foreign supplier.

Meanwhile Navantia has not launched a new submarine since the 1980s Agostas and even those were French designed and mainly French developed. The problems experienced by the not-yet-launched S-80 (aka "Isaac Peral class") have not inspired confidence. Also the possible Spanish strength of advanced SENER-TKMS AIP is not a benefit if the Dutch don't need AIP.

SO WHY IS THE SHORTLIS POSSIBLY REDUCED TO NAVAL GROUP AND SAAB/DAMAN

Naval Group (NG) are used to building Scorpenes and larger submarines (also now designing the Shortfin). These larger subs are capable of operating further than relatively short European distances. If the Walrus replacement does not require AIP then the lack of operating advanced AIP on NG subs is not a problem. Hence NG is still on the Dutch reduced shortlist.

Saab's Stirling AIP may also be of low Dutch interest. However Sweden is significantly not a powerful neighbour (unlike Germany and France). Larger countries sometimes exhibit an overbearing attitude (reflecting economic reality?) inevitably making the small Netherlands a junior partner in a Walrus replacement joint venture.

After Sweden's Saab builds its first 2 x A26 submarines to be delivered in 2022 it will need 2 more in late 2020s to replace the (30yo by 2025) Gotlands, thus making a 4 x A26 force. If the Netherlands' Damen want to work with Saab (see Damen website) to build 4 x even larger Walrus replacement then that represents a fair bit of economic equality with consequent shared decision making.

Maybe Damen is looking at a:

- Saab A26 Oceanic extended range (ER) design, and/or

- a smaller version of the Saab Type 612 design.

Computer Artwork comparing the Dutch Walrus (left) to Saab's A26 Oceanic ER (extended range). (Courtesy Armada International, October 24, 2018)

---

So the ongoing Walrus replacement competition throws up many submarine business, political and technical issues and realities.

Pete and Anonymous

There are many aspects of the latest India, Pakistan confrontation. There being no submarines showing their hand (so far) below I am looking at the Pakistan F-16 vs Indian MiG-21 (called “Bison” not NATO designation “Fishbed” in India).

It would seem that India has made its aging MiG-21smore formidable by arming them with Soviet/Russian developed air-to-air missiles (AAMs) that are proving better than US developed AAMs.

Russia Today (RT) March 1, 2019 reports:

“Could Indian MiG-21 have downed Pakistani F-16? Military expert says it’s up to pilot, not plane

India’s claim that its MiG-21 fighter jet shot down a more modern Pakistani Air Force F-16 [on Thursday 28 February 2019] seems surprising at first, but a military expert tells RT there is more to the Indian Air Force than meets the eye.

The [Indian Air Force] IAF confirmed that one of its MiG-21 fighters downed a PAF F-16 on Thursday, two days after Pakistan said that it had shot down two Indian jets as tensions continue to mount between the two nuclear powers over the disputed territory of Kashmir.

News reports from battle zones often contain “inaccuracies or deliberate disinformation,” but it doesn’t mean that a MiG-21 couldn’t have hit an F-16, even though the two planes are of completely “different generations,” Mikhail Khodarenok, military expert and retired colonel who served in Russian missile defense forces, told RT.

MiG-21 is a third-generation supersonic jet fighter and interceptor aircraft, which was introduced into the Soviet military in 1959. The F-16 is a fourth-generation supersonic multirole fighter, which entered service with the US Air Force almost two decades later.

Obviously, the F-16 has much more advanced characteristics, including the combat radius of 547 km, compared to 370 km of MiG-21.

However, Khodarenok explained that the MiG-21-93 ‘Bison’ used by the Indian Air Force is

“a largely modernized version of the aircraft. Its ‘Spear’ radar system allows tracking down incoming enemy aircraft at a distance of up to 57 kilometers in the front and up to 30 kilometers in the rear. It can track eight targets at the same time, with the quick search and automatic capture of visually observed targets in close combat mode concluding with the use of guided missiles or cannon.”

MiG-21 Bison boasts medium-range R-77 air-to-air self-guided missiles as part of its arsenal. They have a range of 110 kilometers and can reach the speed of 4250 km/h, while carrying a 22-kilogram warhead, he said.

“So MiG-21-93 could’ve well shot down an F-16. And could’ve done it easily,” Khodarenok said. “Besides, the best plane is the one with the best pilot inside. The rest is details.”

ENDs

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

Separately, below is a relevant youtube, although it feature an AIM-120D AMRAAM, which is more modern and capable than Pakistan’s US supplied AIM-120C-5.

ARTICLE

In a notable article INDAILY Adelaide’s independent news, February 21, 2019 reported:

That Jean-Michel Billig, Executive Vice President, Future Submarine Program [Naval Group] and Member, Naval Group Executive Board in translation, made the very significant comment that:

“Diesel generators [for Australia’s future Attack class submarine] will be German...”

