Aussie Christmas Song

“Santa Swapped His Sleigh For A Surfboard” An original composition by Australian singer/songwriter Craig Stewart.
---

Thanks everyone who read Submarine Matters and commented during 2024. 

Wishing everyone Seasons Greetings.

Pete

US Airstrikes Target Iran Proxies & Islamic State in Syria

At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_Republic_A-10_Thunderbolt_II#Operational_history

“On 29 November and 3 December 2024, USAF A-10s were used against targets in Syria to defend US forces in eastern Syria as part of the ongoing Syrian civil war. The USAF said the strikes destroyed vehicles, mortars, and a T-64 tank.^[130] Concurrent with the fall of the Assad regime on 8 December, A-10s participated alongside B-52s and F-15Es in what the USAF said were "dozens" of airstrikes against over 75 ISIS targets. The strikes were intended to prevent ISIS from benefitting from the political upheaval in Syria.^[131]”

++++++++++++++

Video here and above by Chris Cappy and Diego Aceituno (they also wrote description below) at Task and Purpose December 15/16, 2024. Edited by Syed.

"The Syrian civil war has exploded again leading to the United States Air Force executing an A-10 Warthog gun run against Iranian backed proxy militias. Just when you think the A-10 is ready to retire it comes out swinging. The strike KOed three rocket artillery trucks, a T-64 tank, an Armored Personnel Carrier, and a mortar battery.

Today I want to try to untangle this absolute cluster f--k of a situation and investigate whether the US really backed the rebels with material support to overthrow Assad. Why did Syria, Russian and Iranian forces fail to hold the line? Who is this mysterious rebel group that’s taken over the country? All these questions are important but the most important thing is that hopefully the Syrian people themselves stop getting the short end of the stick in the outcome.

According to US Central Command, These strikes were conducted “in self defense”. They claim the gun run was to neutralize an imminent attack that was aimed at the nearby [US] Military Support Site code named “Euphrate” which is a US-led coalition base that’s traded fire with both ISIS and Iranian proxies before."  

First Images of Japan's Type-12 (Upgraded) SSM, Hypersonic Missiles?

The first photos of the new version of Japan's Type-12 Surface-to-Surface Missile (SSM) have been released to the public by Japan's ATLA (Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency).

This report from Naval News has the details (and more pictures). But broadly, the main improvement seems to be an increase in range from 200 km (on the previous Type-12) to a reported 900 km (with an eventual aim of reaching 1,200 km). This will give the Japanese Self Defense Forces a longer, stand-off reach to tackle targets.

Additionally, it appears the new airframe of the missile is designed to minimize its radar signature to make it more difficult for adversaries to detect or shoot down the missile as it approaches. This is a feature that previous-generation SSMs lacked and they could therefore be detected at longer ranges, giving more time for adversaries to prepare defences.

This previous SubMatts article from January 2022 by Pete, with information mainly from Anonymous, goes into the details of how the Type-12 missile achieves these enhanced capabilities.





Japan expects to field the improved Type-12 missile in operational units by around 2026. The Type-12 (Upgrade) is reportedly designed primarily for aircraft and ship-based usage but ground-based launchers might also become viable to use once the full range envelop is realized.

Given the presence of what appears to be a small air scoop/inlet on the underside of the missile (see first image from top), it would seem that the new missile is indeed powered by an air-breathing engine, a turbofan. The turbofan (below) is actually identified in January 2022 SubMatts article. 

Turbofan Engine (a jet) of improved Type-12 SSM.
---

Subsonic Missiles to Supersonic, even Hypersonic

This would mean that the new Type-12, like its predecessors, would primarily or wholly travel at subsonic speeds (below Mach 1). Such a slow speed might be unable to defeat the suite of SSM-countermeasures used by China's PLA Navy. Japan may need to develop supersonic missiles like the Indian-Russian BrahMos or even hypersonic missiles to compete with Russia's hypersonic Zircon, emerging Chinese missiles and future North Korean developments.

In order to increase its survivability, the new Type-12 would have to rely almost entirely on its stealth characteristics - which is in line with the strategy employed by the United States' LRASM missile.

Japan, much like the US and other countries is pursuing gradual development of hypersonic weapon systems like the Hyper-Velocity Gliding Projectile (HVGP) program (tested earlier this year). But the results of these technology-demonstration efforts might take much longer to emerge in the form of operational weapon systems.

Until then, the Type-12 (Upgrade) would likely become Japan's go-to SSM for Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW). It might remain the mainstay even after some hypersonic missiles or gliding projectiles are inducted. Hypersonic missiles are expensive and difficult to develop - and to replenish once used.

Japan might need to rely on the US to fully develop hypersonic weapons in reasonable timeframes. Japan might then eventually secure licensed production rights to reduce reliance on US supplies.

SYRIAN Civil War - Sunni HTS Victory Bodes ILL

It looks like NATO and Israeli intelligence agencies have their work cut out clarifying what is happening to the Russian bases and what deals Russia is making with Turkey’s ambitious President Erdoğan. The agencies need all sources and methods: informants in the region, SigInt and satellite imagery.

