October 12, 2015

Japan fine-tuning campaign for Australian Future Submarine

COMMENT

Blogger Julien Araneta in Comments [October 12, 2015 at 5:14 PM] below identified an excellent  report by Navy Recognition (see below) which concerned PACIFIC 2015, Sydney Exhibition Center, Glebe Island, October 6 to 8, 2015. The original comments from Naval Recognition and additional comments in square brackets are diverse. 

The removal of Prime Minister Abbott has forced a rapid revision in Japan's selling style - which concentrates on presentations by civilians from Japanese industry and the Japanese Ministry of Defence. Hence Japan's Defence Ministry spokesman Masaki Ishikawa and Izumi Ishii of MHI now feature. Japan is tightening up its bid and making it more understandable for a wider public including influential Australian politicians. Japan has moved very quickly since Admiral Sato's delegation visited Adelaide in late August 2015

One issue that did not seem to be mentioned in presentations is pressure hull steel type to be used. This is noting the Soryu's NS110 may still be too confidential for Japan to transfer to the Australian Soryu and in any case may be too difficult to cut and reweld and is weakened when that occurs. The cut/reweld problem may particularly impact on Australian Soryus given their longer desired operational life of 30 years. Japanese Soryus are just operational for 24 years maximum. Thirty years means that the need to replace Australian Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) and diesel engines (for higher diesel usage - longer ranges travelled) is much more likely. It is therefore likely that Japan and Australia are formulating another pressure hull steel alloy with fewer issues.

ARTICLE WITH [COMMENTS]

See original Navy Recognition post at  http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/pacific-2015-naval-show-daily-news/3152-japans-government-and-industry-held-an-industry-briefing-on-soryu-submarine-at-pacific-2015.html. The text and photos from that Navy Recognition post are below. In square brackets are comments from Anonymous, S and Pete.

"Japan SEA1000 Industry Briefing at PACIFIC 2015

At PACIFIC 2015, the international maritime exposition currently held in Sydney Australia, the Japanese Government and Industry held an industry briefing on its bid with the Soryu for the SEA1000 program. Japan has a small pavilion at the exposition with scale models of the SEA1000 proposal, a Soryu class, an Atago class Destroyer and the 20DX Frigate.

At PACIFIC 2015, the international maritime exposition currently held in Sydney Australia, the Japanese Government and Industry held an industry briefing on its bid with the Soryu for the SEA1000 program. Japan has a small pavilion at the exposition with scale models of the SEA1000 proposal, a Soryu class, an Atago class Destroyer and the 20DX Frigate.Izumi Ishii, Vice President of Integrated Defence & Space Systems at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. during SEA1000 Industry Briefing at PACIFIC 2015

The briefing which Navy Recognition was attending was presented by Japan's Defence Ministry spokesman Masaki Ishikawa and Izumi Ishii, Vice President of Integrated Defence & Space Systems at Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.

The Team Japan as presented by the Defence Ministry spokesman is to incorporate state of the art technologies from both Australia and Japan into proven technologies for ocean navigation, to work with local industries in whatever arrangement best suited for the Australian Government and to involve Australian industries from the design phase throughout the program.

At PACIFIC 2015, the international maritime exposition currently held in Sydney Australia, the Japanese Government and Industry held an industry briefing on its bid with the Soryu for the SEA1000 program. Japan has a small pavilion at the exposition with scale models of the SEA1000 proposal, a Soryu class, an Atago class Destroyer and the 20DX Frigate.Japan SEA1000 Industry Briefing at PACIFIC 2015


According to Izumi Ishii, the submarine offered for the Australian SEA1000 program will be "a quite different submarine compared to the Japanese Soryu because of its American combat system, larger size and increase range but it will have some commonality with the Soryu".

MHI envisions two design centers: One in Japan and one in Australia with a growing Australian portion as the program transitions from concept design to basic design and eventually detailed design. A full scale mock-up of the submarine would be built in Australia for basic training (but no shore integration center is planned for now).

While both MHI and KHI (Kawasaki) build Soryus for the JMSDF, only MHI is involved in the competitive evaluation process for SEA1000.

The Japanese government has set up a website to help Australian companies getting in touch with Japan industries for the program. MHI will be conducting 1 on 1 meetings with companies accross Australia over the next few weeks.

