About subs, military/naval, missiles, nuclear weapons & politics. New Aussie subs have been just talk since 2009. Collins upgrades of partial help. UUVs help more. POTUS may cancel AUKUS Virginias in 2031 as the USN needs all SSNs to the 2040s. Australian Gov ignores US higher priority Columbia SSBNs (one/year being commissioned 2029-2041). Meaning no new Virginias 2030-41? Shawn C and Gessler are excellent authors. Pete.
SILEX & other Laser Enrichment
December 15, 2023
Hamas "Long Range" Rocket: Ayyash-250 [km]
Russian Yasen-class SSGN
Type 093 (Shang Class) Chinese SSN: odin.tradoc.army.mil
THE FOLLOWING IS "APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE"
NOTES [Introduction]
The Type 093 (or Type 09-III, NATO codename: Shang class) is China’s 2nd-generation nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) introduced in the early 2000s. It represents a significant improvement over the 1st-generation submarines in performance and capability. At least six hulls have already been commissioned into the PLA Navy as of 2015, and the construction programme continues. The improved Type 093B (Shang-III class) SSGN is capable of carrying log-range cruise missiles for anti-ship and land-attack.
The PLA Navy initiated the development of its next-generation Type 093 nuclear attack submarine in the mid-1980s as a successor to its 1st-generation Type 091 (Han class). However, little progress was made until the mid-1990s, when Russia agreed to transfer its nuclear submarine technology to China in exchange for urgently-needed cash.
[Pete Comment: For 2022-24 a China-Russia barter situation may apply as the Ukraine War is running down Russian military and financial resources. China's future Type 095 SSN could be benefitting from some Russian tech (eg. Yasen) data].
The St. Petersburg-based Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering, one of Russia’s primary centres for submarine design, offered consultation to the Type 093’s development, including overall hull design, engine and machinery quieting, combat system, weapon system, and countermeasures outfit. The existence of the submarine programme was first reported by the Pentagon in 2003. The U.S. Navy intelligence and Pentagon suggested that 2 hulls in the basic variant Type 093 and 4 hulls in the improved Type 093A variant had been constructed by 2017 ((Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China, 2017, page 24.)).
While the basic variant Type 093 is only comparable to the 1970s U.S. and Russian designs such as the early variant Los Angeles (688) class and the Victor-III class, the improved Type 093A/B is believed to be approaching the later variant Los Angeles class and the Akula class in quietness and overall capability, though they still cannot match the more advanced Seawolf and Virginia class.
Type 093 Shang-I class Construction of the Type 093 reportedly began in the late 1990s at the Huludao-based CSIC Bohai Shipbuilding Heavy Industry Co., Ltd. The first-of-class Boat 407 was launched sometime in 2001 to 2002. After a sea trial that lasted for four years, the submarine was finally commissioned by the PLA Navy in 2006. The second hull Boat 408 was launched in late 2003 and commissioned around 2007. The production then stopped and replaced by the follow-up variants.
The basic variant Type 093 (Shang I class) was said to have been partially based on the Russian Victor III class in design, though the two submarines bear no resemblance in appearance. The submarine is estimated to have 6.000 to 7,000 t displacement when dived. It features a water-drop shape hull, with a pair of fin-mounted hydroplanes and four diving planes. Six (three on each side) flank-mounted sonar arrays are clearly visible on the hull of the submarine. There are six 533 mm bow torpedo tubes (4 above, 2 below), capable of carrying the various anti-submarine/surface torpedoes of wire-, acoustic- and wake-homing, as well as the YJ-82 anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM).
Type 093A Shang-II class This is an improved variant with a redesigned sail with a tapered front (similar to that of the Seawolf class and Virginia class) and all windows removed. Type 093B Shang-III class
The improved Type 093B nuclear-power guided missile submarine (SSGN) was launched in 2012 and commissioned in 2015. This variant features some redesign to the sail, with the tapered front retained but all windows removed. There is a mysterious hump located immediately behind the sail, which is believed to accommodate a missile vertical launch system (VLS). The VLS is said to be used for carrying and launching the YJ-18 ASCM, the Yu-8 rocket-propelled torpedo, and the CJ-10 land-attack cruise missile (LACM). The YJ-18, a Chinese copy of the Russian 3M-54 Klub (SS-N-27 ‘Sizzler’), is capable of attacking surface and land targets to a maximum range of 650 km. The CJ-10, rumoured to have been developed from the Russian Kh-55 (AS-15 ‘Kent’), employs a combined inertial navigation system (INS), satellite, and terrain contour matching (TERCOM) navigation to a maximum range of 1,500 km. These missiles allow the Type 093B to project power ashore over long distance – a capability not previously possessed by Chinese SSNs...
December 3, 2023
Submarine Matters Will Continue for Free
I have decided to continue Submarine Matters on the Blogger/Blogspot platform.
I don't need money unlike many submarine/naval/military writers. SubMatts, a free database going back to 2007, is also useful for you readers including democratic governments, in several ways.
The main difference, from now is:
I will no longer reply in the Comments Section below articles.
I found I was commenting there more than (or instead of) writing articles.
Also only the words in articles are readily retrieved (from the Search Box (top left of website)) and by broader search engines, like Google. Comment section words are largely lost to the Internet "Ether".
But please discuss/argue between yourselves in Comments.
I have reopened reader access to the Comments Section.
