Quantcast
Channel: Submarine & Other Matters
Viewing all 2365 articles
Browse latest View live
↧

3 Submarines by L/D ratios. 2 Subs by I Ratios, eg. for Netherlands. India?

October 14, 2019, 2:53 am
$
0
0
On October 12, 2019 Anonymous provided the following useful comments and calculations which compare: (A) Naval Group, SAAB and TKMS submarines against Length (L) / Diameter (aka Beam) (D) ratios, and (B) SAAB-DAMEN and TKMS submarines against Indiscretion Ratios (IRs). 
--

(A)  Length (L) / Diameter (aka Beam) (D) ratios

Naval Group, SAAB and TKMS have proven submarines with similar dimension:
-  Scorpene AM-2000 (displacement 1,870 tons (t); length (L) 70m; Diameter (D) 6.2m, L/D = 11.2) 
-  A26 (1,930t, 63m, 6.4m, L/D = 9.8) and
-  Type 218SG (2,200t, 70m, 6.3m, L/D = 11.1), respectively. 

To achieve a larger submarine (say for the Netherlands) with a displacement of 3000t (if required?) with a simple hull extension (aka plug) the estimated L/D = 15-18 considerably deviates from the optimal L/D = 7-10 [1]. SAAB and TKMS proposed new submarines with bigger beam (to achieve an optimal L/D) presumably based on the existing (Collins-class) or mature paper designed submarine (Type 216). Unless Naval Group can offer submarine with optimal L/D, a successful bid will be a long shot.

(B) Indiscretion Ratios (IRs)

On the basis of rough estimates [2] the Indiscretion Ratios (IRs):
-  large SAAB-DAMEN A26 (3 x MTU diesels, LIBs, Stirling-AIP) = 3.8/% 
-  large 212CD (2 x MTUs, LIBs, FC-AIP) = 4.2%

So the IR of the SAAB-DAMEN A26 is slightly smaller than the 212CD's thanks to the A26's 3 x MTU diesels. These IRs are far superior to IRs of LAB-submarines (around 12%).

There are two strategies to achieve a low IR by using LIBs:
-  one is a combination of diesels and AIP, and 
-  another is the adoption of high power diesels. 

To achieve 4% of IR without AIP, SAAB-DAMEN needs 5 x MTU diesels [with LIBs] or 2 of the latest KAWASAKI diesels [with LIBs].

[1]“Optimum L/D for Submarine Shape”, by M. Moonesun and others. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences, vol.45(1), Jan/2016, pp. 38-43 at
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0bb4/68b6b618d564c401285ecf31129312e677a2.pdf
(Conclusion is on page 42) The main achievement of this paper is the suggestion of an L/D = 7-10 as the optimal range for cylindrical middle body submarines.

[2] Assumption: AIP is used for 50-days submerged surveillance in a 70-day mission. Power consumed per hour is 0.2MW (c = hotel load 0.15MW + propulsion input 0.05MW). Then, total energy to be consumed for the surveillance is 240MW (e=c*24 hours*50days) consisting of an energy supply from AIP (d = c*24hours*submerge period by AIP (a) = 4.8*a) and that from diesel 
(j = 240MW-d). IR is related to daily energy supply (g = j/50days) from diesel with electrical output (b), namely, IR = 100*g/(24*b).

Where:
- SAAB-DAMEN: a=20days, b=3*MTU=3.12MW, d=96MW, j=144MW, g =2.88MW, IR=3.8/% and
- 212CD: a=28days, b=2*MTU =2.08MW, d=134.4MW, j=105.6W, g=2.11MW, IR=4.2%

Submerged period by AIP, hotel load and propulsion input are estimated in various articles.

Pete Comment - Naturally many other technical, cost and Dutch content variables will be part of the Netherlands' future submarine decision. Also, as Submarine Matters October 11, 2019 article records, Netherlands' domestic political factors and international relations with supplier countries will also influence the selection. India is also considering the selection of 6 Project-75I AIP submarines.  

Mainly Anonymous (Pete some editing, comments)
↧
Search

Future South Korean Nuclear Submarine Seen As Threat to Japan

October 17, 2019, 2:07 am
$
0
0
On October 17, 2019 Anonymous provided the following useful and timely comment with links.

The South Korean (SK) Navy officially admitted it is making efforts to secure a nuclear submarine [1].

On October 10, 2019 the Chief of Staff of SK Navy officially announced that an SK nuclear propelled submarine is the most convenient way to follow and destroy North Korea (NK) submarines that are capable of firing nuclear tipped submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs). 

The Chief of Staff of SK Navy also stated  that an SK nuclear propelled submarine could be a "useful deterrent" against neighbouring countries. [Pete Comment: By "deterrent" the Chief of Staff of SK Navy is presumably meaning SK missiles with nuclear warheads as a handful of missiles with  conventional warheads would be no deterrent (particularly to nuclear armed NK)]. 

The Chief of Staff of SK Navy explained that an SK nuclear propelled submarine is not restricted by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) or Safeguards Agreements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 

The Japanese government will interpret “neighboring countries” to mean NK and Japan and that SK Navy considers Japan as a virtual enemy[2]. This is because the SK Navy would never attack heavily nuclear armed China and Russia.

[1] South Korean Navy "Efforts to secure nuclear submarine ... convenient for North SLBM", Radio Free Asia, October 10, 2019 (in Korean - right-click mouse to translate)
https://www.rfa.org/korean/in_focus/nk_nuclear_talks/ne-hw-10102019083107.html

[2]“Development of an SSN starting in SK before Japan [builds an SSN]” by Jun Kitamura, October 17, 2019, [Japan's] JBpress, (in Japanese) https://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/57942?page=4 which displays the SK SLBM range map (below) to hit Japanese territory:

SK Navy submarine attack posture simulation [against Japan] (Map courtesy [Japan's]
 JBpress at https://jbpress.ismedia.jp/articles/-/57942?page=4 ) [where]:
-  "SSK" [or SSB?][conventional sub]: SK Navy KSS-III batch-2
    [or Batch II already designed] launch point to fire SLBMs [at Japan] 
-  "SSN" [or SSBN?]: SK Navy launch points to fire SLBMs [at Japan] 
"Red fan is SLBM range"

Pete Comment - The South Korean SLBMs may become a longer range variant of the land based Hyunmoo-2B (range with 500kg warhead 800 km in 2012?) or of the future Hyanmoo-4 (likely to have a range, with 500kg warhead, well over 1,000km).

Anonymous (some Pete comments)
↧
↧

South Korean Defense and Attack Strategies Against Japan

October 17, 2019, 10:54 pm
$
0
0
On October 18, 2019 Anonymous commented:

Japan has already noticed South Korea’s (SK’s) suspicious intentions [1, 2]. According to a representative SK paper, SK studied, in the 1990s, “the Strategy of Stinging” to hit Tokyo [3].

[1]Masahisa Sato (the Secretary General of the Japanese Diet members caucus of Liberal Democratic Party, and Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs)tweeted (in Japanese) December 25, 2018:

“The basic design of the next 3,000-ton class submarine has been completed in South Korea. Scheduled to be built from late 2019. According to a South Korean announcement, the submarine will be built to respond to threats from all directions and can be equipped with six ballistic missiles with a range of 500km. Where is the main enemy of this submarine? [What is SK’s intent?]”

