Oleg7700 has been very helpful
shedding light on INS Drakon a (likely) VLS test bed. Drakon will
likely simultaneously serve Israel’s Nuclear Triad with its nuclear
tipped Popeye Turbo missiles. I think the Popeyes will continue to be launched
from Drakon’s 4 x 650mm horizontal torpedo tubes.
On August 23, 2023 Oleg7700 provided
a comment. In a P.S. to Oleg7700’s August 23,
2023 comment Oleg brought to my
attention that on "08/23/2023" one Ami Rokhax Dumba at IsraelDefense (in Hebrew when translate into English) draws heavily on my article including my guesswork that “The purpose of [Drakon's] fin/sail may only be for streamlining/quiet,
or to accommodate more masts/sensors or perhaps to house between 2 and 4
vertically launched missiles..."
Rather than my estimate of 2 to 4 vertically
launched missiles H I Sutton estimates 2 to 8. Possible! TKMS please advise the true number :)
Possibly INS Dakar has an enlarged
AIP and battery capacity to permit it to sit longer on the seafloor, secret
and silent, in the eastern Mediterranean, off Israel’s Haifa Submarine Base. This is for Drakon to be ready to rise closer to the surface to torpedo tube
launch its Popeye Turbo missiles (within range of future nuclear
armed Iran and Saudi Arabia) and vertically launch missiles with sufficient
range to hit Pakistan (already keeper of the "Islamic Bomb”). Pakistan reputedly has a nuclear warhead sharing arrangement with its nuclear program creditor, Saudi Arabia.
On reader comments here.
SSKs and SSBs have grown in size to boost their capabilities eg. longer medium range-at-speed, longer seafloor sitting time, greater crew comfort/endurance and particulary more heavyweight torpedoes and missiles.
I think it is generally misleading to write size is ultimately an attempt to imitate nuclear submarines. SSNs unlike SSKs, serve their highest requirement, which is surveillance/shadowing opposing SSBNs and SSNs in peacettime and then destroying these opposing SSBNs and SSNs immediately before a nuclear war.
There is no "sudden spike" to >3000 tons. Australia's Collins-class SSKs have weighed 3,100 tonnes (surfaced) since 1993. Japan’s 12 Soryu SSKs have weighed 4,200 tonnes (submerged) since 2007.
Might this photo of INS Drakon above, at TKMS Kiel, imply Drakon is so “fat” that it might contain 3 continuously inhabited decks rather than the usual 2 in Type 214s? Is the differing angle, at Kiel, of Drakon, in the photo below, sufficient to explain the difference in "fatness"? Or has one or both been "touched up" or distorted due to Israeli security concerns?
.jpg)
Hello,
ReplyDeleteregarding your paragraphs concerning submarine size and capability:
Whether recent trends in the submarine building industry can be considered an attempt to „imitate“ nuclear subs depends on one’s understanding of the term. What is clear is that, since the late 2000s/early 2010s, there has been an increasing amount of large submarine designs, and the main reasons for the larger size are either range or VLS. Huge range and powerful missile strike capability were traditionally capabilities belonging to nuclear submarines, therefore I believe it is fair to say that SSKs are increasingly (and with varying success) being designed to fill roles previously reserved for SS(G/B)Ns.
I’m aware of the submarines you gave as counterexamples. The Collins-class is certainly valid for this purpose, though it should be considered that these large submarines faced many issues during their career and were prone to falling short of expectations, particularly in the first years of their service. The Japanese submarines can be considered both an exception and a pioneer of this „trend“. Curiously, I once read a Korean publication from around 2000 arguing in favor of the Type 214 submarine saying that Fritz Abels (not sure about his first name), essentially head of submarine construction at what is now TKMS, disliked the Japanese submarines because of their size (among other reasons). The author supported his claim and was mostly opposed to VLS in a future domestically designed sub (ironically). So there certainly were differences in design philosophy! Back then, smaller submarines were more appreciated for their quietness, but we‘re now at a point where SSKs are so quiet that continuing to make quietness the absolute priority no longer returns major tactical benefits, making Defense Companies explore capabilities SSKs had not yet offered - and that is kind of my entire point. Apart from Collins-class, there wasn’t really anything in the 3,000+ ton department for a long, long time, and designs that reached this size weren’t constructed according to modern standards (Tango-class).