Turkey’s apparent power over Syria’s new Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) regime gives Turkey considerable power and latitude. Turkish forces have invaded large parts of northern Syria without HTS resistance (or US complaints?) – in order for Turkey to destroy the Kurds to the extent possible.

HTS’s advance south from Aleppo was so rapid and efficient it is reminiscent of Islamic State in Iraq and Syria’s (ISIS‘s) conquest of large parts of Syria and Iraq in 2014. At worst ISIS elements might be the real power behind HTS.

Like the Arab Spring in 2011 any optimism that the Sunni Jihadist HTS takeover of Syria will bring lasting peace and Western style democracy should be tempered by reality. While most Sunnis (74% of Syria’s population) want peace, the HTS regime are liable to round up and eventually kill many of the Shiites (13%) who dominated ex-President Assad’s old regime. Also the 300,000+ Syrian Christians are under threat. Shiites and Christians may be trying to escape over Syria's borders in large numbers.

Generally a bleak picture. One hopes HTS might surprise with continuing moderation. But we shouldn’t bank on it.

K-4 SLBM Launch from Submarine & Indian Hypersonic Program Updates

On the 17th of November 2024, a test launch of the medium-ranged K-4 SLBM was conducted from the recently commissioned Indian nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) INS Arighaat. I had previously written about the commissioning of this boat which is also known as S3 or by its pennant number SSBN-81.

INS Arighaat is the second submarine in the Arihant-class, which comprises four SSBNs total - the first two (S2 Arihant & S3 Arighaat) with 4 x SLBM launch tubes and the last two (S4 & S4*, not yet named) with 8 x SLBM launch tubes.

It's being reported that this was the first test of the K-4 SLBM from an actual submarine (though some analysts in the know suspect this was just the first 'public' test from a submarine), all previous tests of the missile being from a submerged pontoon test platform.

With a stated range of 3,500 kilometers with a 1-ton (nuclear) payload, the K-4 serves a deterrence purpose by holding major Chinese targets like Beijing and Shanghai within its reach if employed from the northern portions of the Bay of Bengal.

Below is an older video of the missile from one of its previous pontoon-based tests.

However, having to launch from a very specific part of the water in order to reach those targets presents the Indian defence planners with a problem as those waters could be patrolled and/or monitored by Chinese PLA Navy SSNs, which are known to visit the Indian Ocean Region and India's periphery increasingly often. This is why India continues to pursue development of longer-ranged SLBMs like the K-5 and K-6, which supposedly have intercontinental ranges.

The K-5 may find application on the S4 and S4*, while the K-6 appears to be offering a definitive capability that would only equip the future S5-class SSBNs.

Artistic impression of the K4 SLBM; Sourced via overtdefense.com

A nominal range of at least 6,000 kilometers while carrying a MIRVed payload is necessary in order to attain credible deterrence value against the People's Republic of China - and that definitive capability appears to be India's eventual goal with its SSBN & SLBM programs. But this might only be achieved at some point in the next decade (2030s).

But what the K-4 also symbolizes in the meantime is an ability to ensure a truly survivable deterrence against India's other nuclear-armed adversary, Pakistan. The K-4's increased range over the previous K-15 SLBM would mean that India's SSBNs operating in the Bay of Bengal would now be capable of rapidly carrying out launches against major Pakistani counter-value targets like the capital Islamabad and the largest city Karachi without having to spend a considerable amount of time (several days) travelling from the Bay of Bengal to the Arabian Sea in order to bring at least Karachi into range (Islamabad would have still been out of reach for the K-15).

++++

Another interesting development out of India is the test of a Hypersonic missile reportedly called the Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile or LRAShM (pronounced L-Rashem?) on 16 November 2024. The configuration of the weapon appears to be a Hypersonic Boost-Glide Vehicle (HBGV) sitting on top of a large solid rocket booster which is estimated to have the same diameter as the K-4 SLBM.

The only officially stated number about this weapon seems to be its range - a reported 1,500 kilometers - and the fact that it travels at hypersonic speeds (Mach 5 or above) throughout its flight envelop, which might include several maneuvers/altitude variations considering it has the flight control surfaces to affect such movement.

LRAShM during its maiden public test; the object on top is the 'lid' of the sealed canister from which it was launched, it remained stuck on the nose cone for a short while after the ejection

No official figure is stated as to its maximum speed capability - with various analysts speculating it could be between Mach 6 and Mach 9. All that said, it could represent a capability similar to China's DF-17/DF-ZF which also employs a Hypersonic Glide Vehicle (HGV, not the same as a HBGV) payload employed over a similar range (1,600 km).

If deployed in ground-based launchers in the Andaman & Nicobar Islands, the LRAShM can pose a significant threat (over and above what the extended-range BrahMos already represents) to any Chinese PLAN surface task force and/or Carrier Battle Group attempting to traverse the Malacca Strait.

3D Model of the LRAShM by artist Kuntal Biswas, sourced via Twitter; the nose cone & the leading edges of the 'control fins' appear to be coated in a material that's tolerant of extremely high temperatures expected in hypersonic flight

If the Arihant-class ends up being relegated to a comparatively less demanding conventionally-armed SSGN role following the commissioning of the S5-class in the nuclear deterrence role, the LRAShM might also end up being carried by the Arihant-class boats. Just 4 to 8 of these weapons (considering they have a booster that is the same size as K-4's first stage) with conventional payloads wouldn't cause much damage to a land-based target, but can be potentially devastating in a long-range anti-ship/carrier-killing role.

