COMMENT
AAP's article via SkyNews "France pitches nuclear submarine option" March 24, 2016 (note Oberon photo) touched on the possibility that:
- Australia might develop a nuclear submarine (Brazilian ProSub style) under DCNS guidance, and
- that DCNS feared Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) may "explode".
Nuclear Propulsion for Subs
The DCNS article implies DCNS may help Australia design a nuclear submarine (around "2050"). Such a task may gladen ASC's efficiency for a century. An Australian enriched Uranium industry may be needed to refuel (every 10 - 15 years) the submarine reactor ASC develops with Admiral Rickover like urgency, speed and efficiency.
The offer from (then) US Ambassador Bleich in February 2012 to sell or lease Virginia SSNs to Australia - if repeated - may be more practical, leading to usable SSNs for the RAN this century. Someone like Trump may repeat the offer - but Obama be faint-hearted.
Nuclear propulsion is discussed periodicly in Submarine Matters, the last time in early 2015.
Arguments against nuclear propulsion include:
- high reliance on the nuclear facilities and expertise of foreign allies (UK, US, France) to build, refuel and even safely operate reactors at sea and in port.
- the Australian domestic debate over the decades has rejected even hosting a low level nuclear waste dump, so nuclear propelled subs based in Australia would probably be unpopular.
- Sydneysiders, who host Fleet Base East, would certainly be lacking in enthusiasm for frequent hosting of nuclear subs. Would a new naval base on the eastern seaboard be needed?
- many don't see the difference between nuclear propulsion and nuclear weapons. However the difference becomes obscured in the case of Virginia SSNs which rely on a reactor that happens to be over 90% HEU - nuclear weapons grade.
DCNS "explode" Batteries
The worry in the DCNS article article that Lithium-ion Battery (LIBs) may explode should be avoided by a decade (2020-2030) of Japanese Navy operational use of LIBs. This would be before Australian future submarines use them in the early 2030s. Japan may lay down its first operational "LIBs only Soryu Mark 2" this year or next. That Soryu, probably built at MHI, may be designated "27SS and SS-511" perhaps being launched late 2018, then commissioned into the Japanese Navy around 2020 or 2021. See Soryu Table below with possible submarine building schedule for Australian Future Submarine in red (if Japan is chosen).
The Shortfin that France is offering is to be a conventional version of the future Barracuda SSN. The first Barracuda, the Suffren, was laid down in 2007 and apparently will be launched late 2016 and commissioned late 2018.
What occurred in the decade (so far) of construction, of what in many respects is the prototype for the Shortfin, has not been explained to the Australian public. Why almost a decade, so far? I'm working with French sources to figure this out.
Compare the French decade long batch-building approach [Table above] with the Japanese continuous build system. [Table below] The Australian Government is talking "continuous build" so?
Japan's CEP competitors may well use "Japanese submarines have a short operational life (in years)" as further competitive ammunition before the submarine choice is declared.
AAP's article via SkyNews "France pitches nuclear submarine option" March 24, 2016 (note Oberon photo) touched on the possibility that:
- Australia might develop a nuclear submarine (Brazilian ProSub style) under DCNS guidance, and
- that DCNS feared Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) may "explode".
Nuclear Propulsion for Subs
The DCNS article implies DCNS may help Australia design a nuclear submarine (around "2050"). Such a task may gladen ASC's efficiency for a century. An Australian enriched Uranium industry may be needed to refuel (every 10 - 15 years) the submarine reactor ASC develops with Admiral Rickover like urgency, speed and efficiency.
The offer from (then) US Ambassador Bleich in February 2012 to sell or lease Virginia SSNs to Australia - if repeated - may be more practical, leading to usable SSNs for the RAN this century. Someone like Trump may repeat the offer - but Obama be faint-hearted.
Nuclear propulsion is discussed periodicly in Submarine Matters, the last time in early 2015.
Arguments against nuclear propulsion include:
- high reliance on the nuclear facilities and expertise of foreign allies (UK, US, France) to build, refuel and even safely operate reactors at sea and in port.
- the Australian domestic debate over the decades has rejected even hosting a low level nuclear waste dump, so nuclear propelled subs based in Australia would probably be unpopular.
- Sydneysiders, who host Fleet Base East, would certainly be lacking in enthusiasm for frequent hosting of nuclear subs. Would a new naval base on the eastern seaboard be needed?
- many don't see the difference between nuclear propulsion and nuclear weapons. However the difference becomes obscured in the case of Virginia SSNs which rely on a reactor that happens to be over 90% HEU - nuclear weapons grade.
- the Virginia reactor is advertised to last 35 years - hence lasts the life of the submarine. The alternate French Barracuda reactor is advertised with only 10 years of use (demonstrated) between lengthy refuels (in France?) - and this is based on perhaps less use in the Atlantic compared to more use (shorter life?) in long Indo-Pacific transits.
- the upfront price of SSNs may be more a political decision as they have only ever been leased (Russia to India). However buying or leasing may be preferable to the political decision driving assembly of Australian subs in cutting-edge ASC Adelaide.
- any Australian strategic need for SSNs or even SSGNs would also need to anticipate the possibility of a subsequent nuclear sub arms race of nuclear have-nots in the region (proliferation). The first tranche of have-nots going nuclear may be South Korea and Japan. The second tranche may include Indonesia. This is noting Indonesia has more than three times the GDP of nuclear armed Pakistan.