COMMENT

[At 4,500 tonne (surfaced) the Attack class submarines will probably need to achieve a diesel output of 6,000kW requiring at least 4 x 1,500kW diesels]

From the "will be German" diesel statement Anonymous [with some further translation by Pete into more correct English] on February 27, 2019 calculatedAustralia’s future Attack class submarines may use the following German diesel designs:

A. MTU diesels (MTU based in Friedrichshafen, Germany)

specifically the MTU 12V 4000(mechanical output=1300kW,

Mean Effective Pressure (Pme) = 27.9MPa[1])

B. MAN Energy Solutions (MAN based in Augsburg, Germany) formed 2010 from merger of
MAN Diesel and MAN Turbo.

specifically the MAN 12 PA4 V200SMDS (1330kW, 25.8MPa).

Note that the MAN 12 PA4 V200SMDS has a slightly lower Pme and a longer but lower rotation or piston speed (1300rpm, 9.1m/s) than the MTU 12V 4000 (1800rpm, 11.2m/s). But if the 12 PA4 V200SMDS is modified (such as common rail injection system), it may achieve about 1500kW of mechanical output by 10% increase in Pme. Higher boost modification depends on the selling price.

It is unlikely the older MTU 16V396 will be used as its Pme is low at 20.5MPa.

[1] seeMean effective pressure (Pme)is a valuable measure of a reciprocating engine's capacity to do work that is independent of engine displacement. Higher Pme means better performance. Pme = 8 x E / (3.14 x N x S x D^2 x H). Where, Pme = brake mean effective pressure, E = mechanical output, N = number of cyliders, D = cylinder bore, H cylinder stroke.

PETE COMMENT

Penske Power Systemssupplies MTU and MAN diesels for marine and defence applications in Australia with branches all over Australia including Adelaide (where the Attack class submarines are being built).

Anonymous and Pete

Despite international media reports that the Second Trump-Kim Summit (Hanoi, February 27-28, 2019) was a failure I think it was successful.

Yes I think the US intelligence community is right in saying there is very little possibility that North Korea will de-nuclearize. Trump, working, within that assessment, is making the situation less dangerous.

As I argued on May 24, 2018 North Korea needs a nuclear deterrent more than most countries because all of its neighbours and the US, have invaded it many times. After decades of building up a nuclear deterrent at great sacrifice, North Korea is not about to disarm and thereby make itself vulnerable to takeover.

As well as deterring invasion nuclear weapons reduce the chances of large-scale conventional war.

The real danger is how nuclear armed countries threaten to use their nuclear weapons.

The problem with North Korea is not that it HAS nuclear weapons but how often it has threatened to use nuclear weapons.

North Korea and especially the latest Kim suffer from immaturity and an inferiority complex.

I think continuing to work on the ego of Kim, by allowing Kim to talk in Summits with the world's most powerful leader (Trump) is the best way to address North Korea's need to be noticed.

These Summits (with the first one being in Singapore, June 12, 2018) seem to be working. Have you noticed there has been no tension raising North Korean ICBM tests, nuclear weapon tests, or threats to use nuclear weapons since the Summits began in June 2018?

For all Trump's international mistakes he has been doing well over North Korea.

Pete

In response to Jack the Unknown's misinformed comment of March 7, 2019 where he says:

“Hi pete. Singapore and USA do Not have official defense ally agreement.
Anyone can speculate under table secret agreement.but I think it's unprofessional. Jack
https://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/collectivedefense/”

The following document, dated February 2018 is provided by the

US Embassy in Singapore.

https://sg.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/197/Fact-Sheet-Defense-Cooperation.pdf

"DEFENSE COOPERATION

Singapore and the U.S. have a strong bilateral defense partnership, underpinned by the 1990 Memorandum of Understanding and 2005 Strategic Framework Agreement, and most recently elevated by the 2015 enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement.

Under the enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, both sides agreed on a broad framework for defense cooperation in five key areas, namely in the military, policy, strategic, and technology spheres.

Under the technology sphere, the U.S. and Singapore collaborate in 10 distinct bilateral dialogues through forums, committees, and workshops under the oversight of the Defense Cooperation Committee (DCC). The DCC is the senior bilateral science and technology forum between the U.S. Department of Defense and the Singapore Ministry of Defense. Both sides also cooperate against non-conventional security challenges, such as piracy and transnational terrorism.

Singapore has also contributed to the U.S.-led coalition to counter the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) since December 2014. Both sides also agreed to enhance cooperation in new areas, including humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), cyber defense, biosecurity, and public communications.

The annual Shangri-La Dialogue held in Singapore promotes dialogue among policymakers in the defense and security community in the region. The United States has welcomed Singapore’s initiative to promote better coordination of regional militaries’ HADR efforts through the establishment of the Changi Regional HADR Coordination Centre (RHCC) in 2014.