[2]“South Korea’s epoch-making defense budget of 50 Trillion won [US$42.4 Billion], “North East Asia budget” to check neighboring countries”, SK's JoongAng Ilbo (in S Korean) August 29, 2019https://news.joins.com/article/23565170

“South Korea's defense budget is expected to exceed 50 trillion won [US$42.4 Billion] for the first time. The South Korean government explained that it will greatly increase its defense spending to prepare for the conversion to wartime warfare. It was confirmed that there was also [an intention to build a military capability] to keep in check neighbouring countries such as Japan and China.”

[3]“South Korean Government Self-Defense Strategy New Version [Against] Pyongyang Bay? Beijing and Tokyo”, SK's JoongAng Ilbo(in S Korean), September 22, 2019, https://news.joins.com/article/23583206

“Another concept of independent defense against neighbouring countries is the Strategy of Stinging. An SK government source, asking for anonymity, said, “At the National Research Institute of the 1990s, we studied how to fight in disputes with neighbouring countries under the [code] name of “Key Research”. [The Strategy of Stinging involved the possibility of stinging the core of neighbours]. In other words, the Strategy is to neutralize the command or major facilities in Beijing or Tokyo.” (Only SK version)

Anonymous
↧

South Korean and Japanese Nuclear Submarine Propulsion

October 20, 2019, 11:05 pm
$
0
0
South Korea (SK) has carried out research on building a nuclear powered submarine (aka KSS-N, KSSX-N and SSX) since the 2003 (codename) “362 initiative” if not longer ago. But that 362 initiative was officially (perhaps not actually) terminated in 2004 once it became public - under ( likely) US, Chinese, Japanese and Russian, pressure.

The lead time and technical hurdles for SK to develop a submarine reactor, and specialised submarine to use it, are huge. Only the US, Russia, China and France (with much larger defense budgets than SK) have fully designed and produced submarine reactors. To avoid the huge cost even a big player (the UK) used/(still assisted by) US designs and India uses Russian.

Early speculationthat SK would shrink and modify its existing small land-based SMARTreactor seems misplaced. SMART is unnecessarily large (for SK proposed 4,000 tonne submarine) at 350 MWt (thermal), which if developed for submarine would translate to 70 MWe (electrical). More significantly SMART uses low power/weight ratio 4.8% LEU fuel with an overly frequent 3 year refueling cycle.

Unless SK is conducting an extremely well hidden indigenous reactor for submarine effort one preliminary step might be to produce a reactor powered ship. SK’s DSME has had hints, but no details, for years. Go to the DSME technology website> hover on R&D and you will see “Nuclear Propulsion Ship” > Click on Nuclear Propulsion Ship and you will see Arctic Drill Ship. Such a ship could in future use a reactor for its ice-breaker propulsion function and for its drilling function. Neither SK nor DSME seem to provide further details on nuclear ship plans.

Instead SK has approached other countries for technology transfer assistance for a reactor and a specialized submarine to use it (the subject of my next article).

JAPAN


Japan's nuclear propelled ship Mutsu with Reactor and auxiliary machinery compartments shaded. (From Submarine Matters'June 17, 2016 article).
---

Japan built and operated a nuclear propelled ship – the Mutsu (diagram above) – from 1968 to 1992 with a reactor developed by what is now the Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA). From that experience Japan may have quietly conducted further design research on submarine reactors within the JAEA under the guidance of the Japanese Ministry of Defence (MoD). The most likely countries to assist Japan are the US and France.

Pete
↧

South Korea seeks Submarine Reactors from US and RUSSIA

October 22, 2019, 1:46 am
$
0
0
In Submarine Matters’“South Korean and Japanese Nuclear Submarine Propulsion” October 21, 2019 Pete assessed that South Korea saw its land based SMART nuclear reactor as a technological dead-end for submarine use.

Building submarine reactors is the most expensive and technologically challenging part of building nuclear submarines. Hence better to buy than reinvent. South Korean politicians, officials and scientists appear prepared to cross longstanding alliance lines in seeking reactors from Russia. 

Professor Frank von Hippel provides details in his excellent academic paper titled “Mitigating the Threat of Nuclear-Weapon Proliferation via Nuclear-Submarine Programs” Pages 133-150, Published June 27, 2019 at Taylor Francis Online https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/25751654.2019.1625504. Here is a paragraph with references:

[von Hippel] “South Korea’s president, Moon Jae-in, has declared an interest in building or buying nuclear attack submarines. During US President Donald Trump’s November 2017 visit to Seoul, the two leaders reportedly discussed the possibility of South Korea purchasing a US nuclear attack submarine.”

Further details see “Nuclear-Powered Subs, JSTARS Make South Korea’s Wish List” Defense News, November 8, 2017 at https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2017/11/08/nuclear-powered-subs-jstars-make-south-koreas-wish-list/ 

"Moon had indicated an interest in nuclear-powered submarines even before his election in May, and the topic was reportedly discussed during his meeting with Trump. However, details of those discussions were not revealed, and the Trump administration has not indicated that it is open to that idea.

South Korea’s interest in nuclear-powered submarines has been stoked by North Korea’s development of ballistic missile submarines capable of firing the KN-11, also known as the Pukguksong-1, submarine-launched ballistic missile, which has undergone testing during the North’s recent spate of missile tests.
... Should South Korea acquire nuclear-powered attack submarines, either through an unlikely direct purchase from the U.S. or more likely through the development and production of an indigenous design with U.S. technical assistance, it would represent a significant shift in the country’s defense posture and stoke concerns with nuclear proliferation on the Korean Peninsula.

But significant obstacles to these ambitions remain. South Korea is a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the Asian nation is also prohibited from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent fuel for military purposes under a deal signed with the U.S. in 2015. The U.S. has also not sold nuclear-powered submarines and has not transferred such technology even to allies [Pete - Except to the UK for decades – see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1958_US%E2%80%93UK_Mutual_Defence_Agreement] and it is likely to loath doing so out of nonproliferation concerns.

[Pete Comment - US submarine reactors use “Bomb Grade” 93% to 97% U-235, another reason for the sensitivity of their design and export. See page 20 of https://www.hsfk.de/fileadmin/HSFK/hsfk_downloads/prif124.pdf]

[von Hippel continues] Russia’s premier designer of naval propulsion reactors, OKBM Afrikantov, has made public the fact that, in 2017, it had discussions with the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute on the possibility of providing the design of a new Russian icebreaker reactor as a “reference design” for a South Korean “maritime propulsion” reactor.”
[endnote 9 "An email communication to the author [Frank von Hippel] from a South Korean government official on 9 August 2018 stated that the Moon administration was no longer actively pursuing the idea of a nuclear-powered attack submarine."]

Further details see “Russia May Help South Korea to Build Nuclear Reactor for Maritime Vessels.” Sputnik International, August 7, 2018 at https://sputniknews.com/asia/201808071067008274-russia-south-korea-nuclear-reactor/ 

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Russia may help South Korea to build a ready-to-operate nuclear power plant for maritime propulsion using the RITM-200 reactor as a basis for its design, JSC Afrikantov OKBM, a subsidiary of Rosatom nuclear corporation, said in a 2017 annual report made public on Tuesday.

"In November 2017, during a meeting in Nizhny Novgorod [Russia], representatives from the Korean Atomic Energy Research Institute [KAERI] said that the Korea is considering the possibility of developing a concept for a new reactor with a capacity of about 150-200 MW for sea-faring vessels and is viewing the RITM-200 reactor as a possible reference design," the report says.