The smaller upper stage (the HBGV itself), with an estimated diameter of 0.6m, might also be carried independently (without the booster, or with a smaller booster of the same diameter as the upper stage) for greater magazine depth (12 to 24 missiles, triple-packed in the silos just like the 0.74m diameter K-15 SLBMs) but with an understandably shorter range of perhaps around 500 to 700 kilometers.

Interesting things to look forward to.

Putin's Future Black Sea NUCLEAR Warning Explosion?

My sources indicate this may be Putin's plan:

Putin may react against the US decision to permit Ukraine to fire ATACMS missiles [1] onto targets in Russia in the following way.

Putin may stage a low yield nuclear warning (atmospheric or on sea) explosion over international Black Sea air-sea space to scare the international community. The yield may be less than 100 tons (ie. < 0.1 kiloton) using a very small existing or newly developed warhead. This would be of the same magnitude yield as the old US Davy Crockett's - W54 Mod 2 warhead (yield was 0.02 kilotons). Delivery means might be many and varied, eg. a suitcase nuke [2] dropped out of a helicopter, transport plane, free fall bomb from a fighter-bomber, dropped off by a boat or conventional submarine, or within an aerial, sea surface or under sea drone or a missile warhead.

"There might be no casualties."

The objective would be to shock the world, including the US, in preparation for the Trump brokered post January 20, 2025 Ukraine-Russia Peace Treaty.

Perhaps Russia's new creditor, China, is holding back Putin from such a warning explosion because the international shock could damage China's top priority, healthy trade.

Ukraine, the US and broader NATO would be more willing to avoid the threat of a seemingly "unhinged Putin" ushering in a regional nuclear war by giving in to Putin’s territorial and other demands. 

Proposed Historical Precedent

Note that in the runup to the 1945 nuclear explosions against Japan a non-combat demonstration explosion was considered [3].

[1]  https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/19/russia-warns-ukraines-atacms-attacks-mark-new-phase-of-war

[2]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuclear_device

[3]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki#Proposed_demonstration

Some further reading from Australian Major General (Retired) Mick Ryan AM is “PUTIN’S CHILLING NUCLEAR THREAT HAS ONE STRATEGIC TARGET” of 27 November 2024 at https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/putin-s-chilling-nuclear-threat-has-one-strategic-target

Pop-Up Sandy Ridge Nuclear Waste Dump. Another for Osborne, Adelaide.

Western Australia now hosts a massive low level nuclear waste dump few have heard of. Its called Sandy Ridge, created after paid-for secret agreements with interest groups, including some Aboriginal groups. More see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-08-06/nuclear-waste-sandy-ridge-facility-tellus-holdings-aukus/104130550

(Photo above courtesy ABC News, just part of the Sandy Ridge facility)
For decades federal and state governments have tried to find a place to store low-level radioactive waste and failed. Now private company, Tellus Holdings, has quietly amassed 100,000 tonnes of low-level radioactive and chemical waste stored in the Western Australian outback at very isolated Sandy Ridge. (Photo below courtesy The West Australian - broad shot of the whole Sandy Ridge facility).

Maps above and clearer on Tellus PDF below. Sandy Ridge may be about 150km by helicopter ENE of Kalgoorlie, Western Australia. Or may be more than 3 hours and 200+kms by reliable 4WD east via the Great Eastern Highway from Kalgoorlie or out to blazes from Perth. See clearer image of MAPs on pages 3 and 8 of Tellus Holdings' PDF document at https://www.gemg.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/52018-Sandy-Ridge-%E2%80%93-Australia%E2%80%99s-First-Dual-Revenue-Near-Surface-Geological-Repository.pdf

Separately in Adelaide

Today it was announced Federal parliament has passed legislation that allows for low level nuclear waste to be stored and disposed of at Osborne shipyard in northeast sleepy Adelaide. Residents said they were not consulted or told of the plan. Our AUKUS robot AlboGov (encouraged by his cheerful UK reps :) said the dump is going ahead whatever local plebs think or fear. See https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-18/aukus-nuclear-waste-to-be-stored-adelaide-suburbs/104605640

An Australia-China military alliance?!

1. Is seeing Trump’s good side like kicking a puppy into orbit? He’s decisive, scares the sh-t out of enemies and also friends. He's anti woke. His lifestyle, wealth, values and trophy wife all represent what red blooded, gun totin, American men aspire to. True or false? Meanwhile “Trump’s a village idiot” Ambassador KRudd may be planning a new job fast?

2. Higher populations and increased living standards in the developing world are steadily increasing hydrocarbon use. This means our climate change measures are wasted. At climate conferences developing countries are asking for US$1.3 Trillion in hand outs (not loans) as compensation and to somehow lessen their hydrocarbon use. Many Tesla wanter leaders are corrupt. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-talks-urged-find-1-trillion-year-poorer-countries-2024-11-14/ But more developing country cars and motorbikes all rely on hydrocarbons. Or electric vehicle factories are high energy use. Doom?