Cheers!
Hi Submarine Autistry at 8/27/2023 11:55 AM
ReplyDeleteOh contraire. Most new subs being sold (209s, 214s, 218s, A26s and their variants, Scorpenes, Taigeis, Yuans and Kilos) have only grown slowly in size and remain multi-mission SSKs with limited or no land attack capabilities, depending on missile availability.
KSS-IIIs and Dolphins are the much smaller in number SSB exceptions.
Fritz of TKMS would probably see the Japanese as a longer term export competitor to "gut Deutsche U-Boots". eg. my Japanese sources advise that Taiwan's 8 future "indigenous" subs are very much Japanese Kawasaki-Mitsubishi designs supervised by a "retired" Japanese contractor workforce. Japan didn't want to openly antagonise the PRC - so Japan has kept the Japanese design and parts quiet.
On "quietness" of SSKs assuming an open ocean setting that might have a backgound sound on 90 Decibels (dB). When SSKs run their diesels they are very loud (say 120 dB?). On batteries they are quiet - old Oberons might have been 80 dB.
https://www.google.com/search?q=decibels+nuclear+submarines&rlz=1C1CHMO_enAU908AU908&oq=decibels+nuclear+submarines&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIHCAEQIRigAdIBCTE2MjAwajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
"The US Virginia class is about 95 decibels, Russian Kilo class is about 105 decibels."
Decibel rating might vary on distance, depth (down to 700m) and levels with varying
salinity, temperature of water, presence of nice noisy large ships around and storms. One could go on forever.
Cheers Pete
Hi Pete
ReplyDeleteOf course, the fact that there are nowadays much more submarine designs displacing >3,000 tons and offering >15,000 nm range or VLS does not mean that all or even just the majority of SSKs in the future will have these characteristics. Many countries, particularly those that rely on "importing" them, will continue to prefer smaller ones to keep costs down. But this is less about customer demand and more about the fact that, in the 21st century, there has thus far been a surge in submarine designs of around ~3,000 tons or more after decades of hardly any in this category.
I should also say that I've always found Japanese submarine development quite impressive and don't necessarily agree with Mr Abels here. I just meant to show the differences in design philosophy, as TKMS (back then the IKL design bureau) had never thoroughly designed anything larger than roughly 2,000 tons (the unbuilt TR 2000 submarine), something which to my knowledge also applies to most other Western SSK designers & builders.
Regarding noise levels, I personally don't think these public figures can be very useful since as you said the ratings can vary strongly on numerous factors. The Oberon-class was at one point the quietest submarine in the world (at least for its size), but I'd strongly doubt that it is generally quieter than a Kilo-class.
Rgds
Demand creates supply, it is well known fact. As a result, was marked by a change in leadership of the tkMS. https://www.fresh.co.il/ לאחר מכן ניגש לאנשי המספנה ושאל אותם עליה ועל המערכות שלה, אמרו לו שיש איפול מצד הישראלים וגם מצד הנהלת המספנות אז לא קיבל תשובות.
ReplyDeleteהדבר היחיד שאמרו זה שהיא הצוללת הגדולה ביותר והשקטה ביותר שנבנתה אי פעם בגרמניה.
להערכתם היא הדיזל חשמל השקטה ביותר בעולם מאחר והוטמעה בה טכנולוגיה חדשה "...After that he approached the people of the shipyard and asked them about it and its systems, they told him that there was a blackout on the part of the Israelis and also on the part of the management of the shipyards so he did not get any answers. The only thing they said was that she was the biggest and quietest submarine ever built in Germany.