The U.S. Department of Defense and Singapore Armed Forces work closely to equip Singapore's sailors, soldiers and airmen with the latest in state-of-the-art weapons systems, sophisticated sensors, and smart munitions through an extensive Foreign Military Sales program.

BY THE NUMBERS:

· 36 Years of Exercise Tiger Balm, a bilateral exercise between the U.S. and Singapore armies

· 1 Singapore is the only Pacific country that holds annual unilateral training exercises in the U.S.

· 3 Littoral Combat Ships rotationally deployed to Singapore since 2013

· 12 Bilateral military forums focused on science and technology collaboration

· 1,000 Singaporean personnel train in the U.S. each year

· 29 Years Singapore has operated advanced fighter jet detachments in the continental U.S.

DEFENSE THREAT REDUCTION AGENCY

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) collaborates with Singapore on various research and development projects,as well as Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and high-yield Explosives (CBRE) and Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Awareness training. To help ASEAN countries develop or improve their core capacities to meet international health regulations, DTRA has partnered with Singapore via the Third Country Training Program to build laboratory and epidemiologic capacity, as well as training scientists and physicians from partnering countries.

OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH GLOBAL

Since 2000, the regional Office of Naval Research Global (ONRG) in Singapore has supported emerging science and technology (S&T) globally to address the technological needs of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. The office identifies and funds research and development to enable future Naval missions and capabilities. ONRG actively collaborates with government, industry, and academia on key S&T of mutual benefit to the U.S. and its strategic partners including Singapore.

NAVY MEDICAL RESEARCH CENTER

Navy Medical Research Center - Asia (NMRCA), located inSingapore with a detachment in Cambodia, consists of 120 scientists, research physicians and support staff that work in partnership with host nation military and civilian institutes to conduct research and surveillance of infectious disease threats. The command focuses on threats of public health and military relevance throughout the U.S. Pacific Command's area of operation.

ARMY INTERNATIONAL TECHNOLOGY CENTER - PACIFIC (ITC-PAC)

Since 2004, the Southern Asia Regional Office of ITC-PAC as part of the Army's Research, Development and Engineering Command (RDECOM) has promoted Science and Technology (S&T) collaboration with partner countries, to include Singapore, in areas that are relevant to the overall needs of the U.S. Army. The goal of the office is to identify emerging technology (basic research) by supporting cooperative development initiatives and identifying innovative foreign technology solutions."

ENDS

PETE COMMENT

Also see:

Lynn Kuok’s, The U.S.-Singapore Partnership: A Critical Element of U.S. Engagement and Stability in the Asia-Pacific, Brookings Institution, July 2016, https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Paper-6.pdf

The following is a Joint Statement on the 4th United States-Singapore Strategic Partnership Dialogue, 22 January 2016, Singaporehttps://2009-2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2016/01/251668.htm

Please click on the following: The US and Singapore also share close intelligence relations.

Pete

Pete Comment

All submarines have pressure hulls that are made of special steel alloys. In the past the Soviets/Russians bankrupted their economy by also using Titanium alloys. Essentially pressure hullsprotect the crew, sensors and engines from excessive water pressure and provide the airtight conditions the crew rely on to breathe.

Pressure hulls need special high yield steel alloys that are flexible enough to:

- contract as water pressure increases (during diving),

- is also strong enough to stop contracting (at maximum diving depth) and

- can then expand as water pressure reduces on the way to the submarine surfacing.

High proof or yield steel for submarines can be measure in pounds per square inch (psi), (eg. HY80= 80,000psi) or Mega/million pascals (MPa) with this conversion
https://www.unitconverters.net/pressure/megapascal-to-psi.htm.

A submarine can only go through a limited number of contraction-expansion cycles (especially if it has to deep dive) before it loses flexibility, putting it in danger of metal fatigue.

For a diesel-electric submarine with AIP (eg. a Swedish Gotland class ) on a typical short 12 day mission in the Baltic Sea it may dive and the operate on its Stirling AIP for 10-12 days. It then surface only once = 1 cycle. Perhaps its pressure hull is good for 200 cycles (?) - although its service life is more rapidly limited by hull rust and corrosion - all contributing to a 34 year service life.

ANONYMOUS' TABLE 1.

Many thanks to Anonymous advising that the pressure hull details in Table 1. below apply to the:

- Swedish (Gotlands, future A26s),
- Swedish designed Australian Collins, and
- future SAAB-Damen entry for the Walrus Replacement competition

In the [cylinder like] design of a submarine, the diameter of a pressure hull significantly effects on many other feature of a submarine [including space, propulsion choices and acoustics]. In terms of diameter (which may sometimes equal Beam) Gotland's are 6.2m, A26s 6.4m, Collins 7.8m and 8m for a SAAB-Damen Walrus replacement. Part outer hulls and sonars on hulls will effect the overall beam of a submarine.