- the upfront price of SSNs may be more a political decision as they have only ever been leased (Russia to India). However buying or leasing may be preferable to the political decision driving assembly of Australian subs in cutting-edge ASC Adelaide.
- any Australian strategic need for SSNs or even SSGNs would also need to anticipate the possibility of a subsequent nuclear sub arms race of nuclear have-nots in the region (proliferation). The first tranche of have-nots going nuclear may be South Korea and Japan. The second tranche may include Indonesia. This is noting Indonesia has more than three times the GDP of nuclear armed Pakistan.
DCNS "explode" Batteries
The worry in the DCNS article article that Lithium-ion Battery (LIBs) may explode should be avoided by a decade (2020-2030) of Japanese Navy operational use of LIBs. This would be before Australian future submarines use them in the early 2030s. Japan may lay down its first operational "LIBs only Soryu Mark 2" this year or next. That Soryu, probably built at MHI, may be designated "27SS and SS-511" perhaps being launched late 2018, then commissioned into the Japanese Navy around 2020 or 2021. See Soryu Table below with possible submarine building schedule for Australian Future Submarine in red (if Japan is chosen).
Barracuda SSN Name | Laid down | Launch (est.) | Commissioning (est.) |
Suffren | end of 2017 (the crew expect) | end 2018 or 2019 | |
Duguay-Trouin | ? | end 2020 | |
Tourville | ? | ||
Grasse | ? | ? | |
Ruby | ? | ? | |
Casabianca | ? | ? |
Table based on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classe_Suffren_(sous-marin)#Noms with the French frequently calling the Barracuda SSN by the more formal name "Suffren class".
---
The Shortfin that France is offering is to be a conventional version of the future Barracuda SSN. The first Barracuda, the Suffren, was laid down in 2007 and apparently will be launched late 2016 and commissioned late 2018.
What occurred in the decade (so far) of construction, of what in many respects is the prototype for the Shortfin, has not been explained to the Australian public. Why almost a decade, so far? I'm working with French sources to figure this out.
Compare the French decade long batch-building approach [Table above] with the Japanese continuous build system. [Table below] The Australian Government is talking "continuous build" so?
Japan's CEP competitors may well use "Japanese submarines have a short operational life (in years)" as further competitive ammunition before the submarine choice is declared.
SORYU TABLE (with earlier Oyashios, as at March 24, 2016)
SS No. | Build No Name | Pennant No. | MoF approved amount ¥ Billions & FY | LABs, LIBs, AIP | Laid Down | Laun -ched | Commi-ssioned | Built By |
5SS | 8105 Oyashio | SS-590/ TS3608 | ¥52.2B FY1993 | LABs only | Jan 1994 | Oct 1996 | Mar 1998 | KHI |
6SS-15SS Oyashios 10 subs | 8106 -8115 various | SS-591-600 | ¥52.2B per sub FY1994-FY2003 | LABs only | Feb 1994 | Mar 2008 | MHI & KHI | |
16SS Soryu Mark 1 | 8116 Sōryū | SS-501 | ¥60B FY2004 | LABs + AIP | Mar 2005 | Dec 2007 | Mar 2009 | MHI |
17SS | 8117 Unryū | SS-502 | ¥58.7B FY2005 | LABs + AIP | Mar 2006 | Oct 2008 | Mar 2010 | KHI |
18SS | 8118 Hakuryū | SS-503 | ¥56.2 FY2006 | LABs + AIP | Feb 2007 | Oct 2009 | Mar 2011 | MHI |
19SS | 8119 Kenryū | SS-504 | ¥53B FY2007 | LABs + AIP | Mar 2008 | Nov 2010 | Mar 2012 | KHI |
20SS | 8120 Zuiryū | SS-505 | ¥51B FY2008 | LABs + AIP | Mar 2009 | Oct 2011 | Mar 2013 | MHI |
No 21SS | No 21SS built | |||||||
22SS | 8121 Kokuryū | SS-506 | ¥52.8B FY2010 | LABs + AIP | Jan 2011 | Oct 2013 | Mar 2015 | KHI |
23SS | 8122 Jinryu | SS-507 | ¥54.6B FY2011 | LABs + AIP | Feb 2012 | Oct 2014 | 7 Mar 2016 | MHI |
24SS | 8123 Sekiryū | SS-508 | ¥54.7B FY2012 | LABs + AIP | Mar 2013 | Nov 2015 | Mar 2017 | KHI |
25SS | 8124 | SS-509 | ¥53.1B FY2013 | LABs + AIP | Oct 2013 | Nov 2016 | Mar 2018 | MHI |
26SS | 8125 | SS-510 | ¥51.7B FY2014 | LABs + AIP | ? | ? | Mar 2019 | KHI |
27SS Soryu Mark 2 | 8126 | SS-511 | ¥64.3B FY2015 | LIBs only | ? | ? | Mar 2020 | MHI |
28SS | 8127 | SS-512 | ¥63.6B FY2016 | LIBs only | ? | ? | Mar 2021 | KHI |
29SS | ? | ? | 1st of New Japanese Class | LIBs only | ? | ? | 2023? | MHI? |
Aus1 | ? | ? | 1st of new Aus class (if Japan chosen) | LIBs only | 2028? | 2030? | 2033? | in Aus or Jpn? |
Aus2 to 12? | ? | ? | between 5 and 11 additional Aus subs | LIBs only | from 2029? | from 2031? | from 2034? | in Aus or Jpn? |
Table courtesy of information provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries, AIP = air independent propulsion, LIBs = lithium-ion batteries.