Submarines - The War Against Invisibility

The U.S. Navy has been secretive about how effective it has become in detecting non-nuclear submarines. That discretion is necessary to prevent the enemy from fixing any vulnerabilities you are exploiting. The quietness of modern diesel-electric boats puts nuclear subs and surface ships at a serious disadvantage, especially in coastal waters. This is a big problem for the United States, which went to an all nuclear submarine fleet half a century ago. While the nuclear sub is the most effective high seas vessel, especially if you have worldwide responsibilities and these nukes would have to quickly move long distances to get to the troubled waters, the diesel electric boat, operating on batteries in coastal waters, is quieter and harder to find.

 

For over a decade the U.S. Navy has been trying to get an idea of just how bad the threat is and developing technologies and tactics to deal with it. This was part of a larger ASW (anti-submarine warfare) effort that began in the 1990s to deal with post-Cold War submarine threat. A major part of this effort using a state-of-the-art non-nuclear subs to practice on. Thus from 2005 to 2007 the United States leased a Swedish sub (Sweden only has five subs in service) and its crew, to help American anti-submarine forces get a better idea of what they were up against. This Swedish boat was a "worst case" scenario, an approach that is preferred for training. The Gotland class Swedish subs involved are small (1,500 tons, 64.5 meters/200 feet long) and have a crew of only 25. The Gotland was based in San Diego, along with three dozen civilian technicians to help with maintenance.

 

For many years before the Gotland arrived, the U.S. Navy had trained against Australian diesel-electric subs and often came out second. The Gotland has one advantage over the Australian boats because of its AIP (Air-Independent Propulsion) system (which allows it to stay under water, silently, for several weeks at a time). Thus the Gotland was something of a worst case in terms of what American surface ships and submarines might have to face in a future naval war. Since the Gotland experiments the U.S. has borrowed other AIP subs for further work in refining detection methods. None of America's most likely naval opponents (China, North Korea, or Iran) only China has built some AIP boats yet. These three nations have plenty of diesel-electric subs which, in the hands of skilled crews, can be pretty deadly. China is making an effort to create experienced and well trained crews. 

 

Based on the experience with Australian, Swedish, German and other subs, the U.S. Navy has been developing new anti-submarine tactics and equipment. All this is done in secret, obviously. But apparently the modern, quiet diesel electric boats continue to be a major threat to U.S. surface warships and subs. Meanwhile, potential enemies build more of their cheaper and higher quality diesel-electric boats and train their crews by having them stalk actual warships (including U.S. ones). 

The subs are getting more numerous, while U.S. defenses are limping along because of the sheer technical problems of finding quiet diesel-electric boats in coastal waters.

 

The U.S. has found that, given current sensor (sonar, magnetic, heat, chemical) technology it is possible to detect very quiet diesel-electric and AIP subs. To do this required many small tweaks to existing sensors. AIP boats, in particular, were found to have many vulnerabilities. The AIP technology generated more noise and heat than just using batteries. The more the U.S. studied AIP subs in operation the more ways they found these subs could be detected. It is known that the passive (listen only) sonar systems in the new Virginia class SSNs (nuclear attack sub) was tweaked to better find diesel-electric and AIP boats. 

 

Despite keeping most of the details secret, some potential targets of these new ASW capabilities realized the danger they were in. One reason China wants to keep American naval forces out of their economic zone (370 kilometers from the coast, an area which does not bar foreign warships) is so that Chinese diesel electric subs can train without being stalked by American subs, surface ships, and aircraft looking for realistic practice tracking Chinese boats. At the same time the U.S. Navy has lost the full use of its most effective underwater anti-submarine training area (a well mapped and instrumented area off southern California) because environmentalist activists have convinced judges that the use of active sonar in this training area is harmful to some species of aquatic animals. So going after potential targets off their coasts is more important than ever. 

 

There are 39 nations operating a total of 400 diesel electric subs. Only three of these nations (China, Iran, North Korea) are likely to use their subs against the U.S. or its allies. China has fifty of these boats, Iran has three (plus 25 much smaller mini-subs) and North Korea has 20 (plus 50 much smaller mini-subs). So the U.S. has to worry about 73 diesel electric subs and 75 mini-subs. But about half the full size subs are elderly, obsolete, and noisy. The same can be said for at least half the mini-subs. That leaves about 36 full size subs and 40 mini-subs that are a clear threat (though the older stuff can be a threat if you get sloppy). That’s a lot of subs, and they make the East Asian coast and the Persian Gulf dangerous places for American warships. 

 

Moreover, the North Korean and Iranian fleets (and governments) are in decline, while China is pouring more cash into their armed forces. If there’s any diesel-electric boats the U.S. Navy has to be extremely concerned about, it’s the Chinese. While China continues to try and develop world class nuclear subs, they are also moving ahead in creating world class diesel electric boats.