Table 1 Similarity of pressure hull of Swedish and Australian submarines

Submarine	Pressure hull steel	Proof (or Yield) strength of steel [MPa]	Beam [m]	Diameter of pressure hull	Estimation
Gotland	Weldox700EM [1]	700	6.2	Same	In A26, sound absorption rubbers (thickness 100mm) are presumably attached on the surface of prssue hull. In A19, no sound absorption rubbers are attached, or very thin rubbers are used.
A26	Strenx700E	700	6.4	Same
Collins	BIS 812 EMA	700	7.8	Same	Difference in beam is due to difference in position or shape of flanl arry sonar.
SAAB-Damen Walrus Replace-ment	Strenx700E	700	8	Same

[1] Weldox is old brand name of Strenx.

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

Below is a broader comparison of Chinese, Russian & Western Submarine Pressure Hull Steel Strengths originally published on July 20, 2015. Note the Swedish measure Weldox700 and Australian BIS 812 EMA in both Tables with both at 700MPa equivalent to HY100..

TABLE 2.

YS = Yield Strength or proof stress. HY = High Yield

YS	US	UK	France	Germany	China	Russia and India	Japan	Australia	Sweden
550MPa	HY80	Q1N		1.3964		India DMR- 292 #	* 1) NS56
590MPa			60HLES		921A TA5-A	AK-25 48-OT3
630MPa				1.3974
690MPa	HY100	Q2N				AB-2	* 2) NS70
700MPa			80HLES					BIS812 EMA	Weldox 700
785MPa					980	AK-29	NS80
890MPa	HY130		100HLES		*4) Ti80	AB-3?	NS90		Weldox 900
980MPa						AK-33
1075MPa						AK- ??
1178MPa	HY156						* 3) NS110

* 1) steel of 550MPa and NS56 is equivalent to HY80 grade steel.

* 2) steel of 690MPa and NS70 is equivalent to HY100 grade steel.

* 3) steel 1078MPa and NS110 is equivalent to the HY156 grade steel.

* 4) Ti80 Titanium alloy under development 880MPa equivalent to NS90 or HY128 steel - source.

The Table is from towards the end of Japanese Document "High-tensile steel Summary of national submarine" or Summary of High Tensile Steel for Submarines by Country 2013 http://seesaawiki.jp/w/doramarine/ .

COMMENTS FOR TABLE 2.

The higher the yield (stronger) the steel alloy or Titanium alloy in a submarines pressure hull the deeper it can dive in operations. As well as alloy strength other factors also influence diving depth including:

- supports for the the pressure hull

- compartments or multiple pressure hulls, and

- strength of the welds used to join sections of the pressure hull.

It is not possible to verify the accuracy of most of the figures. Commenters who know more are invited to supply corrections.

FURTHER READING

See Soryu Submarine Steel Details - Japan Offer to Australia, January 20, 2015

Anonymous and Pete

Following MTU 4000s maybe on Type 218SG & future Type 212CD submarines of February 26, 2019 Anonymous commented:

2 x 2000 kW diesels for middle sized (2,000 ton) and 2 x 3000 kW diesels for large sized (4,000 ton) SSKs especially if the SSKs are equipped with advanced Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs). Currently German made MTU or MAN diesels, each around 1,300 kW for submarine, are underpowered if the submarine wishes to achieve optimal quick charging performance for LIBs.

However [having 2 of] Japan's new KAWASAKI 12V25/31 (mechanical output 3,100 kW) would be most suitable for large (4,000 ton) submarines. From the viewpoint of power performance, a combimation of Toshiba NTO-LIBs and KAWASAKI 12V25/31s is better than Saft Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) LIBs married to MTU or MAN diesels.

BTW, on February 26, 2019, Toshiba announced the successful development of a new LIB anode for electric vehicles. The new battery a has higher capacity and longer life. This LIB is Toshiba’s second generation SCiB Niobium Titanium Oxide (NTO) battery. Toshiba aims for mass production in the early 2020s.

Anonymous
(with some rearranging by Pete)

So India and Russia announced, on March 7, 2019, that India will lease yet another Russian built Akula class nuclear propelled attack submarine (SSN).

Akula on surface. Note large rear pod, from which a long towed sonar array can be spooled.

---

AGE AND CLEANING

The "new" submarine to be 10 year(?) leased (maybe 2025-2036 for US3 to 3.3 Billion) will probably be the current Russian Navy Kashalot (K-322) - hereinafter called Chakra"III".

III is actually older than India's current leased Akula Chakra II (was Russian Nerpa), hereinafter called "II". The most significant milestone in a submarine's age may be its "Launched" year. II was launched in 2006.

III was launched way back in 1987. Due to Russian national and military bankruptcy in the late 1980s III was laidup then mothballed in Severodvinsk (within Russia's massive Northern Fleet complex).

Due to III already being 33 years old and mothballed for decades it will need to be derusted outside and even more crucially inside, especially between:
- its inside pressure and outside hulls,
- inside, especially high pressure, pipes
- within its often seawater filled buoyancy tanks, and
- on the insides of III's diesel tanks, which feed its emergency diesel generators.