According to the report, Moscow expressed readiness to cooperate with Seoul in the production of a turnkey reactor plant after receiving an official request for cooperation from South Korea and obtaining appropriate approval from the Rosatom State Nuclear Corporation.

JSC Afrikantov OKBM is the main developer of nuclear reactor cores for Russian naval vessels."

[von Hippel continues] “The Russian icebreaker reactor, the RITM-200, was designed to use LEU fuel,”

Further details see IAEA. 2016a 180“Advances in Small Modular Reactor Technology Developments, A Supplement To: IAEA Advanced Reactors Information System (ARIS).” at https://aris.iaea.org/Publications/SMR-Book_2016.pdf.

[von Hippel continues] “but apparently will use HEU fuel.”

Further details see “New Russian Icebreakers Will Use HEU Fuel.” International Panel on Fissile Materials, November 29, 2017 http://fissilematerials.org/blog/2017/11/new_russian_icebreakers_w.html.
Despite the earlier plans to use LEU fuel in reactors that will power its new icebreakers, Russia has apparently decided to develop HEU fuel for these reactors. The "integrated propulsion unit" with a nuclear reactor, known as RITM-200 [new link added by Pete] was developed by the Afrikantov OKBM design bureau in Nizhniy Novgorod. The unit will be installed on icebreakers of the Project 22220 series (referred to as UAL, Universal Atomic Icebreaker, in Rosatom documents). The lead ship of this class, Arktika, is expected to enter service in 2018, followed by two more ships, Sibir and Ural...”

Frank von Hippel [another reference] is a Senior Research Physicist and Professor of Public and International Affairs emeritus at Princeton University’s Program on Science and Global Security. He was a founding co-chair of the Program and of the International Panel on Fissile Materials. During 1993–94, he served as Assistant Director for National Security in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
↧
↧

MEDIA BACKGROUND on Lithium-ion batteries for submarine use

October 22, 2019, 4:26 am
$
0
0
The issue of lithium-ion batteries for Australia's future Attack-class submarines is becoming time critical.

The authors (Derek Woolner and David Glynne Jones) of the following MEDIA BACKGROUND, have given Pete permission to publish it:


MEDIA BACKGROUND

Release date: 20 October 2019

Major Western Submarine Designers Ready to Proceed
with Transformational Power Systems: status of lithium-ion
battery technology for naval submarine propulsion

Several countries have now revealed their intention to acquire naval combat submarines within the next decade that will be powered by lithium-ion main batteries.

The following is a collection of public information to provide the media with background on the current status of development and adoption of advanced battery power systems for naval submarine propulsion.

JAPAN

On 4 October 2018 Japan launched the JS Oryu, a Soryu-class attack submarine fitted with lithium-ion main batteries instead of the conventional lead acid batteries used in earlier Soryu-class submarines.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/10/japan-launches-first-lithium-ion-equipped-soryu-classsubmarine/ 

“The lithium-ion batteries radically extend the sub's range and time it can spend underwater.”

https://asia.nikkei.com/Economy/Trade-war/Japan-s-silent-submarines-extend-rangewith-new-batteries

The JS Oryu is due to enter service in March 2020. The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) has advised that the next three Soryu-class submarines, due to enter service between 2021 and 2024, will also be fitted with lithium-ion main batteries

https://mags.shephardmedia.com/Show%20Daily/IMDEX_Asia_Day_Two/IMDEX%20Asia%202019%20Day%20Two.pdf  [p7]

The JMSDF has also indicated that some earlier Soryu-class submarines may be refitted with lithium-ion main batteries.

Initial development of the next generation of Japanese attack submarines – the 29SS class – has commenced, and it is expected that these submarines will also use lithiumion main batteries. The 29SS class will be developed and launched in a similar timeframe to Australia’s new Attack-class submarines.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/stealth-suprise-japans-new-submarine-gamechanger-65611

1

SOUTH KOREA

Commencing in 2016, South Korea undertook an intensive 30-month Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) to evaluate the suitability of commercially-available lithium-ion battery technology for naval submarine propulsion.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/kss-3-2.htm

The outcome of the TRA process, which involved South Korean defence agencies, the prime battery system contractor and 11 research institutes, was a decision to incorporate lithium-ion main battery systems in Block 2 of South Korea’s new KSS-III class attack submarines. The KSS-III Block 2 submarines will be built and commissioned in the midlate 2020s.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/rok/kss-3-unit.htm

In the second quarter of 2019 Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI) launched the lead boat of South Korea’s next generation advanced midget submarine design, currently known as the HDS-400. While not confirmed, it is believed that the HDS-400 will use a lithium-ion main battery system similar to that developed and evaluated for the KSS-III Block 2 large attack submarine.

http://www.hisutton.com/HDS-400_Midget-Submarine.html

GERMANY

In October 2018 Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) announced that they had developed a new type of lithium-ion main battery system for submarines together with SAFT, a manufacturer of advanced battery systems for industry.

Dr. Rolf Wirtz, CEO of Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems said "The use of the new battery technology has enormous tactical advantages. We are entering a new era of submarine construction."

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/2018/euronaval2018/6606-euronaval-2018-tkms-showcasing-li-ion-battery-prototype-for-ssk.html

Following the completion of extensive testing in 2019, TKMS intends to fit the new battery system to Type 212CD submarines to be supplied to the Norwegian Navy.

FRANCE

At Euronaval 2014 DCNS (now Naval Group, lead supplier for the Australian Attackclass submarines) announced three new submarine propulsion technologies including “a hull plug equipped with new-generation high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. Easy to operate, the technology offers high submerged speeds on demand and improved response to power ramp-up and variations.”

2

“The (submerged) endurance of a Scorpene-type submarine is increased to seven days resulting in a significantly enhanced tactical capability.”

https://www.naval-group.com/en/news/major-dcns-innovations-improve-submarinecapabilities/

“DCNS has also announced new generation lithium-ion batteries offering a week's submerged endurance thanks to their increased capacity.”

“In addition to increased submerged endurance, the new-generation lithium-ion batteries offer improved response to power ramp-up and variations as well as deep discharge. Overall, the new batteries allow a submarine to maintain a submerged speed of 12kts for 24 hours, marking a significant new milestone in SSK performance.”

https://www.meretmarine.com/sites/default/files/pdf/MM2014_pp42-55.pdf  [p49]

In October 2018 Naval Group announced that it had developed a high performance and highly secure Li-ion battery system (known as LIBRT) to provide its conventional submarines with outstanding operational capabilities. The LIBRT main battery system also uses lithium-ion battery cells developed and manufactured by SAFT.

https://naval-group.com.au/2018/10/24/naval-group-presents-librt-its-new-generation-oflithium-ion-batteries-system-for-submarines/

Alain Guillou, Senior Executive Vice-President at Naval Group said “The successful development of the LIBRT Li-ion batteries systems is a huge technological stride for the new generation of submarines developed by Naval Group. It provides utmost security guarantees as well as operational and technological superiority to all our clients worldwide.”

Naval Group advised Australian industry media representatives in October 2018 that it intended to present the Australian Government with the option to integrate the LIBRT lithium-ion battery system into Batch 2 of the Attack-class program.

https://www.manmonthly.com.au/news/naval-group-presents-new-generation-lithium-ionbatteries-submarines/

In July 2019, in anticipation of a Dutch Navy requirement for an expeditionary submarine able to be deployed worldwide, Naval Group announced that it “is working on a Barracuda derivative that is very close to the SMX Ocean conceptual design displayed at Euronaval 2014. This conventional submarine of around 4,700 tons shares the dimensions and external design of the Suffren and Shortfin Barracuda (Australian Attack-class) with a totally different propulsion system.”