At PACIFIC 2015, the international maritime exposition currently held in Sydney Australia, the Japanese Government and Industry held an industry briefing on its bid with the Soryu for the SEA1000 program. Japan has a small pavilion at the exposition with scale models of the SEA1000 proposal, a Soryu class, an Atago class Destroyer and the 20DX Frigate.

["Anonymous" in Comments [October 12, 2015 at 5:17 PM] indicated SEA 1000 Concept (in the diagram above) shows double layer arrangement of future Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) (the Current Soryu adopts single layer arrangement of existing Lead-acid Batteries (LABs), and adopts [very difficult] Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) and Shield Metal Arc Welding (SMAW), I think. Training of welders will be crucial element of technology acquisition, especially for NS110-GTAW. 


Anonymous added that the Japanese Ministry of Defence (MOD) may release a list of subcontractors which is partially disclosed. Translation and understanding of NDS (MOD Standards) are also very important. There are so many things to do.]

["S" in Comments [October 12, 2015 at 5:22 PM] indicated (along the lines) that Japanese research on new main batteries for submarine revealed that the energy density of LIBs was twice that of LABs and lifetime of LIBs was 1.5 times that of LABs. 

But, from analysis of “Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Management Reports on 23SS (LABs-Soryu) and 27/28SS(LIBs-Soryu)” and other budget papers, S concludes that the life time of current LIBs will be twice that of LABs [that is higher than "1.5 times"] and that prices of LIBs will be high. When adding 24-years of operational life of 22 Japanese submarines with 30-years operational life of the 8 Australian submarines, more than 300,000 LIB unit cells will be needed. There may be a reduction in the price of LIBs caused by mass production effects.] 

FURTHER COMMENT

Reduction of LIB prices may also occur due to much more diverse and frequent non-submarine uses such as:

-  in UUVs for civilian and military purposes  
-  in large land vehicles (eg. trucks for mining) as well as cars and 
-  much more common Tesla like (solar to battery) static use on an industrial scale.

Cost of LIBs will, of course, be one item in the many items that make up the submarine's up-front, training, running and other maintenance costs.

Right up until the winner is announced Japanese delegations will likely be travelling around Australia to promote their SEA 1000 solution to politicians, the RAN, businesses and wider public (through the media). Delegations will also be more widely discussing industrial alliances with businesses in all Australian states and territories (as all will likely be involved in the build).

Thankyou Navy Recognition for use of your report.

Pete

24 comments:

Anonymous said...


Blogger Julien Araneta said...

Hi, Pete! This might interest you

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/pacific-2015-naval-show-daily-news/3152-japans-government-and-industry-held-an-industry-briefing-on-soryu-submarine-at-pacific-2015.html

Peter Coates said...

Thanks Julien Araneta

for the link on the Japanese bid

Interesting where http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/naval-exhibitions/pacific-2015-naval-show-daily-news/3152-japans-government-and-industry-held-an-industry-briefing-on-soryu-submarine-at-pacific-2015.html says:

"While both MHI and KHI (Kawasaki) build Soryus for the JMSDF, only MHI is involved in the competitive evaluation process for SEA1000."

Where it says:

"The Japanese government has set up a website to help Australian companies getting in touch with Japan industries for the program."

Has that website been made public?

If so, what is the link?

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...


Hi Pete and Julien Araneta.

Thanks for very interesting information [1]. SEA 1000 Concept shows double layer arrangement of LIBs (Current Soryu adopts single layer arrangement of LABs, and adopts Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW), Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) and Shield Metal Arc Welding (SMAW), I think. Training of welders will be crucial element of technology acquisition, especially for NS110-GTAW.

Ministry of Defense (MOD) may release a list of subcontractors which is partially disclosed. Translation and understanding of NDS (MOD Standards) are also very important. There are so many things to do.

[1] http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3152, PACIFIC 2015 Show News - Japan's Soryu for SEA1000.

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete

I will show you prototype of LIBs which were used in FY2006 MOD research[1,2]: i) electrode and unit cell (left top), ii) controller system of battery, iii) LIBs, iv) LABs.