Even if relaunched around 2023 III may still have alot of hidden rust.

III's 33 year old reactor will need to be refurbished and refueled. Then III will be modernised with new Russian and Indian torpedo-missile tubes, modern communications and sensors.

Diagram of Akula submarine. Note its relatively small, streamlined, fin/sail, which improves chances of attaining 35 knots submered and theoretically with reduced hydrodynamic flow noise.
(Diagram courtesy Robert Whiston's Weblog 2011)
---

SPECIFICATIONS

Looking at Wiki right sidebar if the future lease III is unpgraded to Akula III status is may have the following specs:
- 8,500 tons (surfaced), 13,800 tons (submerged).
- 113.3m long, 13.6m beam,
- 1 x 190MW OK-650B/OK-650M pressurized water nuclear reactor, 1 OK-7 steam turbine 32MW.
Reactor likely needs refueling every 9 years (?). The OK-650 was developed in the 1970s but, as a
sign of Russian naval budget austerity, the OK-650 reactor is still being fitted to Russia's latest
submarines, eg. the new Borei/Borey SSBN.

- 2 x OK-300 retractable electric propulsors for low-speed, quiet manoeuvring at 5 knots

- Speed up to 35 knots submerged,

- Endurance 100 days limited by food.

- Test depth 520m

- A small complement up to 62, does that imply it only has short-medium cruises of up to
40 days (?). A rather small crew compared to 134 on US Virginia's and 98 on UK Astutes.

- Armament - if same as Chakra II then likely 8 x 533 mm torpedo tubes (with up to 40 mix of
torpedoes and missiles). Klub/Club S missiles (and maybe newer 530mm BrahMos) anti-ship and
land attack missiles. This is assuming there are no lease terms that mean "no armament?"

STEALTH AND LEASING

Contrary to this source's "Current status" subheading the Soviet built late 1970s designed Akula's are nowhere near "among the best nuclear vessels in the world in terms of stealth". Not "best" compared to the US Virginia's or Seawolves, to the UK Astutes or to Russia's Yasens. A Yasen, being much more capable, was what India tried to lease but Russia refused. But a leased Indian Akula II may be the equal in stealth or better than its Chinese opposition which will be Type 093 Shangs and future Type 095s.

India would be prudent if it carries out an intention to extend the 10 year lease (currently to 2022) of II by 5 years to 2027. The more years the greater strategic and tactical effect. This will cover India for any delay in rebuilding and improving III and also holds the prospect that India could lease operate the two Chakras concurrently. Two SSN's to defend India's two (INS Arihant and Arighat) SSBNs is a prudent naval policy and tactic. Also one more new Indian SSBN is likely to be launched by the mid-2020s - needing SSN protection for a higher tempo of SSBN deterrence patrols.

Later this week "What will India's Future Leased "Chakra III" be Used For?"

Pete

On March 6, 2019 Submarine Matters' argued that North Korea would not dismantle its nuclear capability. This is because North Korea recognizes the US will not dismantle its own intercontinental nuclear capability - a capability which can always strike North Korea.

So North Korea recognizes deal making (parleying) with the US is a facade. With that realization North Korea feels unconstrained in again resuming long range missile launches (maybe under the peaceful pretext of putting a satellite in orbit).

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

Aircraft Anonymous dismisses the relevance of the US intercontinental nuclear capability
(not even mentioning highly nuclear capable US B2 bombers)
by focussing on March 9, 2019 (below) on the artificially limited Korean Peninsuala theatre. This is limited by the US and North Korea, both wilfully avoiding broader strategic realities.

Aircraft Anonymous argues:

"Its not about all nuclear weapons the US has in its arsenal that can attack North Korea. Its more specifically their presence on the Korean peninsula and the surrounding seas. Strike weapons are far more accurate than long range ICBMs [but not accurate B2s?] which arent relevant in this context

[see] https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/18/06/2018/denuclearization-what-does-it-mean-korean-peninsula

Only a small number of USAF fighter bomber types ( F16 , F15E) are nuclear capable, as its all about the latest version of the B61 nuclear bomb. It is only around 800 lbs weight but long for its size. The capability is directly the result the software and wiring on the aircraft to be able to respond to the launch codes and arm the bomb for release. Currently the F22 doesn't have that capability even though [the B61] will fit inside its weapons bays.

The F35 will have the full [nuclear] capability which is the centre of debate in Europe for replacing existing nuclear capable planes such as F16 and Tornado. [1]

The multi-lateral Typhoon doesn't currently have [a nuclear] capability - but may in its 'ultimate version'. I have seen some sources say the US navy F/A-18F isn't B61 capable but that is more likely a 'neither confirm nor deny' situation.

