Orcas have various propulsion options including fuel-cell or diesel powering batteries. Perhaps, in future, they can even be powered by a micro reactor.
Orcas have many of the capabilities of a manned
submarine including intelligence collection, eg. electronic interception and can tow sonar arrays. Orcas can report back to base * via technologies including short range acoustic signals to AUKUS fixed seafloor sensors, aided by Orcas' ability to dive much deeper than manned submarines.
Orcas can lay mines and can be
configured (on remote human command) to launch heavyweight torpedoes and
anti-ship missiles. The only thing they can't do is special forces/diver delivery.
* This is noting that in the only modern Western example,
HMS Conqueror's sinking of
General Belgrano in 1982, submarines do report back to base before torpedoing a vessel.
HistoryNet records:
General Belgrano in 1982, submarines do report back to base before torpedoing a vessel.
HistoryNet records:
“…Conqueror duly reported its change of direction to London at 1400 Zulu. Then, despite problems with its communications equipment, at 1710 Zulu the British submarine received and acknowledged
the new ROE and orders to attack. At the same time Cmdr.
Chris Wreford-Brown, Conqueror’s captain, transmitted his
intention to strike the enemy..."
Thanks Pete. It is interesting to look at the roles envisaged. All useful, but when it comes to sending something out to sink a hostile approaching ship or sub, I'm not seeing anything likely to replace an SSN or SSK with a good torpedo (or SSM) and a well trained crew any time soon.
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous [at Jun 17, 2022, 1:10:00 PM]
ReplyDeleteSee revised text.
Orca future torpedo and anti-ship missile delivery is possible. More tests and procedures are being developed by the US.
Orca's can also be seen as part of a network where humans launch the anti-ship missles via Australian warships, aircraft or launched from land. Mobile smart mines are another weapons option.
Better to buy Orcas, each for $150 million and ready in 5 years than "interim" submarines for about $1.5 Billion each and only ready in the standard 15 years. There being no actual "off the shelf" shelf for Australia to buy from.
Regards Pete
EVEN SOONER THAN RIGHT NOW ?
ReplyDeleteHello Pete
Strongly concur with your views on getting something along the lines of the Boeing Orca in the water now or sooner. Not much training needed and plenty large enough to pack a brace of 324 to 400mm torpedoes.
So Ghost Bats and "Bluebottles" for Oz. Sixty of each please !
Send another twenty to the UK in exchange for fifth and sixth Astutes ? Both the RN and the RAN would be far better prepared for 2029, were this to be done.
BUREAUCRATUS LEX 18 JUNE 2022
Thanks BUREAUCRATUS LEX 18 JUNE 2022
ReplyDeleteYes some US Orcas for Aus and creative bartering with the UK (many of our Ghost Bat UCAVs for 2 of their Astutes) sounds feasible :)
For Orca propulsion:
- an always on Radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) (that you've flagged in the past) topping up 2 tonnes of Lithium batteries may be an option. This would allow such Orcas to shadow relatively slow moving SSKs. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator
- to keep up with hostile SSNs Orcas would need nuclear reactors - a propulsion being used/proposed by Russia for its similar sized Status-6/Poseidon/NATO designation "Kanyon" nuclear-powered UUV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status-6_Oceanic_Multipurpose_System
If the US followed the nuclear warhead strategy advertised for Kanyon then that might be a weapon option for nuclear propelled US Orcas. Such Orca's would do "wonders" in Russia's most vulnerable point of attack, which is the Arctic Ocean (specifically Russian Northern Fleet bases).
Cheers Pete
Pete and Bureaucratus Rex
ReplyDeleteThanks and I support your suggestion to build armed Orcas. At that price they look a bargain.
Once again a group are lobbying for ASC to build a “Son of Collins” class sub build. Ten years too late. Collins is no longer a regionally superior sub, compared to recent Singaporean (German design/build) and Japanese subs. Once again, another push to design a new sub would guarantee delay and only benefit the sub designers.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/jun/19/new-collins-based-submarine-best-fit-while-waiting-for-aukus-defence-experts-say
The Collins LOTE project was cobbled together to occupy ASC while the French contract was stalled. It is not a good investment. $6 billion for getting an extra ten years out of each sub. We could build 40 Orcas for that.
If the start of a nuclear sub build is as faraway as claimed we should hold proper tenders for it. If it is soon we should focus on that and buy new diesel subs from Germany or Japan to replace Collins in the interim if there is any capability gap. Build Orcas here in the mean time. There seems little point re-establishing an SSK manufacturing capability in Australia for a stop-gap solution.
One thing is clear – at this point nobody outside Defence has confidence in its interim plans.