This research revealed that the energy density and life time of LIBs increased by 2 and 1.5 times than those of LABs, respectively. But, from analysis of “Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Management Reports on 23SS (LABs-Soryu) and 27/28SS(LIBs-Soryu)” and other budget paper, I conclude that the life time of current LIBs will increase twice as long as LABs and that prices of LIBs and LABs per unit cell are 600,000 and 300,000 yen (68,000 and 34,000A$: A$=88yen). Price of LIBs is high. In combination of 24-years operation by 22 Japanese submarines and 30-years operation by 8 Australian submarines, more than 300,000 unit cells will be needed, and which may cause lowering of price of LIBs by mass production effect. [words corrected]

[1] http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/seisaku/results/18/jigo/sankou/jigo05_sankou.pdf “Evaluation report on policy implementation of MOF in FY2006”, Research on new main batteries for submarine.
[2] http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/seisaku/results/18/jigo/sankou/jigo05_sankou.pdf Appendix.

Regards
S

Peter Coates said...

Hi S [at October 12, 2015 at 5:22 PM]

Thanks for http://www.mod.go.jp/j/approach/hyouka/seisaku/results/18/jigo/sankou/jigo05_sankou.pdf
However unfortunately I cannot translate Japanese pdf files into English or use images from pdf files to place them on Submarine Matters articles. It would be great if they were in html :)

Your comments are very useful "This research revealed that the energy density and life time of LIBs increased by 2 and 1.5 times than those of LABs, respectively. But, from analysis of “Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Management Reports on 23SS (LABs-Soryu) and 27/28SS(LIBs-Soryu)” and other budget paper, I conclude that the life time of current LIBs will increase twice as long as LABs and that prices of LIBs and LABs...price of LIBs is high. In combination of 24-years operation by 22 Japanese submarines and 30-years operation by 8 Australian submarines, more than 300,000 unit cells will be needed, and which may cause lowering of price of LIBs by mass production effect.

There is no need to put a price on batteries in Yen or dollars because most pricing will occur in about five years time. There are many likely contractural distortions. LIB prices may go down like silicon chips if LIBs are used for many large scale storage, non-submarine applications.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete

As there is no html, I translated it.

“FY2006 Policy Evaluation Report (Result of Policy Implementation)” by Department of Finance & Equipment from Oct/2006 to Mar/2007

Project Name: Research on new main batteries for submarine

Policy System: I-4-(2)-2 Research (Development)

Abstract:
We studied high performance main batteries as main batteries for next submarine, which is alternative of current lead acid batteries, and got necessary technological data.

Budget: About 4,6 billion yen

Evaluation
1 Aim of Project
Lead acid batteries have drawbacks such as heavy weight, large volume, cumbersome treatment and long charging time. The aims of this project are to study lithium ion batteries with high energy density as main batteries for next submarine, and to demonstrate their feasibility and effectiveness.

2 Status of Achievement
(1)Effect of Achievement
We established technology base of large lithium ion batteries with high capacitance for main batteries of submarine by achieving following technological terms (a-d). We obtained technological data on performance, safety and life of submarine main batteries, which would contribute to enhancement of stealth ability, motion performance and attack avoidance ability, extension of submerging period, and improvement of maintenance
(a)Energy density
By adopting lithium ion batteries, we realized new batteries with twice higher energy density per unit weight volume than that of lead acid batteries.
(b)Charging efficiency
We confirmed that lithium ion batteries showed more efficient charging and lower reduction in capacity at high efficient discharging than lead acid batteries.
(c)Safety
We confirmed that lithium ion batteries ensured designed safety in overcharging, overdischarging and external short circuit situations.
(e)Repeatable numbers of charge and discharge cycle
We confirmed that lithium ion batteries showed 1.5 times larger repeatable numbers of charge and discharge cycle than lead acid batteries, having excellent life time.

(2) Period of Achievement
We started research trial in 2002, finished laboratory testing by 2005.

(3) Profit
In this research, we have tried realization of lithium ion batteries with high capacity considering implementation and established new technology base in a short period.

Regards
S

Peter Coates said...

Hi S [October 12, 2015 at 10:33 PM]

Thankyou for doing the translation so quickly. There is alot of material in your translation that I will use.