See https://theaviationist.com/2017/04/14/in-other-news-a-u-s-f-16-has-dropped-an-inert-b61-12-nuclear-bomb-over-nevada-last-month/

For long term context , the Korean War armistice specifically excluded 'introduction of new weapons' to the Peninsula. In the mid 50s the US announced it was bringing nuclear weapons to the area and was open about repudiating what it had signed up to. Its well to consider that in looking at who hasn't been following what agreements, its not a judgemental thing, its just a relevant fact."

ENDS

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

[1] EURPOEAN COUNTRIES NUCLEAR ARMED BY US (Courtesy Wiki) added by Pete

"Weapons provided for nuclear sharing" (2015)
Country	Base	Estimated	Bombs
Belgium	Kleine Brogel	10~20	B61
Germany	Büchel	≥20^[2]	B61
Italy	Aviano	50	B61
Italy	Ghedi	20 - >40^[3]	B61
Netherlands	Volkel	10~20	B61
Turkey	Incirlik	50~90	B61
5 nations	6 bases	160~240	B61

In case of war, B61 nuclear bombs are to be mounted on the fighter-bombers of the European countries' above. The weapons are under the custody and control of the USAF Munitions Support Squadrons co-located on NATO main operating bases. These USAF Munitions Support Squadrons work together with the European host airforces.

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

See intercontinental US weapons, the B52, B2, B21 (armed with Long Range Stand Off Weapon (LRSO)), that don't need to be based in the Korean Peninsula to strike North Korea.

The article ties in with the previous article of March 12, 2019.

The Youtube below reports on the future Long Range Stand Off Weapon (LRSO). The LRSO:
Program is for a W80 mod 4 nuclear-tipped air-launched cruise missile that can penetrate and survive integrated air defense systems and other strategic targets. Such high intensity conflicts might include Russia, China, North Korea and maybe Iran.

The LRSO will replace the AGM-86 ALCM. The LRSO is under development by Raytheon
and Lockheed Martin each under US$900 million DoD/USAF contract. The contracts terminate in 2022, when the DoD will pick the winner for further development.

The LRSO will be carried by the B-52, B-2, future B-21. and smaller US aircraft including the F-22 and F-35.

Note in Youtube below Dialogue ends early after 4 minutes, 5 seconds!

An informative, description of the LRSO, AGM-86, related to the INF etc. Dialogue ends early after 4 minutes, 5 seconds! (Youtube probably published by Warrior Maven April 15, 2018.)
---

Pete

Following March 11 2019 this article focuses on uses of India's current Akula Chakra II ("II") and what its replacement ex-Kashalot (K-322) Chakra "III" will do from 2025.

Broadly India uses II and will use future III for technology transfer, training (including ASW, anti-shipping and land-attack), exercises, protection of India's SSBN deterrent patrols and shadowing Chinese SSNs and ships.

In part drawing from GhalibKabir's comments:

Currently much of II's use is as a design and testbed for technology transfer for India's current and future indigenous SSBNs and future indigenous SSNs. This especially includes testing/training on II's and future III's powerful 190MW OK-650B/OK-650M Russian built reactor. India needs to upgrade from INS Arihant's and (maybe) Arighat's underpowered 83MW reactors.

India may currently be working on an Indian land based derivative of the OK-650B/OK-650M. before it installs a seabased version in a larger Indian SSBN (under construction).

FOLLOW THE WEAPONS

II is cloaked in mystery and may carry no weapons at present. But it is most likely that III from 2025 will initially carry such weapons as those fitted to India's Russian built Kilo submarines. This includes the:

- Type 53 (530mm) torpedoes (ASW and anti-ship), and

- Club-S, cruise missiles (anti-ship and land attack).

From about 2030 If Russia agrees to integration of Indian and foreign made components AND Russia shares key software interface modules, III may be upgraded to the:

- Indian made advanced 530mm Varunastra torpedo (may need 12+ tests and years to mature)

- new Indian built smaller 500mm BrahMos missiles (anti-ship and land attack)

- nuclear capable Nirbhay more for land attack

Some combat system elements might be placed in III and then on indigenous Indian SSNs to make them more capable eg. Israeli electronics (eg. those used on Dolphin Is and IIs) and/or French Optronic/Photonic masts (like the Safran AOM 30) and French advanced low frequency flank array sonars.

The Indian military establishment has useful experience cross wiring 'different source' systems to talk to each other. The Russian designed Su-30 MKI multirole fighter built under licence by India's Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) is a good example.

GEOGRAPHICALLY WHAT II and III MAY BE USED FOR

The deployment pattern of II is classified - so it is unclear how long II spends in and away from its homeport at India's Eastern Naval Command Base - Visakhapatnam. It is significant that
Visakhapatnam is well situated against Chinese submarine threats and potential nuclear targets within China.