“The SMX Ocean displayed both an AIP (air independent propulsion) module and lithium-ion batteries instead of acid-lead batteries commonly used today. A configuration that could allow transoceanic deployment at high speed followed by a full month of underwater low-speed operation.”

3

“Lithium batteries offer more power and faster charging than previous generation (lead acid) batteries. If some accidental fires occurred in the civilian uses of this type of battery, Naval Group representatives stress the fact that acid-lead (batteries) are intrinsically even more dangerous. Military security applied to lithium-ion batteries is making them a safer solution.”

“Naval Group already uses lithium-ion batteries underwater, including in the training variant of the F21 torpedo and on UUVs. Recently, Naval Group simulated an 18-days dive using both their new generation AIP and lithium batteries. The final proposition to the Netherlands could use a similar propulsion configuration in order to meet the requirement of projection in the Caribbean.”

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/07/more-details-on-suffren-the-frenchnavy-next-gen-ssn-on-its-export-ssk-variants/ [sub-heading - A Barracuda derivative for the Dutch Navy]


END


This media background is provided by Derek Woolner and David Glynne Jones from published sources.

Derek Woolner is co-author of The Collins class submarine story: steel, spies and spin. He is a previous director of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Group in the Parliamentary Research Service.

David Glynne Jones is an independent advocate for the adoption of renewable energy technology across all sectors of the Australian economy. He is currently assessing the implications of emerging advanced battery technology for electrification of the Australian transport sector.


Media contact:     Derek Woolner
                               Mobile: 0415 510 028
                               Email:  woolner.jones.21@gmail.com

4

↧

Submarine Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motors (PMSM) and Australia

October 22, 2019, 11:39 pm
$
0
0
On October 22, 2019 Anonymous commented:

Permanent Magnet Synchronous Motor (PMSM) technology is applied to propulsion motors to reduce the power of propulsion [1, 2]. 

Jeumont Electric and Siemens both manufacture PMSM, i.e., MAGTRONIC and PERMASYN, respectively. The structures of MAGTRONIC and PERMAYN are completely different. While MAGTRONIC presumably consists of two armatures [3], PERMASYN currently has one armature. 

From the viewpoint of redundancy, PMSM with two armatures or a tandem combination of PMSM [4] with one armature is desirable.

[Pete added further details about Permanent Magnet Motors [5]. Note that it was announced today that Jeumont Electric had won a major contract to install the electrics of Australia’s future Attack-class submarines [6]. Jeumont will almost certainly supply PMSMs for the Attack-class [7].]

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armature_(electrical)

[2] According to Toshiba, PMSM reduced power consumption by 50% . In Anonymous calculations by using the data of Victoria-class submarines (DC motor) and Soryu submarines (PMSM), nearly the same result was obtained.

[3] One armature is used at low speed range, and two armatures are used at middle and high speed ranges. Even if one armature has failed, another armature can be used.

[4] Siemens seems to be developing tandem PERMASYN.

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_motor#Permanent-magnet_motors

[6] on October 23, 2019 Naval Group announced https://naval-group.com.au/2019/10/23/subcontract-awarded-for-future-submarine-main-electric-propulsion-equipment/“Subcontract Awarded For Future Submarine Main Electric Propulsion Equipment” “Naval Group has signed a subcontract with Jeumont Electric (France) for the design of the Main Electric Propulsion Equipment for the Attack Class Submarines. The Main Electric Propulsion Equipment converts electrical power using Converter Cubicles into mechanical power and then propels the Submarine through the water...”

[7] "November 7, 2019 Jeumont Electric is...also the preferred supplier of new generation permanent magnet motors for the Australian Future Submarine Program." https://www.asc.com.au/news-media/latest-news/asc-enters-into-long-term-collaboration-with-jeumont-electric-of-france/

Anonymous and Pete
↧

Nickel-Zinc Main Batteries Unsuited to Submarine Use

October 24, 2019, 12:05 am
$
0
0
Lead-acid batteries (LABs) have been used for submarines for over 100 years and it appears they will unquestionably be used for Australia's future Attack-class submarines.

If replacement battery technologies were considered? There is a debate in Australia about the suitability of using 100 year old Nickel-Zinc (NiZn) battery technology for these future submarines rather than using newer technology Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs).

Anonymous does not think NiZn is suitable for submarines.

There are two issues (A. short lifetime [1], and B. low voltage) in NiZn battery applications for submarines. 

A. The biggest issue is short battery life. Charge/discharge cycles for NiZn is only 200-300 times. 

Snorkeling of a submarine (with LABs) is conducted at least once a day. 

If the annual availability rate of submarine is 60% (ie. 200 mission days per year) then NiZn main batteries would need to be replaced once a year. This is unrealistic on cost grounds. 

NiZn's 200-300 cycles can be compared to:
-  500 cycles for LIB-NCA technology
-  7,000-15,000 cycles for LIB-NTO technology, and
-  2,000 cycles for LABs but with LAB's disadvantages compared to LIBs including lower LAB voltage (power)/weight as well as shallower and slower charging (higher LAB indiscretion ratio).

B. Also, the voltage (power) of a NiZn battery (1.6V) is lower than LABs (2V) and LIBs (3.6V).

[1]  https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/nickel_based_batteries see Nickel-zinc (NiZn) subheading

Comment

As NiZn batteries have been around since 1901 one would have thought NiZn would have been adopted well before now if LiZn were a serious contender.

Anonymous and Pete
↧
Search

Type 214 submarine variant with AIP to be built for INDONESIA

October 24, 2019, 4:13 pm
↧
↧

South Korea Looking At France's Barracuda SSN or Just the K15 Reactor

October 24, 2019, 9:18 pm
$
0
0
In Submarine Matters’ “South Korea seeks Submarine Reactors from US and RUSSIA” of October 22, 2019 South Korea may have concluded it is better to buy an existing submarine reactor, designs or at least a ship reactor than totally reinvent a submarine reactor. 

Since 2017 (if not earlier) South Korea has been considering France’s new Barracuda SSN with its K15 (aka K 15 aka K-15) reactor. With North Korea's buildup of nuclear weapon and missile capabilities South Korea, in October 2019, has been testing any increased US willingness for South Korea to explore nuclear propulsion options.


"In October 2017, the [South Korean] Navy commissioned the Seoul-based Korea Defense Network to conduct a five month study on the feasibility of developing an indigenous nuclear-powered attack submarine. The think tank reported in March 2018 the results to the Navy, suggesting the service build a nuclear attack submarine along the lines of the French 5,300-ton Barracuda-class sub. The French sub is fueled by low-enriched uranium."

It is conceivable that France may want to sell a complete French built Barracuda to SK, supply just the Barracuda’s K15 reactor or transfer technology (including a reactor design) for SK to incorporate in its 4,000+ tonne KSS III Batch III building program. Thus KSS III Batch III would become the nuclear propelled KSSN or KSSX-N.