3.Trump is appointing Robert F. Kennedy Jr head of the US Federal Health empire. This covers public health policies like vaccines, food, medications, Medicare and fluoride. Australia’s TGA likes to adhere to US FDA rules and standards. This will set hares running in Australian public health. eg There’s always “fluoride is poison” drongos in Australia who write to any distant council or town considering fluoride.

4. The US withdrawing from the Paris climate change agreement would see a boost in US oil, gas and coal (hydrocarbon) production. Australia under Dutton from May next year might compete by permitting higher extraction of Australian hydrocarbons. Transport costs would go down. Also under Trump’s Ukraine War “Peace” Treaty would free up currently sanctioned /blocked Russian oil/gas to flow back into the world energy market. More hydrocarbons extracted worldwide would lower the cost of living in Australia, across the board.

5. On 15 November AUKUS robot AlboGov (term coined here first) announced details of Labor’s electoral reform bill. This includes imposing a $20,000 cap on individual donations and an $800,000 cap on spending per electorate. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/nov/15/labor-and-coalition-accused-of-cooking-up-secret-deal-to-rig-electoral-rules-with-new-bill Independents have accused AlboGov of attempting to “rig” electoral rules in a “major party stitch-up” against the Greens and independents. Meanwhile any party in power or in Opposition uses policy announcements as election advertising.

6. If Trump’s US imposed a 30+% tariff against Australian exports might this be good for Australia to make up our minds to end reliance on the US? In 2023, China accounted for 41% of Australia's total exports. Japan was 12%, South Korea 7%, India 5.5%, US only 4.3%  https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/exports-by-country. How about our alliance with the US? Does it merely drag Australia into far off US led wars?

Maybe Australia should forge a military alliance with main trade partner China. Could ex Prime Minister Keating negotiate this monumental pivot? 😅

7. Good News British novelist Samantha Harvey has been awarded the 2024 Booker Prize for her novel Orbital. “Its written through the perspectives of real-life astronauts” (many of whom are ex fighter pilots). Harvey dedicated her victory to world peace and no doubt Bambi. 

NO UK Astutes Likely to "Rotate" Through Fleet Base West

Here is Gessler’s first comment above the ++++ of Nov 7, 2024 

"I wonder if the 'alternative' proposals listed in the Congressional Research Service (CRS) report mentioned in one of your previous articles (linked below) would find traction under a Trump administration. Namely, the one that calls for the Virginia-class SSNs meant to be sold to Australia instead being owned & operated by the US Navy itself...while SSN-AUKUS program proceeds in parallel with the UK.

https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2024/02/would-be-ssn-countries-us-rejected.html

It's also possible that Trump will instead argue in favour of building the AUKUS boats in the US itself (perhaps based on SSN-X instead of UK's SSN-R design) in an attempt to create more jobs for American workers & yards while promising to deliver each boat to USN & RAN at a cheaper price instead (as the cost per boat would naturally go down if the number of SSNX hulls increase, plus the cost of building all-new nuclear submarine infrastructure in Australia would no longer be a factor).

Remains to be seen what Trump will do with AUKUS."

To which Pete2 replied:

I think Trump might be guided by US Navy insistence that the USN needs ALL the the Virginia SSNs operational now (ie. no second hand SSNs for Australia) AND USN needs all the new Virginia's. 

This does not preclude Australia getting a clapped-out, Los Angeles-class moored  SSN for immobile training use at Fleet Base West, Western Australia. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moored_training_ships like USS La Jolla (SSN-701) and USS San Francisco (SSN-711)

Regarding "Virginia-class SSNs meant to be sold to Australia instead being owned & operated by the US Navy itself." This is in some respects what is planned for the maybe half US/UK squadron sized "Submarine Rotational Force (SRF-West) " maybe from as early as 2027. The US and maybe UK may provide this force at HMAS Stirling (Fleet Base West).

-  One sub may be a UK Astute. Although the UK RN is already facing severe crew shortages even for those Astutes meant to meet the UK's own Atlantic-Arctic oceans - Mediterranean needs. However, on occasions when an Astute operates in the Persian Gulf - Arabian Sea - Indian Ocean area Australia may get a port visit once every 2 - 3 years. Three years may already be the pattern with Astutes and earlier UK Trafalgar-class SSN visits.  Also see other factors minimising Astute squadron  readiness https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/the-royal-navys-submarine-readiness-issue/

The main hope therefore is one or two US Virginia SSNs (rotated) ie. forward based at Fleet Base West from about 2027 to 2036 when Australia might receive its first purchased Virginia. See https://www.asa.gov.au/projects/submarine-rotational-force-west-infrastructure-project 
and https://www.defence.gov.au/about/locations-property/infrastructure-projects/submarine-rotational-force-west-infrastructure-project

The downside for Australia relying on US crewed Virginias through to 2036 is they will  be used to meet US national interests. These may note coincide with Australian national interests. This is especially if the US decides on a war with Australia's largest trading partner (and 2008 GFC saviour) China - a war that Australia's doesn't want to Coalition of the Willing participate in.