All India's submarines and warships at Visakhapatnam benefit from the new SOSUS link strung between Port Blair (capital of India's Andaman Island territory - see Map below) and then west to the naval bases at Chennai and/or Visakhapatnam itself. This SOSUS link (part of other oceanic links) acts as a force multiplier, giving early warning of Chinese ship and especially submarine movements in the Indian Ocean. Chinese nuclear submarines crossing through the narrows of the Indonesian Archipelago and even moving the long way between Australia and Antarctica would be of particular interest.

Like SSN's worldwide a major job for II and then III would be protecting SSBNs, in India's case INS Arihant and INS Arighat. From the SSBN and SSN base at Visakhapatnam this might begin with a SSN search patrol in the Bay of Bengal beginning some time before an SSBN deterrence patrol. The main threats are opposing SSNs, SSKs, opposing SOSUS (and other sensors). China heading the list followed by Pakistan.

If, in the medium-long term, a Chinese SSBN were detected entering the Indian Ocean then that would also be a high value submarine "target" to follow at a discrete distance.

By the mid 2020s India will probably rely on 3 SSBNs (due to the "Rule of thirds") permitting one to be on deterrent patrol at all times. It would be equally prudent to have at least 6 x SSNs to allow 2 SSNs to protect that SSBN on patrol.

Pete

Above the seabed SOSUS array detects the submarine's sounds and the array automatically informs the shore station (on the left) or nodes of the array can pass on acoustic, VLF or ELF signals to alert the ASW corvette(?) above. (Artwork of SOSUS array from Intelligence on Russian SOSUS 2016).

---

Following SubMatt's March 13, 2019 article. A SOSUS or Sound Surveillance Systemcan be an array of seabed mounted listening devices (hydrophones) linked by a high bandwidth optical fibre cable to shore(s). Also raw signals can go by tethered buoys, beamed up to satellite, then on to shore or ships at sea.

A SOSUS cable may be strung from Port Blair to Indian Eastern Naval HQ, Visakhapatnam (above) on the rim of the Bay of Bengal. The SOSUS cable might detect and triangulate an SSK diesel engine even if the submarine is (say) 1,000 km away in the Indian Ocean. As the submarine gets closer to the SOSUS array many additional submarine sounds can be discerned, eg. SSN reactor water/steam circulation, generator-gearing-electrical motor sounds from SSNs and SSKs, dropped tools and water “swishing” over the hull sounds.

Cavitation sounds might be picked up from Chinese SSNs over 15 knot (?) submerged cruising speed and SSKs over 5 knots (?) submerged cruising. Within 100 km (?) the diesel sounds of an SSK might reveal an individual SSK – even identifying an SSK known to be captained by a particular commander (maybe judged by his manoeuvring habits). Identification of submarine type or actual submarine is much easier if there are already recordings of the submarine’s sound on an Indian supercomputer database (aka electronic “dictionary” or “library”).

The Bay of Bengal SOSUS is likely to be connected to shore stations at Visakhapatnam. These may house supercomputers monitored by Indian Navy and maybe NTROanalysts who particularly want to determine what type of submarine are making noise, as well as its course and speed. Submarine types of particular interest include Chinese Songs, Yuans or Bangladeshi Ming SSKs and Chinese Type 093 SSNs.

Once the sounds have been processed-identified they need to be sent to the right naval assets eg. Naval HQs Visakhapatnam and Mumbai and (via satellite or powerful shore radio station) to Indian ships, submarines at sea and Indian (confusingly called P-8I "Neptune"). Indian ships submarines can cued onto and then tail the Chinese, Pakistani or Bangladeshi submarines detected.

Pete

Following an article of February 28, 2019 Anonymous provided the comments below:

Currently, Japan [J] has three kinds of submarine, Oyashios (non-AIP, with Lead-acid Batteries (LABs)), Soryu MkI (Stirling AIP, with LABs) and is building Soryu MkII (non-AIP, with Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs)) (see Table below). The operational period of J-submarines are as long as 70 days, mainly limited by amount of food [1].

A Soryu MkI's AIP use will end once the LOx is used up. But in a Soryu MkII (with LIBs) there is no such limitation and the underwater mission is carried out after recharge of LIBs in quiet sea area [2]. The operation of an AIP Soryu MkI suffers due to huge 100 (?) ton LOx tank it has to carry for AIP. In contrast the lack of a LOx tank on a LIBs Soryu MkII provides more space for crew accommodation making MkII's more suitable for the mixed male/female crewing that Japan is introducing.

[Comments on SAAB-Damen and ASC-Collins will be published separately on March 15, 2019.]

[1] The range of J-submarines (maybe 6,000nm) is considerably shorter than the Australian Collins-class (around 10,000nm with longer transit legs within same operational period of 70 days). Presumably, J-subamarines sit, monitoring, on the seafloor for long periods. Hence less mobile J-subs do not need extra fuel.

[2] Information from retired submarine Admiral, Masao Kobayashi.