The Barracuda’s K15 reactor has the:

-  political/regulatory advantage of using LEU ie. less than 20% U-235 which South Korea sees as not being restricted by the NPT or nuclear Safeguards Agreements. This is compared to the political sensitivities and anti-proliferation regulatory restrictions placed on exporting/importing US and UK submarine reactors (with weapons’ grade HEU of 93-97 percent (see p. 20)) and Russian naval reactors (reported to use 20 to over 90 percent HEU (p. 20)). 

-  and technical advantage of the Barracuda's reactot being built for a submarine of just over 5,000 tons, ie. in the KSS III Bach III weight bracket. The Barracuda's K15 reactor stands for 150 MWt which translates to 30 MWe for Barracuda’s hotel load + propulsion.

It is significant that France, for over a decade, has been assisting Brazil in designing the non-nuclear aspects of Brazil’s future SN-BR SSN (to be called Álvaro lberto). At Submarine Matter’s 2015 article see the subheading "Brazilian Nuclear Submarine (SN-BR)” “There currently appears to be expectations that SN-BR will be around 100m long and 9m wide. This coincides with France's Barracuda SSN dimensions of: 99.5m long and beam: 8.8m.” Such non-nuclear assistance could be extended to South Korea and perhaps with a more quiet transfer of some K15 technology .

In terms of vertically launched cruise or ballistic missiles the KSS Batch I features 6 VLS tubes, each with one missile. KSS Batch II may feature 10 and KSS III Batch III perhaps 12 to 16. If  KSS III Batch III were nuclear propelled this would amount to a middle naval power solution. This would avoid the much higher great power expense of building separate specialised SSN and SSBN classes.

Neighbouring Japan (a part strategic competitor of South Korea) and Australia with its future conventional Barracuda (know as the Attack-class) are closely observing South Korea's interest in nuclear propulsion and ever larger submarines.

India, already having SSBNs, is interested in building 6 SSNs with specialised SSN reactors. India is naturally talking to France's Naval Group. Naval Group is helping India build the 6 Kalvari-class Scorpenes, bidding for India's 6 Project-75ISSK competiton and Naval Group produces all of France's SSNs and SSBNs. So India can have far ranging discussions, on many topics, with Naval Group.

Pete
↧

Lithium polymer (Li-Po) Batteries "Safer" for Submarines

October 27, 2019, 4:30 am
$
0
0

On October 27, 2019 Anonymous (with some editing by Pete) reported:
  
In the quest for longer term safer Lithium battery solutions for submarines it is pointed out existing Lithium ion batteries (LIBs) mostly use electrolytes in organic liquid solution, while Lithium polymer (Li-Po) batteries use electrolytes in polymer gel (semi-solid) solution.

Li-Po is safer than existing LIBs due to the properties of polymer gel. 

Li-Po is a polymer gel version of LIBs. There are many types of Li-Po, such as Li-Po NMC(lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide).

Dutch battery manufacturing company EST-Floattechis commercializing Lithium Polymer (“Green Orca”) batteries for marine applications.

Green Orca Modules use EST-Floattech partner Kokam’sLi-Po NMC pouch cells. The brochure below indicates: "The technical design choices for the Green Orca® [energy storage system] ESS started with a high performance Li-Ion battery cell and resulted in the world’s safest, DNV-GL certified Li-Ion ESS." Further down the NMC chemistry has a “high energy density and overall strong performance while the pouch shape ensures better heat dissipation resulting in excellent efficiency”. See further details in the brochure at [1].

Examples A and B are Anonymous’ estimated arrangements of Green Orca based on module and estimated sizes in a future SAAB-DAMEN modified A26 submarine. Anonymous estimates a battery capacity of 10 – 20 MW if Green Orcas are used in such a SAAB-DAMEN submarine.

[1]“Green Orca High Energy, Technical Brochure” by the EST-Floattech.com [with Kokam] https://www.est-floattech.com/app/uploads/2019/06/greenorca-technicalbrochure-144dpi.pdf 
An energy module (weighing 82 kg) consists of 14 cells, its size is W x H x D = 335 mm x 541 mm x 542 mm. Its capacity is 10.5kWh (14 cells x 200Ah x 3.7V = 10.36kWh). Capacity per weight is 126Wh/kg (10.36kWh/82kg) [with a Cycle Life of approximately "4,600 cycles"]. Capacity of Lithium Iron Phosphate is 90-120Wh/kg.

Anonymous’ Estimated Arrangements in a future SAAB-DAMEN modified A26 submarine:

Example A - Two battery sections with module arrangement of double stacking, 12 rows and 20 lines
                      of module. Total number of batteries is 960 (= 2 sections x 12 rows x 20 lines 
                      x 2 stacks). This would yield total power capacity is 9.94 MWh.

Example B  - Two battery sections with module arrangement of triple stacking, 12 rows and 20 lines
                       of modules. This would yield total power capacity 14.9 MW.


Anonymous and Pete
↧

Type 212NFS Submarines with Lithium-ion Batteries planned by Italy

October 28, 2019, 12:55 pm
$
0
0
Italy's Senate Defense Committee has approved the construction in Italy of the first 2 of a planned 4 Type 212NFS (Near Future Submarines) for the Italian Navy. 

It is envisaged these will have Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs).

See further details at:

-  https://www.udt-global.com/__media/libraries/sensors-and-processing/116---Vincenzo-Pennino-Slides.pdf and

-  https://www.portaledifesa.it/index~phppag,3_id,2260_pubb,2_npp,16_npag,126.html
   "...the contract will be signed for the acquisition of the two new U-212 NFS (Near Future
   Submarine) for the Navy. The boats will be a little longer than [Italy's 4 Type 212A Todaro-class
   submarines and] above all, they will have a greater Italian industrial content. For example,
   electronic warfare, including the CEMS part, will be by Elettronica. The propulsion
   will be AIP, always based on Siemens PEM cells, but with lithium ion batteries of Italian
   production." 


↧

Indonesia May Buy 4 to 6 Regionally Superior Type 214 Submarines

October 28, 2019, 4:18 pm
$
0
0
Indonesia is undergoing a quick and efficient submarine expansion program. Indonesia has 2 aging German built Type 209s, 2 South Korean new build 209s and 1 209 built in Indonesia (see Table below). Three more 209s are being jointly built by South Korea and Indonesia with delivery to the Indonesian Navy by around 2026. That totals 8 209s by 2026.

Some naval, political and industrial factions in Indonesia understandably see a need for a total of 12 submarines to defend Indonesia’s huge archipelagic sea space. Twelve also happens to equal the number of 12 future submarines planned by Indonesia’s southern neighbour Australia for the Australian Navy. Indonesia’s healthy economic growth (just over 5% a year) can afford it. Indonesia is forecast to have the world’s fourth largest economy by 2030.

Indonesia appears to have a requirement beyond 2024 for 4 (to make up 12) or 6 more submarines (to make up 12 owing to any replacement of Indonesia’s 2 aging "Cakra" 209s (delivered in 1981)). Janes advises Turkey's ship and submarine builder STM [with German backing] gave a presentation to the Indonesian Navy on 12 February 2019. This was to market German designed Turkish built 209s and Type 214s submarines to the Indonesian Navy.

Type 214 submarines feature air independent propulsion (AIP) technology allowing them to remain fully submerged longer than the plain diesel electric (only) submarines that Australia envisages for the future Attack class. In that sense Indonesian Type 214 submarines would be regionally superior to Australia’s current and future submarines. Australian submarines have poorer fully submerged performance than submarines with AIP or Lithium-ion Battery technology because our current and future submarines will lack those technologies.