I will do another article on Wednesday where I will concentrate on the key technical advantages of Japan's bid. This includes:

- LIBs. As they appear to be a major technology area that Japan likely has a lead in - ahead of Japan's French and German competitors.

- likelihood that the Soryu already has a combat system similar to Australia with both countries closely operating with the US. The US has already indicated it is willing to integrate its combat system into a Japanese-Australian sub. Australia and Japan both use Harpoon missiles and similarity of Japan's Type 89 torpedo with Australia's Mark 48, and

- the snorkel system

Thanks again

Regards

Pete

imacca said...

" - the snorkel system "

How significantly different is the capability of the Japanese snorkel system compared to Collins, or the other competitors? I would have thought this kind of kit was pretty mature tech in terms of "all weather" operation??

Peter Coates said...

Hi imacca

Snorkels don't simply suck.

The most publicised advantage of the new snorkel system for Soryu is its ability to operate in typhoons/major storms often described as higher sea states.

An equally large, though lesser known innovation, is major changes to the snorkel system to discretely handle the higher workloads placed on the system due to much more powerful diesels for quicker charging of the Lithium-ion batteries to be used in in Soryus in several years time.

There will be more details in Wednesday's post.

Expert Japanese commenters are invited to add details.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Ta for that. I wonder if some of it is also to do with how exhaust emissions are dealt with in terms of stealth, in terms of people "sniffing" or infra-red detection?

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete,

That's likely to be the "Japanese government website"
http://www.submarineinstitute.com/Japan.html?fp=37

Peter Coates said...

Thanks Anonymous [Oct 14, 2015 4:41PM] re Expressions of Interest

From http://www.submarineinstitute.com/Japan.html?fp=37 I went to

http://gateway.icn.org.au/project/3720/sea-1000-japanese-government-industry

which is "SEA 1000 Japanese Government & Industry" seeking Australian industry Expressions of Interest.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete

Information of snorkel is very little. I just estimated air intake velocity at big snorkel (50cm in diameter [1]) by operation of two 12V/25/25SB diesel engines. The maximum intake velocity at full power operation is very fast (135km/h). Under rainy but not wavy conditions, even in gentle rain, kilograms of water will be introduced into snorkel in an hour at this intake velocity. Design of improved snorkel system is critical factor for quick charging of LIBs.

By the way, stealth performance is not expected in snorkel operation. MAN diesels show 100-115DB of noise, I do not think that new KHI diesel engine will show drastic reduction in noise. Current 12V/25/25SB generates terrible noise in surface operation. Also huge amount of exhaust bubble from snorkel generates easy-to-detect noise.

[1] Diameter is estimated from picture of snorkel and statement of JMSDF, “size of snorkel of Soryu is as big as drum”

Regards
S

Anonymous said...


Hi Pete

I will show examples of Inspection Service in SEA 1000 Japanese Government & Industry [1]. According to NDS Z 2 0 0 3 C ( 2 ) (Standards of Ministry of Defense: Non-destructive inspection of war ship steel and classification of its result), following non-destructive inspections are needed for steel; i) magnetic particle inspection, ii) dye penetrant inspection, iii) ultrasonic testing, and iv) radiographic testing. Qualification from level 3 to level 1 is required for each inspector.

[1] http://gateway.icn.org.au/project/3720/sea-1000-japanese-government-industry

Regards
S

Nicky said...

HI Pete,
What do you think of this prospect.

Could Saab Upgrade Australia’s Collins-class Submarine as a Stopgap Measure?
The Swedish company Saab Kockums offers to upgrade Australia’s subs while Canberra decides who will replace them. Is it worth it? By Benjamin David Baker

http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/could-saab-upgrade-australias-collins-class-submarine-as-a-stopgap-measure/

Peter Coates said...

Hi Nicky

Re Saabs Collins upgrade offer http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/could-saab-upgrade-australias-collins-class-submarine-as-a-stopgap-measure/

I think Saab-Kockums are trying to get back into the future submarine competition via suggesting upgrade work on the Collins. But it is too late to upgrade towards the end of the 6 Collins subs working life. Collins may start to be retired from 2025 - about 6-7 years after any upgrades.

Two major items mentioned in the Diplomat article are AIP and "sonars and the fire management systems" which means large parts of the Combat System

Australia wasn't interested in installing AIP into the Collins subs (rather it relied on high battery capacity) and has expressed no current interest that I've seen. Combat System upgrades is an ongoing US-Australia process.