In fact I think it unlikely the US will sell ANY used or new Virginias to Aus in the 2030s due to the critical short-medium-long term shortage of SSNs even for sole USN use.

The Virginias (through to Block VIIIs) and US specialized SSN(X)s can/will only be built in the US. The UK-Aus specialized SSN-AUKUSs can only be fully designed built and tested first in the UK (from the late 2030s).

I think the SSN-AUKUS with the US combat system (integrated by Lockheed Martin) can then be laid down in Australia about 2040, but they will only be completed in the mid 2040s. See https://www.lockheedmartin.com/en-au/products/systems-integration/maritime-systems-integration-undersea.html

Trump's Past Pro-Japan, SK Nuclear Weapons Position

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nuclear_weapons_program#De_facto_nuclear_state advises:

"On 29 March 2016, then-U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump suggested that Japan should develop its own nuclear weapons, claiming that it was becoming too expensive for the US to continue to protect Japan from countries such as China, North Korea, and Russia that already have their own nuclear weapons.^[50]

[endnote 50 is]

https://web.archive.org/web/20190611080231/https://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-japan-south-korea-might-need-nuclear-weapons/

"Donald Trump: Japan, South Korea might need nuclear weapons

By Stephanie Condon

March 29, 2016 / CBS News

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Tuesday night defended his assertion that more countries, such as Japan, South Korea or even Saudi Arabia, may need to develop their own nuclear weapons.

"You have so many countries already -- China, Pakistan, you have so many countries, Russia -- you have so many countries right now that have them," Trump said in a Milwaukee, Wisconsin town hall televised by CNN. "Now, wouldn't you rather, in a certain sense, have Japan have nuclear weapons when North Korea has nuclear weapons?"

Trump said that the United States spends too much money protecting countries like Japan and Saudi Arabia, but "we can't afford to do it anymore."

CNN moderator Anderson Cooper pointed out that it's been U.S. policy for decades to prevent Japan from getting a nuclear weapon. Trump responded, "Maybe it's going to have to be time to change, because so many people -- you have Pakistan has it, you have China has it. You have so many other countries are now having it."

Trump similarly suggested that Japan and South Korea should develop nuclear weaponry in an interview with the New York Times last week.

Following Trump's remarks to the Times, Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told reporters that his nation remains steadfastly against owning, making or allowing nuclear weapons. He said this position will "remain an important basic policy of the government."

Trump said he's in favor of potentially seeing countries like Japan develop nuclear weapons because "it's going to happen anyway."

"It's only a question of time," he said. "They're going to start having them or we have to get rid of them entirely.""

On 27 February 2022, former prime minister Shinzo Abe proposed that Japan should consider a nuclear sharing arrangement with the US similar to NATO.^[51] This includes housing American nuclear weapons on Japanese soil for deterrence.^[51] This plan comes in the wake of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.^[51][52] Many Japanese politicians consider Vladimir Putin's threat to use nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state to be a game changer.^[52] "

Australia's Trump Era SSN & SSK Choices: Revised

Responding to Scott's at 11/07/2024 12:11 AM comment:

President elect Trump sees himself as a tough, business savvy, negotiator. He does not respect international alliances, even NATO. 

The US Navy is increasingly (and secretly) advising that US industry (eg. principal Virginia SSN builders GDEB and HII) is failing to produce, repair or overhaul sufficient Virginias for USN needs in the 2020s through to the 2040s. Trump may well see AUKUS future Virginia submarines for Australia as a weak Biden Democrat deal [1]. If so Trump might cancel that deal or sharply increase the Virginia sales price to be paid by Australia.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUKUS#Australia%E2%80%93UK%E2%80%93US_negotiations

Anticipating the danger of a Trump cancellation of the Virginia offer, the super secretive Australian Submarine Agency likely has a Fall-back Options Planning Section. This section is probably thinking along the following lines:

Even if Trump cancelled the Virginia class offer it is unlikely the US would prevent the UK supplying SSN AUKUSs (which will have US combat system technology integrated by Lockheed Martin) to Australia. There is too much cash for the declining UK economy at stake. Therefore the UK would exert its still considerable political influence on the US to make the SSN AUKUS offer stand. 

On French SSNs and SK SSK/SSBs:

China is certainly unhappy (and India possibly) with any SSNs being supplied to Australia. There are many reasons why France would hesitate to provide  Barracuda/Suffren SSNs to Australia.

-  One being France rates trade and (Indian and Pacific oceans) strategic vulnerability from China higher than trade with Australia.

-  Also until the early 2040s France's limited nuc sub sector is fully committed supplying the remaining Suffrens and the 4 x third generation SSBNs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNLE_3G to the French Navy. This is to the exclusion of multi-SSN foreign orders. 

-  Australia was also unimpressed with France's nuc subs for the French Navy first priorities expressed by France in 2021. French Navy priorities were to come first before the delayed Australians Attack-class program was fully tackled some time in the 2030s. On those French priorities see my https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/02/frances-new-ssbn-aus-attack-class-2nd.html

I don't think the South Korean (SK) KSS-III, with its heavy K-VLS SLBM loadout , is suitable for Australia's strategic circumstances. The PRC target is too far for slow, medium range, KSS-IIIs (compared to fast, long range, SSNs) to sail from Fleet Base West to within (future Australian nuclear missile) striking distance of PRC coastal targets.