Germany appears to be supporting Turkey’s bid to export submarines to Indonesia. In 2011 a joint German/Turkish bid to sell 209s to Indonesia had been unable to compete with South Korea (which had 209 export rights) to export 209s. Anonymous advises this would have caused some German resentment.

Now in 2019 a German (TKMS)/Turkish (STM) bid to sell 4 Turkish built 209s would still be likely to be outbid by South Korea’s technology transfers, continuity of supply and soft loans all effectively meaning a cheaper price and benefits for Indonesian industry.

However if Germany/Turkey instead managed to sell Turkish built 214s to Indonesia Germany/Turkey would have a complete advantage over South Korea. This is because Germany has given Turkey rights to export 214s while South Korea has been given no such rights.

Indonesia, with the last of 8 209s to be received by 2026, may want to receive the first of 4 x 214s by 2027. This may mean Indonesia would need to secure a 214 contract with Turkey in 2021-2022.

So by 2030 Indonesia may have 12 submarines possibly including 4 regionally superior Type 214s with AIP and perhaps 2 more 214s by 2032.   2030 will be a year that Australia will still only have 6 aging (hence regionally inferior) Collins class submarines. According to current schedules (likely to slip) Australia will be operating its first Attack class submarine only by 2035. However having no AIP nor Lithium-ion batteries Australia’s Attack class will be inferior to the Type 214s of Australia’s nearest submarine neighbour and strategic competitor, Indonesia.
-----------------------------------------------

Indonesian Submarine Table (1981 – 2035)

Class/Sub Name/No.
Launched/
Delivered
Details – Comments
KRI = Ship of Republic of Indonesia.
Cakra class Type 209s
Two sub Cakra class German HDW (now TKMS) built in Kiel. Are Type 209/1300s. 8 x 533mm tubes with 14 x AEG torpedoes. Specs last refurbished 2012.[18]
KRI Cakra 401
1981
Specs   Old at 2019 may be for training only.
KRI Nanggala 402
delivered 1981
Specs  Old, still operational 2019.
Nagapasa class – Batch 1 of Type 209s
3 submarine contract signed with South Korea's DSME, December 20, 2011. US$1.12 Billion total to build 3 x Improved Chang Bogo Type 209 variants of the Type 209/1400 (beating Russian, French and German/Turkish bids with greater South Korean technology transfer and soft loans)
KRI Nagapasa 403
Delivered 2017
1st Nagapasa
KRI Ardadedali 404
Delivered 2018
2nd Nagapasa
KRI Alugoro 405
Launched April 2019 Surabaya
3rd Nagapasa, Commissioned 2019? PT PAL assembled.
Nagapasa class – Batch 2 of Type 209s
no submarine names so far, ie:
US$1 billion contract with DSME signed April 12, 2019 in Bandung, Indonesia, to conclude in late March 2026. for contract with South Korea’s three Type 209/1400  submarines.
KRI ?????????  406
 Probably 2024.
4th Nagapasa PT PAL to build 2 modules  to be sent to Okpo, South Korea (SK) where sub will be assembled with DSME’s 4 modules.
KRI ?????????  407
 Probably 2025.
5th Nagapasa PT PAL to build 4 modules to be sent to Okpo SK, to be assmbled with DSME's 2 modules
KRI ?????????  408
 By 2026.
6th Nagapasa may be assembled by PT PAL Surabaya, Indonesia.
Possible 4 to 6 more Nagapasa Type 209s

(409 to 414)


OR


4 to 6 Type 214s (409 to 414)
 By 2030
Possible 4 to 6 (with the 2 aging Cakras retiring) future Nagapasa Type 209s. First likely built in South Korea. Final 3 or 5 may be assembled by PT PAL, Surabaya, Indonesia.

OR

German designed, Turkish built Type 214s  (with AIP)

Pete
↧
↧

Naval Group's 2nd Generation Fuel Cell AIP "ready to be marketed"

October 29, 2019, 11:27 pm
$
0
0
Here is part of Vincent Groizeleau's Mer et Marine (all the maritime news), September 27, 2019, article (which I have translated from French and bolded some bits) at https://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/sous-marins-le-nouvel-aip-de-naval-group-tient-ses-promesses :

“Submarines: Naval Group's new AIP delivers on its promises”

Naval Group's development of an Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system for submarines based on a new generation of fuel cells passed a crucial milestone this year. The ground system of the Naval Group's, installed at its Indret site, close to Nantes [in France], indeed worked for 18 days in conditions representative of a real patrol. "It was a question of closely checking the functioning of the system with a profile of operational use, as well as the autonomy of diving. For 18 days, the system, connected to batteries (to be representative of actual use on a submarine) produced electricity from diesel fuel, operating at high pressure, which means that it does not limit diving depth.

[The were simulations of] Transits, very slow speeds, accelerations, fast surface rises, stops of the AIP followed by restarting, management of a possible breakdown or damage ... As on a real submarine, the system was confronted with situations to validate its performance and reliability.

...Called AIP FC-2G (Fuel Cell Second Generation - FC-2G), this system has required a decade of research. Technologically, it includes two main innovations. First, the hydrogen used for fuel cell operation is manufactured directly on board, via a chemical reforming process from diesel fuel used by diesel-generators. This process provides increased security through the absence of hydrogen storage on board. The exhaust fumes are discarded discreetly, since they dissolve instantly in the water. In parallel, Naval Group has designed a patented system to produce air by injecting nitrogen into the oxygen inlet of the cell, this oxygen is stored in cryogenic form in a tank. Synthetic air reacts with hydrogen in the fuel cell to produce electricity, which powers the submarine's batteries and the electric propulsion motor. The battery is confined in a closed and ventilated enclosure to control a possible leakage of hydrogen or oxygen.



Principle of the device [above] (© NAVAL GROUP)



1: the reformer is used to produce hydrogen from diesel fuel
2: the component is used to increase the hydrogen yield and eliminate the carbon monoxide produced
    by the reformer
3: Purification membranes feed fuel cells with ultra-pure hydrogen
4: Fuel cells produce electricity from hydrogen and oxygen
5: the tank stores oxygen in liquid form

...Standalone operation or in tandem with batteries

Designed for a lifespan of 10,000 hours, the fuel cell has a capacity of 250 kW. It feeds the electrical plant when the submarine is in AIP mode, thus allowing the electric propulsion motor to run and provides for the [submarine's hotel load power needs]. The submarine can rely on this AIP system alone at a speed of up to about 5 knots, knowing that to obtain a range of three weeks in diving, the use profile varies between 2 and 4 knots. To do this, the power required for the AIP FC-2G is between 130 and 180 kW. Beyond that, you have to tap into the batteries, the passage from one energy source to another being done without interruption. 