In their estimation, it is the quietest electric diesel in the world because new technology has been incorporated into it."
Well... let's hope. !שבוע טוב Shavua tov - have a good week!
Hi Oleg at 9/04/2023 8:52 AM
ReplyDeleteYour contributions to https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2022/02/diamond-hull-patent-dolpin-3-type-212cd.html of Feb 22, 2022 provided early warning:
1. of what has now come out in photos of INS Drakon's long sail/fin with suspicions it contains VLS and
2. That Drakon is an estimated 80m long and "3,400 tonnes. (minimum)"
I assume 3,400 tonnes is submerged?
Cheers Pete
Hi Submarine Autistry at 9/03/2023 11:45 AM
ReplyDeleteDifficult to generalise about 3,000 tonne subs and range, eg.
1. range for what may be the largest, the KSS-IIIs, has been quoted as "10,000 nmi" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSS-III_submarine
2. When Australia was considering the Soryus, up to 2016, their insufficient (though unspecified) range became a negative, with expectations that their patrol "beat" was just southern Japan to northern Luzon and return, or about 8,000nm. Don't know if Taigeis have a similar "beat" and range.
3. I get the impression Israeli Dolphins 1, 2 and 3, are/will be mainly seafloor sitting SSBs where missile warloads with special large 650mm torpedo tubes and then VLS for Dolphin 3s, are at the expense of range.
Though the new Dutch subs might well be 3,000+ tonnes and have 15,000nm range. Hopefully making them attractive for a unconsummated Virginia-less Australia.
Don't know about the "standard" Type 212CDs being bought by Germany and Norway.
Cheers Pete
Pete said... 1)"...Die neuen Boote der so genannten Dakar-Klasse werden mit einer Länge von mehr als 80 Metern die größten jemals in Deutschland gebauten U-Boote." (With a length of more than 80 meters,(sic!) the new boats of the so-called Dakar class will be the largest submarines ever built in Germany.) 2)3,400 tonnes is submerged. „Der Trend geht jedenfalls zu größeren U-Booten wie diesen”, erklärte Rolf Wirtz damals als Werftvorstand gegenüber THB (Täglicher Hafenbericht). Inzwischen seien auch Boote mit einer Verdrängung von 2.800 (Type 212CD) und mehr als 3.000 Tonnen (Dakar) in der Projektabteilung in Planung. (In any case, the trend is towards larger submarines like these,” explained Rolf Wirtz as shipyard director at the time to THB (Daily Harbor Report) submarines with a displacement of 2,800 (Type 212CD) and more than 3,000 tons (Dakar) are now also being planned in the project department). 3)"Displacement of the 'Dolphin 3' / Dakar wiil be maybe in 3.400 - 3.700 tonnes range." Unconfirmed Dutch sources. Regards...
ReplyDeleteHi Pete,
ReplyDelete1. I'm aware of the fact that KS-III definitely has less than 15,000 nm of range, hence why I said "offering >15,000 nm range OR VLS".
2. Hm, this figure appears wrong as distance from Kagoshima to northern Luzon and back is actually less than 2,000 nm... But maybe these patrols feature certain maneuvers and patterns that stretch it to 8,000 nm. Either way, if the range on these Soryus really is so unimpressive, Fritz Abels' criticism of concerning the size of Japanese submarines is actually quite understandable. Again, more recent designs of large submarines typically justify their size with VLS or range.
3. I certainly agree with your take on the future Israeli subs. And the new Dutch subs will certainly have the characteristics you mention (I remember seeing a TKMS promotional video of 212CD E where it was shown to be capable of reaching the Pacific Ocean from the Netherlands, the Swedish offer can be assumed to have similar capabilities). By the way, I don't think the amagnetic construction of Type 212 CD's hull will be an issue for exporting the 212 CD E design. Germany has always liked to use amagnetic steel for their own designs, but has proven adaptable to customer preferences. A good example is the Type 207/Kobben-class submarine, which, for the first time in a German-designed sub, used HY 80 steel.