However if SK industry, in SK, in under 10 years, could build standard SSKs, like the DSME-3000 (which is not burdened by K-VLS silos and has AIP and LIBs) then it may be a good and time sensitive replacement for the Collins. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSS-III_submarine#DSME-3000 .

The Virginias for Australia were never to be built in Australia, so SSKs, like the DSME-3000, need not be built in Australia. Submarine building in Australia (ie. at Osborne, Adelaide) typically takes 3 times as long at 3 times the price.

Day Before the US Election: AUKUS Virginia Subs?

After 10am Wednesday Australian Eastern (AE) time US swing state Exit Poll https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_poll results may start pointing to a winner. After AE 4pm, once Alaska and Hawaii voting has ended, official results may start flowing in in significant numbers. If it is a landslide, by AE 7pm we may know who won.

Iowa (6 votes) is usually Trump territory. According to election “oracle” Ann Selzer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Selzer Harris may be ahead in Iowa, https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-04/donald-trump-criticises-poll-after-kamala-harris-prediction/104556162 . 

In part due to this new Iowa expectation Trump may be unnerved, feeling he is losing. Hence Trump has returned to his 2020 mantra “this Election has been stolen”. Such talk may be a Trump mistake immediately before this 2024 election as it may remind Americans of the Trump prompted January 6, 2021 Capitol riot.

It is widely assumed the 7 swing state votes will decide the whole Election. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_state The swing states are Pennsylvania 19 votes; Michigan 15, Wisconsin 10, North Carolina 16; Georgia 16; Arizona 11 and Nevada 6 (Nevada has many postal votes that delays the final results). All are considered “tossups” as they are so close. Like Iowa Florida (30 votes) needs close watching. Florida is currently assumed to be a Trump state (he won it by 3.36% in 2020), It was Florida that won George W. Bush the 2000 Election by only 537 recounted  votes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidential_election_recount_in_Florida  

There might be no clear result on November 5 US time (November 6 Australian time). Instead it may be so close there may be a week of vote recounting. This is especially in the 7 Swing States and maybe Iowa and Florida. The Presidential winner might then emerge after Sunday 10 November.

If Harris wins it will likely be continuity after January 20, 2025 Inauguration Day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_United_States_presidential_inauguration

The ugly alternative? The Australian Government and most informed Australians are very nervous about the possibility of a Trump win.

Trump sees himself as a tough, business savvy, negotiator. He does not  respect international alliances, even NATO. The US Navy is also increasingly (and secretly) advising that US industry (GDEB and HII) is failing to produce, repair or overhaul sufficient Virginias for USN needs in the 2020s through to the 2040s. Trump may well see AUKUS future Virginia submarines for Australia as a weak Biden Democrat deal [1]. If so Trump might cancel that deal.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUKUS#Australia%E2%80%93UK%E2%80%93US_negotiations

Part 4: Slew of Developments in the Indian Nuclear Submarine Program: New VLF Station and SLBM Updates

To wrap up this Four-part SubMatts series on the Indian nuclear submarine program, I present two separate developments that emerged in mid-late 2024.

The first is the establishment of a new Very Low Frequency (VLF) communication facility of the Indian Navy in the landlocked state of Telangana in south central India. Used for communicating with submarines without requiring them to reach periscope depth, the new facility would be located some 60 km from the state's capital city of Hyderabad (where your's truly currently resides). The foundation stone marking the start of construction was laid on 16 October 2024 by Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh.

The new facility, which is over 300 km from the nearest coastline, offers a more survivable location which is at less risk of being attacked, destroyed or degraded compared to the current submarine communications facility which is located at INS Kattabomman. Kattabomman is in the state of Tamil Nadu and only around 20 km from the coast on the southern tip of India.

Satellite image (via Google Maps) of the facility at INS Kattabomman
---

Notably, the facility at INS Kattabomman has both VLF and ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) transmitters. The ELF band is capable of communicating with submarines at much lower depths, and is therefore more advantageous to use for nuclear-powered boats. It's not known at this time whether the new station at Telangana will also incorporate an ELF facility down the line. 

++++

The second thing I'm writing about is the SLBM program. There have been a few 'releases/deliberate leaks' of SLBM visuals let into the social media space by the authorities (as I don't believe anyone could have acquired them of their own volition).

For example, the video below which shows the K-4 SLBM being ejected from its test pontoon underwater. It then gains altitude by means of nose cap-mounted booster plumes (a method used on older Soviet SLBMs like the R-29). Then the nose cap itself is ejected and the missile's first stage solid motor takes over propulsion. A video of the above-water launch sequence existed before (it can be seen in the K-4's Wikipedia article linked above) but it was of a considerably lower quality and did not include the underwater pontoon-ejection part.

There has also been an image of what seems to be a 'salvo launch' - multiple missiles launched over a short duration - of two K-15 SLBMs, presumably from INS Arihant. It is not known when this salvo-launch test took place (possibly during this bout of testing in 2018). But it goes toward proving a significant capability when it comes to delivering effective deterrence. That is being able to launch multiple nuclear warhead-equipped missiles as quickly as possible. This would be necessary if the SSBN in question has to serve its purpose of performing second-strike. That is a retaliatory strike following an adversary's first strike (considering India has a No-First Use (NFU) policy) before the SSBN itself is probably found and destroyed.