Regards

Pete

MHalblaub said...

Dear S,

"MAN diesels show 100-115DB of noise, I do not think that new KHI diesel engine will show drastic reduction in noise."

This is a big variaty. 115 dB is about 30fold more sound energy than 100 dB. There is also a big difference between airborne sound and structural transmitted sound.

What is the use of LIBs in case you have not the right engines? With the same engines a submarine would need twice the time to load the LIBs instead of LABs.

Regards,
MHalblaub

Peter Coates said...

Hi MHalblaub

The excessive noise that Japanese diesels make may be something the Australian competition assessors are underestimating. China is deploying fixed arrays of passive acoustic sensors in the all important South China Sea.

For efficiency and quietness if Japan wins the submarine competition I think Japan will need to ask Germany for major help with diesel (MTU 4000) technology.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete & MHalblaub

I retract a part of my comment (October 15, 2015 at 12:42 AM), “MAN diesels show 100-115DB of noise, I do not think that new KHI diesel engine will show drastic reduction in noise”.

Regards
S

Peter Coates said...

Hi S on diesel noise and a better diesel [Oct 21 2015 2:03AM]

100+ dB for snorting subs sounds quite high. I assume the "100-115DB" figures you quote are just from a short distance of one metre from the submarine? http://www.armscontrol.ru/subs/snf/snf03221.htm is interesting.

The technology transfer of the German 12V4000U83 (the submarine version of the MTU 4000) is what KHI might want to buy if KHI/MHI win the Future Submarine Competition.

Regards

Pete

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete

From recent news [1, 2], I feel that Japan may win the CEP. A series of pictures in side SS507 Jinryu (the seventh Soryu Class submarine) are very interesting. I also show some information on Soryu as follows.

1) SS508 with newly developed TCM (Torpedo Counter Measures) will be launched in November 2. MOD (Mobile Decoy) as well as exiting NAE (Noise Augmentation Emitter) will be adopted in TCM.

2) We can distinguish between KHI- and MHI-Soryus by shape of bridge door near hydroplane. While MHI-Soryu has rectangular doors with sharp corners, KHI-Soryu has doors with round corners.

3) Current Soryus and SEA concept submarines equip less torpedoes than reported (20 torpedoes). Judging from recent perspective views and actual pictures of torpedo room ([2], Japanese book), they may equip around 12 torpedoes. They cannot equip 20 torpedoes.

[1]http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/future-submarines-first-look-inside-soryu-sub-as-japan-ups-ante-in-contract-bid/story-e6frg6n6-1227579060243, “Future Submarines: First look inside Soryu sub as Japan ups ante in contract bid” by The Australia (October 23, 2015 11:35AM),
[2]http://www.news.com.au/national/japan-is-offering-secret-technology-to-win-submarine-contract/story-fncynjr2-1227571858283
“Japan is offering secret technology to win submarine contract” by news.com.au(October 17, 20153:00pm)

Regards
S

Anonymous said...

Hi Pete

As I forgot to count six torpedoes in the torpedo tubes in my comment (October 24, 2015 at 11:26 AM), I correct comment. I am sorry.

Before correction
3) Current Soryus and SEA concept submarines equip less torpedoes than reported (20 torpedoes). Judging from recent perspective views and actual pictures of torpedo room ([2], Japanese book), they may equip around 12 torpedoes. They cannot equip 20 torpedoes.

After correction
3) Judging from recent perspective views and actual pictures of torpedo room ([2], Japanese book), current Soryus and SEA concept submarines may equip around 20 or less torpedoes.

Regards
S

Peter Coates said...

Hi S [at October 24, 2015 at 8:24 PM]

No problem. I suspected 6 were in the torpedo tubes.

Because 2 mines can be fitted into one torpedo tube this causes some to count 10 torpedos/harpoons + 20 mines = "30 weapons" but = just 20 heavyweight shots.

Regards

Pete

Peter Coates said...

Hi S

I'll turn your comments and strings at October 24, 2015 at 11:26 AM and October 24, 2015 at 8:24 PM into an article tomorrow.

Regards

Pete