Many advantages over other systems
Architecturally, the Naval Group AIP FC-2G has a considerable advantage over existing AIP systems (that store hydrogen in external tanks, posing weight problems (ie. 130 to 160 tons of hydrides of which less than 2% is usable hydrogen) and other AIP systems refueling problems). Fuel cells currently in service use, in addition, pure oxygen, which generates high wear, with filters and membranes needing to be replaced very regularly. AIP FC-2G is more efficient, according to Naval Group, as AIP FC-2G offers (according to its designers) duration of use between each major maintenance approximately five times higher than that of its foreign competitors. "Our system really fits into the operational scheme of a submarine. It only requires a short interruption of three weeks each year - the only equipment to be changed during this maintenance period being the catalysts. In the meantime, there is nothing to do! Says Marc Quémeneur [AIP product manager at Naval Group].
Finally, the choice of hydrogen production from diesel fuel facilitates refueling and storage (single fuel on the submarine) while improving safety compared to systems using, for example, methanol, which are more flammable and introduce toxic products in case of leakage.
The device fully integrated in a standalone module
Like MESMA, (the first AIP developed by the French group and which equips Pakistan’s Agosta 90Bs) the entire AIP FC-2G system is grouped in a single module, autonomous from the rest of the submarine. The system is housed in a hull section about 8 meters long integrated into the submarine  from the beginning or added after overhaul with a minimum of modifications to the submarine. AIP FC-2G is adaptable to submarines with a diameter of at least 6 meters, such as Scorpene or the conventional propulsion version of the Barracuda. AIP FC-2G is obviously designed not to impact overall performance, starting with diving depth and acoustic discretion.
...AIP FC-2G is therefore "ready to be marketed" and already proposed by Naval Group to a number of navies. 
...While AIP FC-2G has been tested with traditional lead-acid batteries, Naval Group is also working on integration with submarines using lithium-ion battery technology, which will expand operational performance. ENDS
-----------------------------------------------------------------
See Vincent Groizeleau's full Mer et Marine report, with more illustrations, here https://www.meretmarine.com/fr/content/sous-marins-le-nouvel-aip-de-naval-group-tient-ses-promesses 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Comment
Naval Group may well have timed this article with a view to India's Project 75I competition for 6 submarines with AIP. Also the Dutch Walrus submarine replacement competition may require AIP. Australia, building 12 conventional propulsion versions of the Barracuda (known as the Attack class) may also decide on AIP for the first or later batches.
Current users of Naval Group Scorpenes (Chile, Malaysia, India and Brazil) might perhaps also decide to retrofit their Scorpenes with AIP FC-2G.
↧

Swarms of Chinese Mini-UUVs Threatening Aussie Submarines

October 30, 2019, 5:38 pm
$
0
0
On October 29, 2019 news came to hand in Australia's Blue Moutains Gazette (see https://www.bluemountainsgazette.com.au/story/6465062/new-sub-could-be-google-maps-for-the-ocean/?cs=9397 )

of a mini-unmanned undersea vehicle (UUV) that can operate in swarms "Not only...to discover new species of marine life and track climate change, but in time...to optimise search and rescue operations, locate wreckages and black boxes, and much more."



Melbourne (Australia) mini-UUV.  (Photo courtesy Blue Moutains Gazette )
--- 

Pete Comment

This invention could carry small sonars. This invention and others like it, being developed in China, Japan, the US, UK and Europe could operate in swarms to detect submarines - making submarines an obsolete, increasingly vulnerable technology. 

Think of a flotilla 20 low cost Chinese "trawlers" all peacefully "catching fish", but actually acting as a "mother-ship" each for 200 Chinese low-cost mass produced mini-UUVs. So that equals 4,000 UUVs per flotilla. 

These flotillas can be assisted by the fixed seabed and tethered anti-submarine sonar sensors China is already stringing across East Asian seas.

Such a flotilla can operate in entirely flexible reconfigurable ways, particularly to track very slow moving (when fully submerged) Australian conventional submarines (SSKs) eg. by being strung in front of, behind and even around an Australian SSK in a tightening sonar net.

Or consider several 4,000 UUV flotillas all mothered by plausibly fishing low cost Chinese trawlers being strung in-line across the East China Sea or South China Sea for months to track and ensnare Japanese, Singaporean or South Korean SSKs.

The possibilities are endless, cheap and can occur in peacetime - no need for expensive naval assets. 

They can "cue" naval assets to easily destroy our submarines, if and when conflict breaks out.

Pete 
↧
Search

France's Naval Group and India's DRDO Working on the Same Fuel Cell AIP

October 31, 2019, 6:21 pm
$
0
0
Following “Naval Group's 2nd Generation Fuel Cell AIP ready to be marketed"” of October 30, 2019 I deduce that India's DRDO AIP and Naval Group's new AIP are one and the same.

The following is an update of Indian DRDO's progress on land testing a Fuel Cell AIP system (in part to retrofit on India's Naval Group (was DCNS) designed Kalvari class Scorpenes). 

This just happens to be occurring at the same time as land testing of Naval Group's 2nd Generation Fuel Cell "AIP FC-2G" (in part to retrofit on Scorpenes).  Scorpenes have been sold by, what is now  Naval Group, to Chile, Malaysia, Brazil and India.

See Xavier Vavasseur's, Naval News update article of 31 Oct 2019 at https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2019/10/indias-aip-system-gets-boost-with-operation-of-land-based-prototype/

"India’s AIP System Gets Boost With Operation Of Land-Based Prototype"

"India's fuel cell-based Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system has crossed several milestones in technology maturity, the Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) has announced.

The DRDO is an agency of the Government of India, charged with the military’s research and development. India’s AIP system will eventually be fitted aboard all Kalvari-class submarines...

...As previously reported, Naval Group India engineers are already working with the DRDO for the integration of an Indian designed [?] AIP module...."

PETE COMMENT

National and organizational pride and high budget justifications are such that every part of a submarine can be claimed as locally invented/indigenous if at all plausible.

Pete
↧

DSME 2000 Concept Submarine, Specifications, Potential Customers

November 4, 2019, 12:22 am
$
0
0
Jane's Navy International and Naval Newshave both provided details of the “DSME 2000” medium sized diesel-electric concept submarine. It was displayed, around October 24, 2019 at the International Maritime Defense Industry Exhibition (MADEX) 2019 in Busan, South Korea.

South Korea's DSME 2000 is a concept (paper) submarine targeted for the export market, particularly to Southeast Asian and South American nations. 

Pete Comment 

Potential customers DSME may particularly be looking at are:
-  the Philippines (becoming relatively wealthy, modernising its fleet, has no submarines but wants to 
   acquire some) 
-  Chile (2 of its 4 subs are old, commissioned in 1984) 
-  Columbia (several very old submarines)
-  Argentina (its 2 active subs very old entering service in 1974 and 1984) 
-  also Mexico (in North America) is relatively wealthy but has no submarines. 

See list of Latin American countries by nominal GDP and GDP per capita - financial indicators on  whether they can afford new submarines. The above potential customer countries might mainly use subs for surveillance against non-state actors (drug, arms and people smugglers, pirates, illegal fishing, separatists and terrorists).

DSME 2000's Indicative Specifications  

Drawn from Jane's Navy International and Naval News.  Preliminary design work was completed by DSME in January 2019, but the final variant can be tailored (with varying specifications) according to customer requirements.

2,180 tonnes (submerged displacement) 
71.1m long
6.5 m beam, diameter 
single-hulled

20 knots (maximum submerged speed)
10 knots (maximum surface speed)
10,000 nautical miles at cruising speed

40 crew + 10 special forces or intelligence linguists/monitors

Lithium-ion batteries
[2+ diesel engines]
AC propulsion motor.
Lengthened version could incorporate an AIP plug

Incorporates a seven-mast configuration The masts suite includes optronic, radar, ESM, SATCOM, Snorkel and up to two communication hoistable masts. The sensor suite is based on Cylindrical Hydrophone Array, Intercept Detection and Ranging Sonar, Own Noise Analysis, Flank Array Sonar, Passive Ranging Sonar, Active Operation Sonar and Towed Array Sonar.