Given the distance between the two points of launch, it would appear that this salvo-firing test was conducted from a submarine that was moving
---

A further piece of my analysis regarding the Indian SLBMs would tie-in to this older article on SubMatts. This raised the possibility of DRDO's ballistic missile-related propulsion R&D work having matured to a degree that no longer necessitated a prominent, raised missile compartment or 'hump' on the S5-class SSBN design. As the solid-fuel and rocket motor technologies advance, it becomes possible to deliver the same payload to the same range as before, but with a missile that is smaller and lighter.

On that note, this excellent comparative artwork (shown below) made by Orion Intel depicting India's Agni-5 IRBM (the government refuses to call it an ICBM). It is in its original configuration on the right, compared to the newer configuration on the left, which is based on photometric analysis of the images revealed during the MIRV test earlier this year.

Comparison of the original Agni-5 and its MIRVed version. Via Orion Intel on Twitter (now X)
---

The newer 'MIRVed' configuration - called by many 'Agni-5 Mk.2' has a different nose cone arrangement. It is noticeably shorter (note the upper black inter-stage section) than the original that was first tested over 12 years ago in 2012. This is in spite of the MIRVed configuration having to carry heavier payloads. Significant progress in miniaturization of ballistic missile stages and motors over the last decade might not be a bad conclusion to draw, although there are several other variables to take into account.

In any case a shorter Agni-5 Mk.2 would certainly explain why the newer hydrodynamic models of the S5 SSBN don't feature a prominent missile hump seen on earlier S5 test models. Improvements in R&D would find applications across the entire gamut of strategic ballistic missiles. Note that the S5s will eventually carry the more advanced, longer range K-6 SLBM. 

With that, this SubMatts series covering recent developments in India's nuclear submarine program comes to an end.

Cheers Gessler

Part 3: Slew of Developments in the Indian Nuclear Submarine Program: First Two SSNs Funded

On the 9th of October 2024, The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS), the apex decision-making body of the Indian Government regarding all Military matters, has officially granted its final seal of approval to the Indian Navy's nuclear attack submarine program, now designated as Project-77 (previously known as Project-75A).

A sum of Rs. 40,000 crores (equivalent to about US$4.8 Billion) has been allocated toward the construction and acquisition of the first two boats out of a planned total of six.

Artistic impression of the Indian Navy's SSN by Nilanjan Das of the India Today magazine (not representative of actual design)
---

Veteran journalist Sandeep Unnithan who has reported on the Indian nuclear submarine program for over a decade has stated that the P77-class SSNs would incorporate a 190MWth reactor which would represent a generational leap over the 83-100MWth PWRs of the Arihant-class. Sandeep Unnithan can be safely assumed as having sources inside the program or at least being a 'designated' individual through which the Government and/or the Navy publicizes developments. Of note is the fact that Mr. Unnithan (then working for India Today magazine) was the first journalist who reported that the 3rd and 4th Arihant-class boats will be larger than the first two, years before the S4 boat first appeared in public. Satellite images from late 2021 vindicated him.

The new 190MWth reactor, known as CLWR-B2 is likely based on or at least built along the same lines as the Russian OK-650B that powers the Akula II-class SSN that India took on lease between 2012-2021. It would also be prudent to estimate that the CLWR-B1 that powers the Arihant-class was derived from the VM-4 reactor family that powered the Charlie-class SSGN that India leased between 1988-1991. However, any help or guidance from Russian agencies (whether in design itself or at least in the design-validation phase) is unlikely to ever be publicized by either side due to obvious reasons, such as eliciting nuclear proliferation concerns.

On both these reactors, it's likely a great deal of redesign and redevelopment was involved in order to bring them up to modern standards of the time - as well as getting them to work optimally in the warm-water conditions of the Indian Ocean as opposed to the freezing waters of Russia's operating environments. They're still likely to use the same level of reactor fuel enrichment as most Russian marine PWRs (~45% enriched HEU). However, I think it can be safe to assume that the new reactor will differ from its baseline Russian design (presumed by me to be OK-650B) to a significantly greater degree than the Arihants' reactors difference from the VM-4.

With around ~60MWe of total electrical power (assuming a 33% efficiency on a 190MWth thermal output), the P77 SSN would be well-placed to incorporate the 35MW Nuclear-Electric Propulsion (NEP) setup. This would involve a silent electric motor replacing the noisy reduction gearing used in older submarines. This is also known as Turbo-Electric Drive, known to have been in the works for the Indian Navy. Assuming this setup is indeed intended for the SSN project, it can be a reason as to why a significantly higher degree of redesign may have been necessary for the CLWR-B2's power delivery system - especially the secondary loop setup - as the OK-650B was not originally meant to work with NEP.