Regards Pete
November 30, 2023
Canadian Patrol Submarine Project: KSS-3?
At Canadian Patrol Submarine Project: Update 1. of November 24, 2023 https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/11/canadian-patrol-submarine-project.html I asked what were the three decent contenders for the Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP). This was with reference to likely requirements also set out at https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2023/11/canadian-patrol-submarine-project.html:
It
is early days with the CPSP team having few staff. This means firm contenders or
a shortlist may not exist well into the 2020s. In the meantime here is my top contender:
South Korea’s (SK’s) Hanwha Ocean (was DSME) KSS-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSS-III_submarine. Hanwha may already know/hope it is top contender having already signed 4 MoUs with Canadian companies and a Technical Cooperation Agreement with Babcock Canada.
The
KSS-3 is the largest (highest surface displacement) sub being considered.
The KSS-3 Batch-1 already has 3 operational subs. Batch 1s are 83.5m long, 3,358 tonnes surfaced, 10,000nm range, with 50 crew. It has Lead-acid batteries (LABs) and a SK developed fuel cell AIP.
The first (even larger) Batch-2 is under construction,
scheduled to be commissioned in 2026. It is 89m long, 3,600 tonnes surfaced, with Lithium-ion
batteries (LIBs) and AIP. If the RCN (like the RAN) is nervous about the
short track record and runaway heat buildup = fire concerns about LIBs compared to the 120 year record of LABs, then LIBs might be considered a minus. However if Canada sees LIBs as a plus then the Batch-2's AIP and LIBs might be the winning combination.
Some in Canada might be attracted to the still currently named "DSME"-3000 export concept sub. But it may run the risk of being a Canada only orphan design, also displacing only 3,000 tonnes surfaced and the current draft concept doesn’t have VLS.
VLS is seen by the SK and maybe Israeli navies and PLA as attractive in SSKs and essential in Los Angeles (Flights II and III), Virginias, Russian Yasens and emerging SSN designs.
SK, unlike Japan (which might be offering Taigei-class subs to Canada) has a long history of supplying major weapons systems to foreign customers. SK’s Hanwha Ocean (then DSME) built and supplied 2 x Type 209 variant/highly improved Nagapasa-class subs in 2017 and 2018 to Indonesia. Hanwha also supplied the parts of a third Nagapasa-class for assembly by PT PAL, Surabaya Indonesia, commissioned 2021.
Consideration of other submarines for Canada and Poland might occur after I shift my attention to a new blog - on WordPress.
Regards Pete
November 24, 2023
Canadian Patrol Submarine Project: Update 1.
At
the moment South Korea, in the shape of Hanwha Ocean (was DSME) appears to be the
most determined contender for the long term (15-20 years) Canadian Patrol Submarine Project (CPSP).
In
late 2023 Hanwha signed MoUs with four Canadian companies (CAE, J-Squared
Technologies, Modest Tree and Des Nedhe) https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/11/hanwha-ocean-signed-mou-with-four-canadian-firms-for-patrol-submarine-project/
Earlier, in June 2023, Hanwha Ocean signed a Technical Cooperation Agreement with (project advisory and designer?) Babcock Canada aimed at the CPSP. https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/madex-2023/2023/06/babcock-and-hanwha-ocean-sign-a-technical-cooperation-agreement-for-the-canadian-patrol-submarine-project/
Canada, over the next 15-25 years is seeking, likely with reference to the following requirements:
- between 6 and 12 submarines (probably the RCN submarine service would prefer 12). Four subs is far too few for Canada's 3 Ocean (Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic) Navy.
- buying new, not secondhand
- that are foreign built (to contain costs and reduce project risk and reduce cost and to meet deadlines (eg. avoiding the build locally Australian habit).
- of existing design, preferably already at sea or under imminent completion. Some minimal alterations might be acceptable as no sub is chosen off-the-shelf. Existing design minimizes technical risk and avoids all of the spares shortages, upgrade problems and other downsides of operating an orphan submarine chosen at a concept submarine stage. Canada is very mindful of Australian downsides eg. that produced the orphan Collins-class and almost led to the orphan Attack-class.
- large (probably 3,000 tonnes (surfaced) at a minimum).
- for oceanic long range, long endurance, probably with 50+ crew
- also large to desirably be able to rise through 1 to 2m of ice to permit (battery recharging and 2-way communications) operations as far north as possible. See genuine importance of rising through ice at Timothy Choi's and Chris Spedding's long joint papers at https://basicint.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/22_66_BASIC_Canadian-Submarine-Recapitalization-within-the-context-of-Climate-Change-report_03.pdf and https://www.navalassoc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Starshell-March-2023-LR.pdf
- diesel-electric (the US clearly did not apply AUKUS Pillar 1 (SSN) reasoning to Canada or Canada didn't want to pay a whole-of-life $Half Trillion for an 8 x SSN Project),
- proven already at sea AIP (no promised immature new technology AIP). This may exclude France's and Spain's new technology not-yet-at-sea AIP systems.
- if no AIP then Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) might be considered. But any significant LIBs caused fires on subs in the 2020s may rapidly exclude LIBs from consideration.
- SSNs are not an option. The US and UK significantly did not invite Canada to the AUKUS Pillar 1 (SSN) Arrangement and the US has a long history of opposing SSNs for Canada
I think there may be three decent contenders for the CPSP that I'll write about next week. Can you guess which 3 subs?