India/Russia - BrahMos to test submarine-based launch by year-end

BrahMos, the Russian-Indian supersonic cruise missile joint venture, is to test-fire its anti-ship version from a submarine platform by year-end, the venture's Russian partner NPO Mashinostroyenie said Friday.

"We need a test-launch by the end of the year," said the company's deputy general director Alexander Dergachev.

"A decision will be made on whether the weapon can be accepted for service with the Indian Navy, dependent on the outcome," he added.

The test will be a single demonstration firing from a submerged raft, he said.

"When an operational carrier has been chosen, then further trials will continue," he said.

BrahMos, set up in 1998, produces three variants of the cruise missile, based on the NPO Mashinostroyenie 3M55 Yakhont (NATO SS-N-26) supersonic cruise missile already in service with Russia's Armed Forces.

The Indian Army has already taken delivery of the land-launched variant. The navy already has the ship-launched missiles on ten vessels, Dergachev said.

The Indian Air Force will also use the weapon from an upgraded batch of 42 Sukhoi Su-30MKI strike fighters it is expected to order later this year, Russia's Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov said earlier this week in Delhi.

"The missile has a range of 300 km, and will be vertically-launched by a gas generator in its launch container, which will eject the weapon by gas pressure, after which it will reach Mach-2," he said.

BrahMos can fly as low as 10 metres or attack its target from a high angle, combined with supersonic speed and evasive maneuvering. BrahMos can carry a conventional warhead of up to 300 kg.

Earlier this week, Russian daily Izvestia quoted defence industry sources as saying India has uprated its BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles by installing the advanced satellite navigation systems from Russia's Kh-555 and Kh-101 strategic long-range cruise missiles.

Submarines - South Korea To The Rescue

On September 4th South Korea launched the first of two rescue and salvage ships. These will replace retired American ships (built in the 1970s) that South Korea has been using for over a decade. These new ATS (the letter code for Salvage and Rescue Ships) type vessels are equipped to send down divers to sunk ships and bring back essential equipment (like code books or secret electronics) and bodies of sailors.

ATS ships, like the new 3,500 ton South Korean vessels, can also clean up oil spills and tow ships displacing up to 15,000 tons (which takes care of the largest ships in the South Korean navy). There is also sonar and remotely controlled camera equipment to get a close look at sunk ships, or the hulls of those still afloat and badly danged. An ATS ship can also handle submarine rescue, including recovering sailors trapped inside a sunk ship. But that gear is only good for shallow waters (down to 90 meters/272 feet).

For deep water rescue, especially from submarines, South Korea can call in portable submarine rescue equipment, like the American SRDRS (Submarine Rescue Diving and Recompression System). This is a modular system that weighs under 200 tons and can be flown anywhere on the planet within 72 hours (faster depending on the distance and availability of heavy transport aircraft.) The SRDRS was designed to be operated from most merchant ships, as an ATS type ship won't always be available soon enough.

SRDRS consists of two main components. There is the rescue module, which is a remotely controlled submersible that descends to the stricken sub, attaches itself to the rescue hatch, and has room for 16 sailors. Once on the surface, the sub links to a decompression chamber, where the sailors have to stay for a while to acclimate them to surface pressures (and prevent the bends). In addition to the rescue vehicle and decompression module, there is support equipment. There are also smaller underwater vehicles and pressure suits for divers. These are flown in first, to explore the stricken sub in detail, clear any debris from the subs rescue hatch, and basically gather information to the actual rescue can be carefully planned.

Five years ago, Britain, Norway and France completed the construction of the NATO Submarine Rescue Vehicle (SRV). This is very similar to the SRDRS. NATO SRV was a $95 million project that resulted in a deep water rescue device that can be airlifted to anywhere in the world on short notice, fit on the deck of at least 140 identified ships, and mate with the escape hatches on most of the worlds' submarines, and carry up to 15 men at a time to the surface. This system is shipped in eleven waterproof cargo containers that can be flown by military or civilian cargo aircraft. Including flight time, set up time on the ship, and movement time to the site of the distressed submarine, the NATO SRV should be able to get there and have the SRV in the water within 72 hours. The SRV itself is ten meters (31 feet) long and weighs 27 tons, has a crew of three and can go as deep as 1,000 meters (which is the maximum depth for most submarines.)

The U.S. and NATO systems are very similar, but not identical. The basic idea behind this modular design is to enable the rescue system to reach the stricken sub as soon as possible. Once the air runs out down there, rescue is no longer possible. All the navies of the world are invited to modify, if necessary, their rescue hatches (usually just the main hatch on the top of the sub) to accept the U.S. or NATO rescue vehicles. If they do that, the NATO or U.S. rescue systems (depending on whose is closest) will be sent to attempt a rescue. The U.S. system is based in California, the NATO one in northern Europe. South Korea could call on either one in case of a submarine emergency.

Germany Reconsiders Sale of Submarines to Egypt After Israeli Request

The planned sale of two German made attack submarines to Egypt is being reconsidered by the German government, according to Der Spiegel, after Israeli lobbying against the sale intensified in recent months.

In late November of 2011, Germany approved a deal that would send two Type-209 submarines to the Egyptian government, however, Israel began its efforts to stop the sale in early September.

According to the Der Spiegel report, Germany’s Federal Security Council would cancel the sale “if the Egyptian government pursues a policy hostile to Israel. That’s a personal promise [Angela] Merkel gave to Netanyahu.”

Earlier this year, Germany and Israel completed the sale of two Dolphin class submarines for the Israeli Navy.  This transaction led Germany to believe Israel would not object to the submarine deal with Egypt.

“Yet to be on the safe side, Merkel personally contacted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the November meeting of the Federal Security Council and told him about the planned deal,” Der Spiegel wrote. Israeli and German defense officials also discussed the deal. “It seemed as if it was a not-very-spectacular deal, certainly not a deal that could trouble German-Israeli relations.”

After Israeli lobbying, Germany pledges to reassess sub deal with Egypt, report claims

Jerusalem knew Berlin planned to sell two attack subs to Cairo since November, but only recently started to express concern.

After extensive lobbying efforts, Israel has convinced Berlin to rethink the sale of two attack submarines to Egypt.

Although Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Defense Ministry have known about the deal for Cairo to buy two Type-209 attack subs since last year, senior government officials in Jerusalem only complained in Berlin earlier this month, citing Israeli security concerns and the need to preserve Israel’s military edge in the Middle East, the newsmagazine reported.

On Tuesday, SW reported that the German government agreed for the deal to be reconsidered and again discussed by the Federal Security Council. The council, whose meetings are secret, would withdraw its previous approval “if the Egyptian government pursues a policy hostile to Israel,” the magazine wrote. “That’s a personal promise [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel gave to Netanyahu.”

On November 28, Germany’s Federal Security Council approved the deal, in which Germany would sell Cairo two Type-209 attack submarines, Der Spiegel reported. The German government presumably figured that the sale of such submarines would not worry Israel, since they are less efficient than the Dolphin-class submarines Berlin provides to Israel.

“Yet to be on the safe side, Merkel personally contacted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after the November meeting of the Federal Security Council and told him about the planned deal,” the weekly wrote. Israeli and German defense officials also discussed the deal. “It seemed as if it was a not-very-spectacular deal, certainly not a deal that could trouble German-Israeli relations.”

But that’s what eventually happened: The planned sale of the Type-209 subs to Egypt caused friction between Israel and Germany, with the Israeli media reporting that Jerusalem sought to torpedo the deal.

Already on Sunday, Israel’s lobbying seemed to bear fruit: German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle promised, during a visit in Jerusalem, that Berlin “will acknowledge Israel’s security interests” before making a final decision on the Egyptian deal.

Jerusalem also reportedly demanded to have a say in all future German arms exports to the region, according to Der Spiegel. “However, that would constitute an end of German sovereignty vis-à-vis military issues and is considered by Berlin as unacceptable,” the paper wrote.

Israel currently uses three Dolphin-class submarines, which have been fully or partially funded by the German government. A fourth was transferred to the Israeli navy in May. Germany is due to deliver a fifth submarine in 2018, and the contract for a sixth was signed recently. According to foreign media reports, Israel’s submarine fleet is equipped with nuclear capabilities.

Israel threatens to block US aid to Egypt to stop German submarine deal

Israel threatens to block US aid to Egypt to stop German submarine dealIsrael has threatened to use its considerable influence over US foreign policy to block Egypt's purchase of two submarines from Germany. According to German press reports, Israel intends to prevent Egypt from buying two Class 209 submarines. Bild newspaper quoted Israeli diplomats as saying that Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi must first show that he can be trusted before such deals can be allowed. They were speaking during the visit of German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle to Israel.

"If this does not happen," said the unnamed sources, "Israel will use its influence in the United States to cut American aid to Egypt." They argued that it is unreasonable for the Egyptian government to appeal to Washington for economic aid worth millions of dollars if this is then spent on arms and armaments.

A London-based commentator pointed out that as the exact details of the German deal are as yet unknown it is deceitful of the Israelis to suggest that Egypt would use economic aid from Washington to buy submarines.