Above is a publicly-available Expression of Interest (EoI) document (sourced via the Twitter handle of strategicfront.org) calling for industry to develop a 35MW Electric Drive solution for future submarines of the Indian Navy.
--- 

For comparison, the French Navy's Barracuda/Suffren-class SSN uses a 20MW NEP setup fed by a 150MWth LEU reactor to drive its pumpjet propulsor. Notably, the setup on Barracuda-class is only designed to use the nuclear-electric solution up to a certain speed (let's say 20-25 knots) for relatively silent transit. Beyond 25 knots the submarine has to rely on its backup conventional propulsion that is understandably more noisy - in order to attain higher speeds (up to a maximum of 30 knots I would assume).

The Expression of Interest (EoI) documentation above also calls for the Indian NEP setup to drive the submarine to a maximum speed of 25 knots. It's likely that the P77 would also have to fall back on a conventional setup to go faster (again, let's say it can do a maximum of 30 knots or more). Either way, even without the NEP, this reactor should put the P77 in a very good place in terms of speed and performance when going up against any given opponent SSN, such as the new Type-093B of the Chinese PLA Navy. Actually, the P77 is very likely to enjoy an advantage in those regards against the Chinese boats - barring any considerable improvement the PLAN manages to make in the decade-plus it would take for the P77 to arrive.

Also worthy of note is the fact that, at least according to the the EoI document above, the nuclear-electric setup being pursued by the Indian Navy clearly calls for the P77's NEP to drive a pumpjet propulsor. Is that enough reason to assume the P77 will have a pumpjet? We'll see.

Example of a turbo-electric generator manufactured by India's state-owned BHEL corporation for commercial applications. BHEL is very likely to be the contractor responsible for building any NEP solution for future submarines.
---

This same reactor and NEP propulsion setup are also likely to drive India's upcoming "S5" class of next-gen SSBNs. The S5s will be much larger, believed to displace between 13,000-14,000 tonnes, with 12 or more vertical launch silos. The S5s will perform a very different mission (deterrence). Hence S5 reactors will have to cater for different SSBN power delivery needs  (smooth and gradual acceleration) compared to the rapid stop-starts of SSN operations.

Based on reports from official DRDO publications (pictured below) it's evident that R&D work on both conformal bow-array sonars as well as planar-arrays (ostensibly used for flank-array setups) is/has been ongoing in India for several years. It's difficult to say which R&D program might or might not find a real-world application on upcoming submarine programs. I think it can be safely said that there's at least a determination in the Indian Navy to advance past the older cylindrical-array sonar setup used in the bow of the current generation of Indian nuclear boats. Among SSNs that are currently being built, the Astute-class comes to mind as one that has a conformal bow array.

Screen-grabs from the DRDO's official 'Technology Focus' publication, detailing some R&D work on next-generation sonar solutions.
--- 

While there's no official word on this, I would estimate using a 190MWth reactor, there would be enough power on tap for the P77 SSN to incorporate additional mission sets beyond pure hunter-killer duties. This could include carrying a pack of vertically-launched Land-Attack Cruise Missiles (LACMs) like the Nirbhay. It remains to be seen what the configuration of the P77 SSN class will be. I would estimate its surfaced displacement to be somewhere between 5,000 and 7,000 tons. P77s will likely be larger than the 5,300 tonne French Barracuda/Suffren-class but possibly smaller than the Royal Navy's 7,400 tonne Astute class and the US Navy's 7,900 tonne Virginia-class (Blocks I-IV).

I personally do not believe in the reports in some sections of media (like this article from the Times of India (TOI)) that says the SSNs will displace 10,000 tons. Such a displacement would make P77s similar to submerged Improved Akulas. I think the TOI reporter in question either misinterpreted the information brief given to him, or the brief itself was a deliberate attempt at misdirection. Either way, I think we'd do well to believe that the P77 would incorporate an entirely new hull design compared to the Arihant - as I believe that the Arihant-class's internal bulkheads would probably be too small to accommodate the 190MW reactor compartment.

All that said, I think we can expect that the first P77 will be commissioned in the mid-late 2030s. This is assuming the construction starts in 2025, with a build time of between 8 and 10 years followed by sea trials. Much would also depend on how much technology being rapidly iterated over the Arihant-class finds application on the P77.

It's worth noting that even going by what's known so far, every single Arihant-class boat appears to be significantly different from the last owing to continuous technology insertion i.e. improved reactor and hull extension. It is also possible the upcoming S4* might turn out having a pumpjet. This is if a decision were taken to de-risk the P77's and S5's next-gen propulsion setup by testing the pumpjet on S4*.

It's also possible that the eventual requirement will be extended beyond the six P77s currently sought, to twelve, as I previously theorized. This is keeping in mind the construction of a new large, higher capacity, dry-dock at SBC (refer the satellite image in Part-2 of this series). It is very likely that at some point within the end of the 2020s, the Indian Navy could have both the new SSNs and S5-class SSBNs under construction at the same time, They might also be delivered simultaneously over a period of time in the 2030s. Unfortunately, being a strategic program (for carrying nuclear weapons) the funding modes for the S5-class boats will be secret. None of the public reporting such as cabinet approvals or funding details applied to the P77s will likely apply to the S5s.

The upcoming part (probably the last) of this SubMatts series will cover a few updates regarding some ancillary programs that support India's nuclear submarine effort without being directly a part of it.