Flexible weapon launching system depending on customer requirements. Standard fitout can be 8 torpedo tubes with a total of 16 torpedoes/missiles/[UUVs] [or typically 32 mines].

Utilizes foreign technologies and local technologies developed for South Korea's KSS-III program. 



DSME’s new diesel-electric attack submarine concept targeted for the export market, DSME 2000. (Courtesy IHS Markit/M Boruah)
---



DSME 2000 class submarine scale model at MADEX 2019. Blue "boxes" may depict combat system and propulsion computers/work stations and yellow boxes lithium-ion batteries 
(Courtesy Naval News)
---



DSME 2000 design features a flexible weapon launching system. (Courtesy Naval News).
---


Pete
↧
↧

Video: DSME 2000 & KSS-III Submarines with Lithium-ion Batteries

November 4, 2019, 9:04 pm
$
0
0
Following November 4, 2019's DSME 2000 Concept Submarine, Specifications, Potential Customers below is a MADEX 2019 video (link) with a South Korean engineer commenting on the DSME 2000 and KSS-III. Then a Hanwha Defense representative provides details of the Lithium-ion batteries for submarines that DSME is using and marketing. 


-  at 1 minute 10 seconds Xavier Vavasseur (Chief Editor, Naval News) with Jejun Park (Chief
   Engineer, South Korea's DSME) introduce the concept DSME 2000 submarine. At 2,000 tonnes it
   is a size between the DSME 1,400 tonne Chang Bogo (Type 2009 variant) exported to Indonesia
   and the 3,000 tonne KSS-III DSME is building for the South Korean Navy.

   The DSME 2000 will have the latest IT and Lithium-ion Batteries, an AC magnet motor and
   X-plane rudders. As it is a concept design it can be configured with  the foreign customer's choice
   of weapons [and presumably with the option of Fuel Cell AIP?].

-  5 mins 4 secs Jejun Park briefs Xavier about the KSS-III - with a KSS-III Batch 1 being
   launched on September 14, 2018. The KSS-III Batch 2s will have Lithium-ion Batteries which
   will increase fully submerged endurance by several days.

-  5 mins 47 secs display of the Lithium-ion Battery arrangement for the KSS-III Batch 2 (on which
   many DSME 2000 components will be based). Monnhee Kang of Hanwha Defense displays the
   contrast between:
   =   Lead-acid Batteries [eg. used for Australia's current and future subs] only having 2,000 "cycles"
        [a cycle being one semi-submerged, diesel engine battery recharging "snort"]. See reference.
   =   compared to Samsung SDI Lithium-ion Batteries that have twice the service life (that is up to
        4,000 cycles "or about 10 years of operational life").
   =   Monnhee points out a Samsung SDI Lithium-ion battery tray, each with 24 cells. With 100
        modules in the front of a KSS-III Batch 2 and 100 in the back. South Korea has been conducting
        land based tests of whole battery pack for submarine since 2016. South Korean industry reps
        indicated all has gone according to plan. 

Pete
↧

South Korea Could Export Submarines to Philippines

November 5, 2019, 3:42 pm
$
0
0
Nicky commentedon November 5, 2019 in response to my South Korean DSME 2000 Concept Submarine, Specifications, Potential Customers article of November 4, 2019. My reply to Nicky just grew and grew. So I am making it into the following comment with links.

I think an assumption that the "Philippines can[not] afford submarines coming from South Korea or Europe" is dated. The Philippines is no longer a poor country reliant on very old second-hand vessels. For example, the Philippines has bought 2 NEW frigatesfrom South Korea.

If you look at this IMF Countries by Nominal  GDP in 2019 List  you'll see the Philippines (at US$347 Billion) is richer than:

-  Egypt (at US$302 Billion) - that has just bought new German Type 209 submarines

-  Chile (at US$294 Billion) that has 2 old German subs but 2 recent French Scorpene subs

-  Pakistan (at US$284 Billion) that has 5 French subs and buying 8 subs from China, and

-  much richer than Portugal (at US$236 Billion) and Greece (at US$214 Billion) that both have
   European subs.

I'd add that South Korea is a more efficient, lower cost submarine builder than Russia. “In 2011, South Korea beat Russia, France, and Germany in competition for a $1.1 billion tender to supply Indonesia with three [Chang Bogo] Type 209-class submarines.” 

Russia generally lacks the money to equal South Korea's soft loan enticements. Also Russia has a notoriously high cost, shoddy work submarine overhaul and weapons upgrade reputation. Just ask the Indians about how unreliable the Russian upgrade for India's Kilos subs was. This upgrade was to fit Klub anti-ship missiles to India's Kilos - with the missiles proving particularly unreliable.

Yes, as I indicated in the November 4, 2019 article, Chile and Argentina are possible buyers for DSME 2000s. Argentina has such old subs that they are unsafe, like the ARA San Juan, that sadly sank.

I don't know whether Columbia needs 2,000 ton medium-large subs for their main role - which is anti-drug smuggler surveillance. See my 2015 article where Columbia, in 2015, acquired 2 small 500 ton Type 206s from Germany.

Pete
↧

China’s Future Forward Base of Tulagi a Threat to Australia.

November 5, 2019, 9:05 pm
$
0
0
In August 1942 US Marines (in the Guadalcanal Campaign) fought and died to liberate the strategically important island of Tulagi (in the Solomon Islands) from the Japanese. Now Tulagi, with its dual-use capable natural deep water harbour and airfield has been leased, cheaply, for 75 years to China. See the map below.

Australian politicians appear to have been taken by surprise and have been unable to head off the lease. China is now too politically powerful and can target its increasing cash reserves to buy off islands that are close to, and strategically important to, Australia.

The New York Times, not Australian news outlets, broke the story on October 16, 2019 and advised:

“The renewable 75-year lease was granted to the China Sam Enterprise Group, a conglomerate founded in 1985 as a state-owned enterprise, according to corporate records.

A copy of the “strategic cooperation agreement,” obtained by The New York Times ... reveals both the immediate ambitions of China Sam and the potential...for infrastructure that could share civilian and military uses.

Signed on September 22, 2019 the [lease] agreement includes provisions for a fishery base, an operations center, and “the building or enhancement of the airport.”



Tulagi island (part of the Solomon Islands) in relation to Australia. (Map courtesy Agency France Press via Yahoo News, October 2019)
---

The military value of Tulagi includes its potential use as a forward Chinese naval and air base in cutting naval strategic lines of communication between the US and Australia (map above). China can improve Tulagi’s airfied to accommodate maritime patrol aircraft to blockade Australia northern approaches (Tulagi to Port Moresby (New Guinea) and return) and Australia’s eastern approaches (from Tulagi to New Caledonia and return). From Tulagi Chinese strike aircraft could hit the cities of Cairns and Townsville (both on the Australian mainland).

Tulagi as a forward operating base for Chinese surface ships and submarines would save many days of passage to block the major east coast Australian city-ports of Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne.

Australia’s leaders have been virtually silent about the strategic possibilities of the Tulagi Lease:

“News of the lease agreement sent Australian diplomats scrambling to find out more details. [Australian] Foreign Minister Marise Payne...had not responded to a request for comment...”.

The possibility that China could develop Tulagi at the rate of its rapid South China Sea island seaport-airport building is a major concern, to say the least. 

Also see an article in The Strategist.

Pete
↧
Viewing all 2365 articles
Browse latest View live
Search