TABLE. Japanese Soryu and Oyashio Programs as at March 14, 2019

SS No. Diesel Type Motor	Build No Name	Pennant No.	MoF approved amount ¥ Billions FY	LABs, LIBs, AIP	Laid Down	Laun -ched	Commi ssioned	Built By
5SS Oyashio 2 Toshiba motors	8105 Oyashio	SS-590/ TS3608	¥52.2B FY1993	LABs only	Jan 1994	Oct 1996	Mar 1998	KHI
6SS-15SS Oyashios 10 subs 2 Toshiba motors SMC-7?	8106 -8115 various	SS-591-600	¥52.2B per sub FY1994-FY2003	LABs only	15SS Feb 2004	15SS Nov 2006	15SS Mar 2008	MHI & KHI
16SS Soryu Mk I 12V25/25SB SMC-8	8116 Sōryū	SS-501	¥60B FY2004	LABs + AIP	Mar 2005	Dec 2007	Mar 2009	MHI
17SS	8117 Unryū	SS-502	¥58.7B FY2005	LABs + AIP	Mar 2006	Oct 2008	Mar 2010	KHI
18SS	8118 Hakuryū	SS-503	¥56.2 FY2006	LABs + AIP	Feb 2007	Oct 2009	Mar 2011	MHI
19SS	8119 Kenryū	SS-504	¥53B FY2007	LABs + AIP	Mar 2008	Nov 2010	Mar 2012	KHI
20SS	8120 Zuiryū	SS-505	¥51B FY2008	LABs + AIP	Mar 2009	Oct 2011	Mar 2013	MHI
No 21SS			No 21SS built
22SS	8121 Kokuryū	SS-506	¥52.8B FY2010	LABs + AIP	Jan 2011	Oct 2013	Mar 2015	KHI
23SS	8122 Jinryu	SS-507	¥54.6B FY2011	LABs + AIP	Feb 2012	Oct 2014	7 Mar 2016	MHI
24SS	8123 Sekiryū	SS-508	¥54.7B FY2012	LABs + AIP	15 Mar 2013	2 Nov 2015	13 Mar 2017	KHI
25SS	8124 Seiryū	SS-509	¥53.1B FY2013	LABs + AIP	22 Oct 2013	12 Oct 2016	12 Mar 2018	MHI
26SS end of SMC-8s	8125 Shoryū	SS-510	¥51.7B FY2014	LABs + AIP	2014	6 Nov 2017	18 Mar 2019?	KHI
27SS First Soryu Mk II 12V25/25SB diesel first SMC-8B motor	8126 *Oryū*	SS-511	¥64.4B FY2015	LIBs only (NCA type)	2015	4 Oct 2018	Mar 2020?	MHI
28SS Second Soryu Mk II 12V25/25SB SMC-8B	8127	SS-512	¥63.6B FY2016	LIBs only (NCA type?)	2016?	Oct 2019?	Mar 2021?	KHI
29SS First Soryu Mk III 12V25/31S SMC-9?	8128	?	¥76B FY2017	LIBs only?	?	?	2023?	MHI?
30SS Second Soryu Mk III 12V25/31S	8029?	?	¥71.5B FY2018	LIBs only?	?	?	2024?	KHI?

Table from information exclusively provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries, AIP = air independent propulsion, LIBs = Lithium-ion Batteries. ¥***B = Billion Yen. MHI = Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, KHI = Kawasaki Shipbuilding Corporation of Kawasaki Heavy Industries.

---

Thankyou Anonymous (further translation by Pete).

TKMS Type 212CD submarine propulsion issues, eg. FC AIP

Launch of first Invincible class TKMS Type 218SG for Singapore

Singapore’s Alliance Anxieties and Submarine Setup (Part 1)

What Singapore's Type 218SG Submarines Might Be Used For (Part 2)

MTU 4000s maybe on Type 218SG & future Type 212CD submarines

USS Santa Fe SSN exercises with 4 Aussie Collins class submarines

Hot Competition as US-Australian "Loyal Wingman" UCAV "drone" unveiled

TKMS & Navantia Likely Dropped in Walrus submarine replacement competition

Indian MiG-21 uses Russian missiles to improve chances against Pakistani F-16

"German" Diesels to be on Australia’s future Attack class submarines

Trump Does Well Talking To North Korea

Singapore and US Share Close Defense and Intelligence Relations.

Submarine Pressure Hull Steel (Tables) Especially Swedish

Fitting suitable diesels to Medium & Large Submarines, LIBs

Indian future lease Akula Chakra III to be older than Chakra II it replaces

US-North Korea Missile Issues Much Broader Than Korean Peninsuala

B-52s, B-2s, and B-21s to be armed with Long Range Stand Off Weapon (LRSO)

What India's future leased Akula "Chakra III" Might Be Used For - Two

Care and feeding of Indian SOSUS detection & processing network

AIP & LIBs difference on Japanese Submarines - Table

Following an article of February 28, 2019 Anonymous provided the comments below: