Australia Selects Shortfin Barracuda, Hands DCNS A$50 Billion On A Platter



The DCNS Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A SSK. Image : DCNS Australia

SEA1000 Future Submarine Program

Merci! That's the least the French could say. Ouch! That's the pain that would come from parting with A$50 billion, after the initial euphoria is over. And Oh ****! would be the response with the realization of the enormity of the task ahead.

Australia's quest to replace its current fleet of six Collins-class conventional diesel electric attack submarine is officially known as the SEA1000 Future Submarine Program. It aims to provide the Royal Australia Navy with " an affordable, regionally dominant, conventional submarine capability, sustainable into the foreseeable future ", so that it can safeguard its sea lines of communication and its economy which is worth A$1.6 trillion annually.

The Aussies wanted them BIG and they wanted them quick. Twelve boats are needed in total. They have to be constructed locally in Australia and they had to have American combat and weapon systems. As there were no off-the-shelf options that can fulfill Australia's unique operational requirements, they began looking for an international partner to design and build their next generation boats, the details of which can be found here. After a long drawn competitive evaluation process, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced last week that the French Shortfin Barracuda designed by DCNS had been selected, thus ending months of speculation by defense analysts as well as the general public alike.

DCNS Shortfin Barracuda Block 1A

The Shortfin Barracuda is actually a conventionally powered variant of the Barracuda-class nuclear attack submarine ( SSN ), specially customized for Australia. It is brilliantly named after the Australian Barracuda or Shortfin Barracuda whose scientific name is Sphyraena novaehollandiae.

French national ship builder DCNS needs no further introduction. Malaysia's Gowind-class frigates and Scorpene-class SSK, Singapore's Formidable-class stealth frigates, and the Mistral-class BPC so coveted by Mr Putin, were all constructed by this innovative company.

The Barracuda-class submarine currently under construction for the French Navy is France's second generation nuclear attack submarine meant to replace their six Rubis-Amethyste-class SSNs. It displaces 5300 tons submerged and 4765 tons surfaced and measures about 100m in length. Its nuclear reactor provides an unlimited range, requiring refueling and complex overhaul ( RCOH ) only once in ten years. Its endurance is about 70 days, the limiting factor being the amount of food it can carry for its crew. It is extremely stealthy and quiet, featuring pump jet propulsion instead of propellers. It can be armed with a variety of weapons including torpedoes, mines, SM39 block 2 Exocet anti-ship missiles and SCALP Naval land attack cruise missiles. First-in-class FS Suffren is scheduled for launch in 2017 and the six boats cost the French government €9.9billion.


The Shortfin Barracuda debuted as the SMX-Ocean SSK at Euronaval 2014 and quickly evolved into its current form as the world's most advanced conventional submarine customized for Australia's needs. It will be slightly shorter than the Barracuda SSN at 97m and also smaller, displacing some 4500 tons when surfaced and " more than 4000 tons ", probably closer to 5000 tons, submerged. Powered by diesel engines and advanced fuel cell air-independent propulsion system, it can remain underwater for up to 3 weeks and has a range of 18000nm ( 33300km ) at 10 knots and an endurance of 80 days at sea. Maximum diving depth is 350m or deeper and its maximum speed will be 20knots. It will have a complement of 60 officers and ratings, plus it can carry another 20 special forces personnel.

It will have " the most powerful sonar ever produced for a conventional submarine " and the same pump-jet propulsion system and the same enhanced stealth features inherited from its nuclear cousin. Pump-jet technology is said to make propellers obsolete, as they can be a thousand times quieter and achieve much higher speeds before cavitation ( bubbling phenomenon ) occurs. It also allows for high maneuverability with the addition of a steerable nozzle, creating vectored thrust. However, it can be less efficient than propellers at low speeds. Other notable features include an X-rudder like the Japanese Soryu boats where the four blades can twist and turn in different permutations and provides superior maneuverability especially in shallow waters, retractable hydroplanes which reduces drag and noise, non-hull penetrating optronic masts and special hull hatches for easy upgrading in the future.

Its combat system and weapon systems will be American, as the Aussies value interoperability with their closest ally the United States. So we can expect an improved version of the AN/BYG-1 combat system, Mk48 Mod 7 Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System ( CBASS ) heavy torpedoes jointly developed by the US and Australia, UGM-84 submarine launched harpoon missiles, UGM-109E Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles, Mk60 CAPTOR mines, Mk67 submarine launched mobile mines and such. Swimmer delivery hatches, unmanned underwater vehicles ( UUV ) will probably be part of the package as well.

At A$50 billion, it is Australia's single biggest defence procurement to date, though this spending will be spread out over the next thirty years or so. At least two thirds of this money will be allocated for future upgrades, sustainment, operations and in-service support of the submarines which means the initial builds would cost A$20 billion or less.

Here's a video of the Shortfin Barracuda from DCNS.






The Shortfin Barracuda : Australia's Future Submarine. Image : DCNS

The Shortfin Barracuda with tiny hydroplanes extended. Image : DCNS

X-rudders and pump-jet propulsion. Image : DCNS

The original SMX-Ocean SSK and the Barracuda SSN side by side. Image DCNS

Why The French Won

The Swedes were eliminated early in the race, due largely to the fact that they had not built a single submarine independently for the past two decades, and perhaps also because they were the designers of Collins-class submarines which were giving the RAN so much trouble.

Of the three that made it to the competitive evaluation process phase, the Germans were dropped for concerns that they had not built anything more than 2000 tons so far, even though they were the most prolific boat builders, supplying more than 160 modern SSKs to navies worldwide.

The Japanese Soryu-class submarine was not chosen purportedly because it lacked the range that the Aussies desired. The berthing compartment is also too small for the Australian sailor who typically have a taller stature compared with their Japanese counterparts, this even after a 6 to 8m hull lengthening modification.

The French design, on the other hand is not only super stealthy but also technologically the most advanced, and most importantly has the range equal to or exceeding those of the existing Collins-class boats. DCNS had also the expertise in building submarines up to 14000 tons in the form of nuclear ballistic missile submarines ( SSBN ) or boomers, like the four Triomphant-class boats currently in service with the French Navy.

 

You can see for yourself why the Shortfin Barracuda could have been so appealing to the Aussies through the above video made by DCNS on the operational capabilities of the SMX-Ocean some months ago.

Constructing the Shortfin Barracuda

All the construction of the Shortfin Barracuda submarines will be done in Australian naval shipbuilder ASC's Adelaide shipyard with the help of DCNS. The project can generate 2900 jobs locally and will no doubt be a great boost to the South Australian economy for many years to come. Because submarines are among the most complicated machines that humans have ever designed, the task ahead for ASC is huge and they know it, describing the construction of the Collins-class SSK as an unprecedented feat of engineering, design and logistics in Australia. Work had to be co-ordinated with 150 major contractors and hundreds of smaller suppliers and many modules were constructed off-site and then shipped to Australia for integration at ASC. Some 33000 drawings and 5000 work orders had to be issued before work could even begin and each submarine required 250000 man-hours over 60 months to assemble. The Shortfin Barracuda is light-years ahead of the Collins in terms of complexity and the question now is whether ASC is up to the job. DCNS Australia describes the task as mammoth and at least twice as big as the Collins project.

For A$50 billion, France has promised the Australians full transfer of stealth technology utilized in their SSN and SSBN submarines, the crown jewels of their submarine designs that they have never shared with anybody else before. Even though the submarines are to be constructed in Australia, another 4000 jobs will be created in France itself in support of the Shortfin Barracuda project.

Looking ahead, contract signing will probably take place in 2017, construction will start between 2022 to 2024 and the first submarine will probably launched in 2028 and be commissioned by 2030. The Shortfin Barracuda is expected to remain cutting edge in terms of operational capabilities until 2060 and will probably in active service until 2070. If the Collins boats were to be retired starting from 2025 as planned, there will be a capability gap which the RAN has to address. The most likely solution will be to have some sort of life extension program to postpone the decommissioning of the Collins-class, but then again, I'm not sure if that's tantamount to flogging a dead horse.

The Shortfin Barracuda firing a presumably Mk48 Mod 7 CBASS torpedo. Image : DCNS

Winners and Losers

Apart from France, South Australian politicians and the naval shipbuilding industry of Australia are big winners as they successfully canvassed for the submarines to be completely constructed in Australia, never mind the competency of the local work force or the available infrastructure. The construction and more importantly the sustainment of the submarine fleet meant that a constant flow of jobs and money into South Australia will be almost a guarantee for the next fifty years.

The Royal Australian Navy could be big winners with the chance of a lifetime to once and for all rectify all the misgivings of the Collins and acquire an underwater capability way beyond their current level and maintain it that way for decades to come, but only if the submarine construction goes smoothly. Chances of that happening is almost close to zero, if historical events could be used as a gauge. Not only had ASC bungled the Collins construction and their subsequent upgrading and sustainment, they have, as part of a consortium, continued to mess up the until now the most expensive defence procurement - the A$8 billion SEA4000 Air Warfare Destroyer project. The Hobart-class AWD are 3 years late with an estimated A$1.2 billion in cost overruns. Its going to be difficult even just to be cautiously optimistic.

Japan was the early favorite in the race for SEA1000, with Shinzo Abe and Tony Abbott being good pals and the inking of a contact for joint development of submarine technology in 2014. Even the Americans also favoured the Japanese since they too have a direct stake in this mega-project as the provider and integrator of the combat and weapons system and would have to work with whoever the Australian chose. An American-Australian-Japanese alliance would also be a good thing to check Chinese ambition in the South China Sea. However, lack of experience with international arms deals and the subsequent ousting of Tony Abbott as prime minister probably doomed the Japanese effort. Japan did not agree to support full construction of the submarines in Australia until very late in the game, after France and Germany had indicated their willingness to do so. Their team of negotiators sent to Australia was said to be comprising of a mix of business executives and Ministry of Defence bureaucrats who had never worked with each other before. Of course the oriental way of business conduct, where a handshake alone would seal a deal, where trust and honour is valued above all else, might be perceived very differently in western cultures.

It is not surprising that Japan was rather peeved to learn that the deal had gone to their competitor when they had invested so much time and effort and that just slightly more than a year ago, they were the front runners. Turnbull will have a great time trying to pacify them and manage the fallout. While the two countries pledged to continue their co-operation in defence research the relationship will never be the same. Hopefully Japan will learn from this experience and turn failure into success in future deals.

Best Submarine at the Best Price?

That was what Tony Abbott promised the Australians but that's not what they are going to get. The entire project had been hijacked by the politicians who have their own agendas to field and don't give a damn what happens a decade or two in the future when they will probably no longer hold office. Building the submarines in Australia is widely reported to carry with it a 30% to 40% premium as opposed to constructing them in their country of origin. The risk of delays and cost overruns is extremely likely given the size and complexity of the project as well as the quality of the local work force. Even if the French design had been chosen on merits of technological advancement, the Aussies could have at least let the French handle the construction in France. What's the use of the best submarine in the world if it can't be put to sea half the time and the other half of the time is spent combating defects?

A procuring a submarine fleet is a long term investment, a strategic partnership that will bind the two countries, in this case France and Australia, for the next 50 years. Good or bad the Aussies would have been stuck with the deal for the next half a century. These submarines are not disposable if anything goes wrong since they are highly customized for Australia's needs and probably nobody else can afford them anyway. The Australian Navy will really have to keep its fingers crossed. As the quest for better submarines continues, we can only wish the RAN Bon Voyage!





Kawasaki P-1 Maritime Patrol Aircraft : Japan's Brand New Submarine Hunter

 

 

The Kawasaki P-1 maritime patrol aircraft of the Japan Maritime Self Defense Force.
 JMSDF Photo.

Introduction

From the same folks who brought you the legendary Kawasaki Z-1 in 1972 that revolutionalised the motorcycle industry comes a spanking new submarine hunter? It's not surprising since Japan's Kawasaki Heavy Industries ( KHI ) is a huge industrial conglomerate made up of multiple divisions and disciplines. KHI's product portfolio includes anything from the Soryu class Submarine, bulk carriers, LNG carriers, the T-4 Advanced Jet Trainer, Boeing 787 ( Joint Production ), helicopters, space rockets and space station components, motorcycles and ATV, jet skis, high speed rail, industrial robots .... the list goes on and on. KHI is known as 川崎重工業 or Kawasaki Jukogyo in Japanese.




A legend was born : The 1972 Kawasaki Z-1, air-cooled,
4 stroke, 4 cylinders, 903cc DOHC super bike.
This was what catapulted Kawasaki into the global lime light. Photo : KHI

Maritime Patrol Aircraft : A Brief History

A maritime patrol aircraft ( MPA ) is a fixed-wing surveillance aircraft that is designed to operate over open water for extended duration in sea patrol duties, in particular anti-submarine, anti-ship and search and rescue roles. Its history can be traced as far back as World War I, when bombers and floatplanes were converted into patrol aircrafts to counter the German U-boat menace. These early generation MPAs were frequently armed with machine guns, bombs and depth charges.

The requirement for high endurance aircrafts to patrol vast expanses of oceans meant that by WWII, many MPAs were converted from long range bombers ( Consolidated B-24 Liberator ) or airliners ( Focke-Wulf Fw-200 Condor ). Some like the Consolidated PBY Catalina amphibious plane were purpose-built. The emergence of air to surface vessel radars during that era was one of the most significant technological advancement that would change the nature of naval warfare. MPAs armed with high resolution centimetric radars like the ASV III can easily detect small objects like the periscope or snorkel of a submerged submarine making them highly effective in anti-submarine warfare ( ASW ).

The immediate post-WWII period ushered in the jet era, and MPAs continued to evolve in operational capabilities with new technologies like sonobuoys and the magnetic anomaly detector ( MAD ), though due to their unique operational requirement of high loiter time at low speed and low altitude, they remained largely piston engine or turboprop driven. The Lockheed P-2V Neptune from which the Japanese variant the P-2J was based on was a typical example from that time. And yes, the P-2J was license-produced by Kawasaki.

During the Cold War, the emerging threat of ballistic missile carrying submarines raining death and destruction onto large population centres with their multiple nuclear warheads from thousands of miles away meant that MPAs continue to be relevant and in demand. Many of the MPAs currently in service throughout the world like the Lockheed P-3C Orion, the Tupolev Tu-142 Bear and the Ilyushin Il-38 May are products of that era. It was also during that time jet-powered MPAs began to appear, the first to enter service being the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod MR1.

Today, most MPAs continue the tradition of having airframes derived from proven civilian platforms, especially jetliners. The Boeing P-8A Poseidon based on the venerable 737-800 is a typical example. In the future we would undoubtedly have MPAs in the form of unmanned aerial vehicles like the soon to be operational Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton developed under the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance programme.

Japan's MPA Fleet

When Japan's Maritime Self-Defense Force ( JMSDF ) was formed in 1954, it operated obsolete WWII aircraft donated by the United States which included 17 Lockheed PV-2 Harpoon patrol bombers and 20 Grumman TBF Avenger torpedo bombers.

From 1956, 60 Lockheed P-2V7 Neptune MPA were added to the fleet, and starting from 1957, 60 Grumman S-2F Tracker ASW aircraft. The Japanese loved the P-2V7 so much that when the time came to have them replaced by the more advanced but expensive Lockheed P-3A Orion, they opted instead to develop an improved version, the P-2V7 Kai ( 改 - kai in Japanese means upgrade or to improve ), later licence produced and designated P-2J. A total of 83 P-2J were produced and they were operational between 1971 to 1994.

The P-2J was eventually replaced by the P-3C, 98 of which was licence produced between 1978 and 1997. Five P-3C had been converted to the OP-3C reconnaissance version and the remaining 93 P-3C are currently the backbone of the JMSDF MPA fleet. Add to that number another 5 EP-3, 1 UP-3C and 3 UP-3D, the grand total is 107 making Japan the largest P-3 operator after the United States.  They will ultimately be replaced by the P-1 of which 70 aircrafts have been planned. The JMSDF classifies the P-3C and the P-1 as Fixed Wing Patrol Aircraft (  固定翼哨戒機 Koteiyoku Shokaiki )



A Kawasaki P-3C Orion based at Atsugi Air Base, Kanagawa Prefecture
flies overland with Mount Fuji in the background.
The JMSDF currently has 93 P-3C in its inventory. Photo : JMSDF 




The UP-3D of the 91st Fleet Air Sqn is an ESM-trainer aircraft
 for the ships of the JMSDF. Its mission is similar to the EP-3J of the USN.
 This particular aircraft with serial number 9163 is the last P-3 ever produced.
Notice the lack of a MAD boom. Photo JMSDF 

The Future MPA P-X Programme

Shortly after the last P-3C ( actually a UP-3D variant, see photo above ) was delivered to the JMSDF by KHI on 1st Feb 2000, marking the end of a production run that lasted for 38 years, the Japanese were already planning for its successor. The Cold War had ended and in the United States, Lockheed's next generation MPA programme, the P-7 Long Range Air ASW Capable Aircraft ( LRAACA ), failed to materialise due to budgetary problems and after incurring huge cost overruns. Existing European alternatives like the United Kingdom's Nimrod MR2 did not meet Japanese requirements. Eventually the Japanese decided that they would have to develop their own MPA.

The P-X future MPA programme was thus initiated in 2001 by the Japanese Ministry of Defence concurrently with the next generation transport aircraft C-X programme to replace the C-130 Hercules and the C-1. These two developments were to be managed as a single project and Kawasaki was appointed the main contractor. The P-X and C-X shared structural components and sub-systems and utilized commercial off the shelf products to save on development and production costs.

First flight for the P-X prototype, by then re-designated the XP-1, took place on 28th Sep 2007. By March 2010 four XP-1 had been delivered to the MOD for testing and trials. They were introduced into service in 2013 as the Kawasaki P-1 to gradually replace JMSDF's ageing P-3C Orion. They were supposed to have attained full operational capability by Sep 2015.




The XP-1 Prototype in Technical Research and Development Institute (TRDI)
 colours at Atsugi Air Base, April 2011. Photo : Wikipaedia

The Kawasaki P1

The Kawasaki P-1 at RIAT 2015, RAF Fairford. Photo : Wikipaedia

The P-1 is unique among all the various modern maritime patrol aircraft as it one of a few that is completely designed from the ground up and not adapted from some bomber or commercial airliner. That means every single part is purpose designed and purpose built. Also, it was originally created for just one customer, the JMSDF, since the post-war Constitution of Japan forbade the export of weapons and weapon systems until very recently. As such, throughout its development and even as it is being deployed in active service, very few outside the defense circles have heard about this mysterious Japanese multi-mission maritime aircraft.

General Characteristics

The P-1 has the appearance and size of a 90 - 100 seat regional jet. It has a length of 38m, height of 12m and a wingspan of 35.4m making it significantly bigger than the P-3C and only marginally smaller than the P-8A which it is frequently compared with. The full complement comprises of 2 flight crew and 11 mission crew. Its maximum take-off weight is 79700kg or 176000lbs. Maximum speed is said to be 996km/h ( 538 knots ) while the cruising speed is 833 km/h ( 450 knots ). The P-1's maximum range is 8000km ( 4320 nm ) and the maximum operational ceiling is 13520m ( 44200 ft ).

Compare and contrast : the Boeing P-8A and the Kawasaki P-1 side by side at
Naval Air Facility Atsugi. USN Photo

Fuselage and Wings

The P-1 has an aerodynamic profile most suited for low speed and low altitude flight. It has a relatively long wing span with the leading edge swept back at 25 degrees but an almost straight trailing edge. A large wing area of  170m² generates more lift, decreases stall speed and increases agility.

Part of the fuselage is made of light weight composite material like carbon fiber.  KHI is responsible for fabricating the horizontal stabilisers, Fuji Heavy Industries the main wings and the vertical stabilisers, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries the mid and rear portions of the fuselage and Sumitomo Precision Products the landing gears.

Power Plant

Unlike its turboprop powered predecessor, the P-1 is powered by four IHI F7-10 high bypass turbofan engines. Japan's IHI Corporation developed the F-7-10 specifically for the P-1, using metal alloys that are corrosion resistant in salt environments. Sound absorbing panels are also used to lower the acoustic signature of the engines, achieving a sound level 5 to 10 dB below the P-3C's Allison T-56-A-14 turboprops. The F7-10 turbofan has a bypass ratio of 8.2:1 and each delivers a maximum thrust of 60kN or 13500lbs. The jet engines enables the P-1 to achieve a greater maximum speed, a higher operating ceiling, a longer range and carry a heavier load compared with the P-3C.


Having four engines instead of two is advantageous for MPAs as they frequently fly over open bodies of water at remote locations where airfields may not be readily available for emergency landings in case of engine failure. In addition, MPAs often have to execute their combat missions at low altitudes where bird strikes can be common. A single engine failure in a twin engine MPA like the P-8A would probably have necessitated a turn around whereas an MPA with four engines could still continue its mission with one engine shutdown. If fact, P-3C jockeys are known to deliberately shut down one or two of the Orion's four turboprop engines when on-station to reduce fuel consumption and increase on-station time. The P-1 with four turbofans could supposedly do the same but it would be suicidal to try that on a P-8A.





The IHI F7-10 Turbofan on the P-1 aircraft number 5506 taken at
 Iwakuni Air Base on 14th Sep 2014. Photo : Wikipedia

Postero-lateral view of the IHI F7-10 on the same aircraft as above. Photo : Wikipaedia 

Frontal view of the IHI F7-10 on the same aircraft as above. Photo : Wikipaedia

In addition, the P-1 has a Honeywell 131-9 Auxiliary Power Unit ( APU ) installed in the fuselage forward of the horizontal stabilizer to avoid interference with the MAD apparatus in the rear.

Avionics

Unlike the mostly analogue instruments of the P-3C, the P-1 has, in common with the Kawasaki C-2 transport, a modern digital " glass cockpit " with 6 large LCD multifunction displays and 2 sets of Head-Up Displays ( HUD ). The cockpit also features huge glass windows reflecting the Japanese emphasis on low altitude visual searches.

The cockpit windows are huge. Seen also are two HUDs and
the multi-function LCD displays. Image : Mainichi Shimbun




External view of the P-1's large windows. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Flight Control

You have heard of fly-by-wire where flight control of an inherently aerodynamically unstable design is achieved by onboard computers continuously micro-adjusting the control surfaces. The P-1 is a generation ahead, being the first production aircraft to feature " fly-by-light " ( FBL ) where flight control commands are transmitted via optical fibre to the actuators. This decreases the risk of electromagnetic interference with the multitude of electronic sensors onboard. FBL also has the advantage of reducing the weight of the installed wiring and reduce power consumption. The technology had been extensively tested on the UP-3C before being implemented on the P-1.

Radar

The P-1 is equipped with the HPS-106 X-Band Active Electronically Scanned Array ( AESA ) radar system jointly developed by Toshiba and the Technical Research and Development Institute ( TRDI ) of the Japanese Defence Ministry. Consisting of 4 arrays, one mounted in the nose, two side-looking panels below the cockpit area and another in the tail, the HPS-106 has a constant 360 degree coverage. It can be used in multiple modes including surface search, air search, navigational and meteorological, synthetic aperture and inverse synthetic aperture. An inverse synthetic aperture radar ( ISAR ) utilizes the motion of the target to create a high resolution 2D image that can allow for threat identification.

The HPS-106 side-looking array is housed beneath this panel just below the cockpit. Wikipaedia Photo

Electro-Optical / Infrared

The P-1 features the Fujitsu HAQ-2 EO/IR suite mounted on a ball-like turret aft of the nose cone for tracking and examining surface targets. It consists of a Forward Looking Infrared ( FLIR ) device for thermal imaging, night vision and navigation, as well as cameras for capturing images in the visible light and near-infrared spectrum.

The Electro-Optical / FLIR Turret which can be retracted and
stowed within the fuselage when not in use. JMSDF Photo

Magnetic Anomaly Detector

The HSQ-102 magnetic anomaly detector housed in the sting-like MAD boom at the rear of the P-1 is a licence produced version of the Canadian CAE AN/ASQ-508(v) by Mitsubishi Electric. CAE is the world leader in the design, manufacture and integration of MAD systems. They have been designing MAD systems for more than 40 years and had delivered more than 2000 MAD systems to the military worldwide. The AN/ASQ-508(v) is also known as the Advanced Integrated MAD System ( AIMS ) and consists of a highly sensitive magnetometer with associated electronics mounted in the tail area of an aircraft to minimize magnetic interference. It detects the variations in the earth's magnetic field caused by the presence of metallic objects in the vicinity like a submerged submarine. The detection range is in the region of 1200m, meaning the MAD will work best with the aircraft flying at low altitudes and at low speeds, both of which the P-1 excels in. One of the key differences between the P-1 and the P-8 is that the P-8 does not have a MAD system.

Close-up view of the P-1's MAD boom which houses the HSQ-102 MAD system. Photo : Wikipaedia 

The " stinger " or MAD boom places the magnetometer as far away
from the aircraft as possible to minimize self interference.
Photo : Sunburn1979 via Creativecommons

Acoustic System and Sonobuoys

The P-1 can carry 30 pre-loaded sonobuoys and another 60 in racks in the cabin for reloading. The Acoustic Processor HQA-7 is manufactured by NEC. Other components of the acoustic system includes the  HRQ-1 Sonobuoy Receiver, HQH-106 Acoustic Data Recorder and the HAS-107 Sonobuoy Controller.




Sonobuoy launcher can be seen in the under-fuselage in this photo of the P-1 at RIAT 2015.
Wikipaedia Photo.

Sonobuoy Launcher Close-up. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Sonobuoy rack with capacity for 96 sonobuoys. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Rotary sonobuoy launcher. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Acoustic workstation. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Command and Control

The P-1 has a Combat Command System designated the HYQ-3 by Toshiba which is basically an onboard combat information processor, some sort of artificial intelligence that can assist the mission commander in planning for the best respond to an encountered threat, like delivering the optimal firing solution on an enemy submarine based on the combined information collected by all the plane's sensors and sensors from other friendly platforms nearby.

 

Communications

The P-1 is fitted with the HRC-124 UHF/VHF Radio and the HRC-123 satellite communications equipment made by Mitsubishi Electric.

Tactical Data Link

Equipped with Link 16 compatible MIDS-LVT terminal, the P-1 can share targeting and any other information with similarly equipped aircrafts like the F-15J, P-3C, E-767 AWACS, E-2C AEW, MH-60 naval helicopters, F-35 JSF, and surface vessels like the JMSDF's Aegis destroyers.

IFF

The HPX-105 Identification Friend or Foe system is installed with the two sets of four N-AT-347 IFF antennae mounted in front of the cockpit wind screen and at the under-fuselage area.

4 IFF antennae clearly seen above nose cone. Image : Mainichi Shimbun

Armaments

The P-1 has a total of 8 hard points under its wings which can be used to carry air to surface missiles like the AGM-84 Harpoon, the AGM-65 Maverick and the indigenously developed ASM-1C. These pylons, also known as the BRU-47/A Bomb Release Unit are rated to carry up to 2000lbs of ordnance each.

It also has an internal bomb bay with an additional 8 hard points which can be loaded with bombs, mines, depth charges and light weight torpedoes including the Mk46, the Japanese Type 97 ( G-RX4 ) and the latest Type 12 ( G-RX5 ). Up to 9000kg or 20000lbs of ordnance could be carried.

Weapon pylons ( BRU-47/A bomb release unit ) under the port wing
 and the internal bomb bay whose outline you can see just aft of the front landing gear
( with 3 red-tipped N-AS-331 and 1 yellow-tipped N-AS-330 antennae for the HRQ-1 sonobuoy receiver ).
 Wikipaedia photo.

XP-1 prototype fires AGM-65 Maverick missile in 2012. Photo : TRDI

The Type 97 ( G-RX4 ) 324mm light weight torpedo. Inert version displayed. Photo : Wikipaedia

 

Self-Protection System 

The P-1 is equipped with the Mitsubishi Electric HLQ-9 self-protection suite which includes the missile approach warning system ( MAWS ) and the radar warning receiver ( RWR ), accompanied by the usual dispensers for flare and chaff.

P-1 dispensing flares against heat seeking missiles 18th Oct 2015. Japanese MOD photo.

An Electronic Support Measures ( ESM ) suite, the Mitsubishi Electric HLR-109B is installed. You can see the ESM flaring which is the prominent bulge on top of the fuselage slightly behind the cockpit. The ESM suite detects and classifies enemy radar emissions and gives the P-1 a secondary role as an  Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance ( ISR ) platform.

Close-up of the ESM flaring just above and behind the cockpit windows. Photo : Wikipaedia

Air-to-Air Refueling

All indications seem to point towards the fact that unlike the Boeing P-8A or the Kawasaki C-2 with which it shares some common components, the P-1 does not have a probe or receptacle for accepting fuel transfers midair. It is highly unlikely that the meticulous Japanese designers would have overlooked this feature. Most probably it was intentionally omitted as a cost saving move. Further more, with a range of 8000km, perhaps the JMSDF chose to live without air-to-air refueling.

P-1 Variants

Just like its predecessor the P-3C Orion which had spawned many variants to serve different combat missions, the P-1 can potentially be similarly modified into different hardware configurations :

UP-1 : Utility / multi-purpose aircraft that can be used as a test bed for systems and equipment or in a supportive role as a training platform.

EP-1 : Signals Intelligence ( SIGINT ), Electronic Intelligence ( ELINT ) platform.

OP-1 : Observation / Visual Imaging platform.

AEW :  To replace the ageing E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft. But the US had just approved the sale of four E-2D to Japan last year, so AEW conversion is currently less urgent or likely.

AIRBOSS : As an Advanced InfraRed Ballistic Missile Observation Sensor System platform. Obviously with Dear Leader as one's neighbour, the capability to detect ICBM / IRBM / SLBM launches in a timely manner can be a matter of utmost importance.

In Jun 2015, the first XP-1 prototype number 5501 had been converted to the UP-1 configuration with the aircraft number correspondingly reassigned 9501.




A UP-3C and a P-1 flying in formation. JMSDF Photo

 

Numbers Ordered

Based on Japanese Defence Ministry annual budget reports of the past few years, these are the current number of P-1 ordered and on order.

FY2008  4   units  ¥ 67.9billion
FY2010  1   unit    ¥ 21.1billion
FY2011  3   units  ¥ 54.4billion
FY2013  2   units  ¥ 40.9billion
FY2014  3   units  ¥ 59.4billion
FY2015  20 units  ¥ 350.4billion

Total P-1 ordered so far is 33 aircrafts, excluding the four XP-1 prototypes. The first 13 units from FY2008 to FY2014 are probably the low rate initial production ( LRIP ) tranches. Mass production really starts with FY2015's 20 unit order. All operational P-1s are deployed at Atsugi Air Base in Kanagawa Prefecture.

Exporting the P-1

Japanese weapon systems have traditionally been expensive due to the fact that they cannot be exported and so production runs are relatively small and cater to only the local defense agencies. Economy of scale can hardly be achieved with a such a small captive market. That has changed since last year when Prime Minister Abe tweaked the Constitution, paving the way for future weapon exports. And Kawasaki has been hard at work trying to sell the P-1 overseas.

Among the potential clients was the United Kingdom, a maritime nation whom in 2010 foolishly retired its Nimrod MR2 MPAs and then abruptly cancelled its replacement, the MRA.4 who's development was by then almost near completion, leaving them with absolutely no MPAs. In July 2015, the P-1 made its first overseas public appearance at the Royal International Air Tattoo ( RIAT ) at RAF Fairford, Gloucestershire, England, in an attempt to generate British interest in the aircraft. If successful, the deal could advance defence co-operation between the two countries and could be worth up to one billion dollars. Two aircrafts flew over to Fairford, number 5504 and 5507, one for static display and one for flight demonstration. You can watch and hear the flight demo here. After the airshow the P-1 went on to Djibouti to carry out hot weather tests before returning to Atsugi Air Base. The P-1's appearance at RIAT was well received and brought the exposure and generated the awareness it needed to compete successfully on the international stage. Hopefully we can begin to see the P-1 at more international airshows in the near future. Unfortunately for the Japanese, on 23rd Nov 2015 the UK announced their intention to buy nine P-8A Poseidon as part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015, without going through any tender or competition.

Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii 7th Feb 2015. Private visit, private flight :
then COMPACFLT Adm Harry B. Harris Jr. walks with JMSDF Cmdr. Kazutaka Sugimoto
 following a flight on a Kawasaki P-1. USN Photo

However, apart from the UK, there are many other navies worldwide that operate the ageing P-3C Orion and they would soon need a replacement. So Kawasaki should in theory have no shortage of potential clients. The main competition would be the Boeing P-8A as they both have very similar capabilities, not surprising as they were intended to be replacements for the same aircraft. Already, Australia, a major P-3C ( AP-3C ) operator has selected the P-8A as its next generation MPA at a cost of A$4 billion for a total of 8 planes with support facilities. So has India, which will operate the P-8I. Still, at an estimated US$250 million per plane, the P-8A is significantly more expensive than the P-1 which costs half as much at $150 million ( based on Japanese MOD figures, FY 2015 acquisition of 20 P-1 at ¥350.4billion ). This would make the P-1 a value buy for current P-3C operators as well as any MPA operator looking to renew their fleet.

P-1 for Singapore?

Why not? The Republic of Singapore Air Force ( RSAF ) currently operates a fleet of 5 Fokker F-50 Enforcer II MPAs. These aircrafts have been in service since 1994 and are close to their end-of-life. Upgrading these MPAs would be challenging as the maker, Dutch aviation company Fokker had gone into receivership in 1996 and is now defunct. RSAF had apparently requested to inspect ex-USN P-3Cs in storage in Dec 2010 which meant it was considering the refurbished Orion as replacement for the F-50. Now, five years on, the P-1 has completed its development and has emerged a viable option since it is technically more advanced than the venerable P-3C and is a whole lot cheaper than the P-8A whose capability it mostly matches.

The Fokker F-50 Enforcer II MPA of RSAF's 121 Squadron. Photo credit on pic.

How much cheaper is it to restore a mothballed P-3C to active duty with modernized avionics and 15000 hours of life extension compared to buying a new build P-1 is anybody's guess, but I'll pick the a P-1 over the P-3 anytime.

P-1 and the State of the Japanese Defence Industry

For the past 70 years, the Japanese defence industry had lead a frustrating existence where restricted by the Constitution, their quality products were procured in anaemic quantities only for the domestic market. This dated, self-imposed restriction had finally been lifted paving the way for major arms export. Already, we are seeing Japanese defence companies participating in international trade shows for the first time.

The Kawasaki P-1 is a highly capable maritime patrol aircraft and a worthy successor to the P-3C. Its success in Japan had probably been guaranteed even before the maiden flight of the first prototype. Currently the planned procurement is for 70 aircrafts to replace 107 P-3C of all variants. Funding for the first 33 P-1 had already been disbursed / approved. The next logical milestone would be to secure export customers so that production volume can be ramped up further and unit cost can come down. Together with the AIP capable Soryu class submarine, and the ShinMaywa US-2 amphibious search and rescue plane, the P-1 maritime patrol aircraft would spearhead the Japanese effort to break into the international arms market. There would hopefully be some successes soon.

Royal Thai Navy To Buy Chinese Submarines : Another Thaitanic Mistake? Updated

Introduction



The Navy Jack of Thailand. Source : Wikipedia

In July 1992, the Thai government commissioned the Spanish shipbuilder Empresa Nacional Bazan ( now Navantia ) to construct the helicopter carrier HTMS Chakri Naruebet. Its design was based on the Spanish Navy's light aircraft carrier the Principe de Asturias which came with a 12 degree ski-jump and it was supposed to operate a fleet of ex-Spanish 8 AV-8S Matador V/STOL and S-70 Seahawk helicopters.

Its originally envisaged roles as the flagship of the Royal Thai Navy (RTN) included patrols and force projection around the territorial waters and the exclusive economic zones of Thailand, supporting amphibious operations, disaster relief and humanitarian missions etc. The cost of its construction was reported as USD 336 million then, and would be equivalent to approximately $580 million in today's currency.

Unfortunately for the RTN, the Asian Economic Crisis of 1997 struck just as the Chakri Naruebet was commissioned. The Thais were left without any funds to operate the helicopter carrier or maintain its air wing of Matadors. For most of the time the ship never left its home port of Sattahip Naval Base. Occasionally it was used as a ferry to transport the Royal Family.



Royal Thai Navy's aircraft carrier Chakri Naruebet in a picture dated back to 2001. A AV-8S Matador can be seen on the flight deck. Source : Wikipedia

By 1999, there was only one Matador still operational, and they were eventually written off all together by 2006, leaving the helicopter carrier without any operational fixed-wing assets. The prestige of being the first Southeast Asian country to own an aircraft carrier brought with it a heavy financial burden that the Thais could ill afford then and now. There was no real need to have an aircraft carrier in the first place when a Land Ship Dock (LSD) type of vessel could serve a similar purpose of supporting amphibious ops and Humanitarian and Disaster Relief (HADR) ops. In fact the RTN subsequently bought exactly such a vessel from ST Marine of Singapore, the Endurance-class LSD. The story of the Chakri Naruebet is cautionary tale of what not to do in the procurement of military hardware and to this day it has been a white elephant and has been nicknamed the Thaitanic, presumably because of its physical size and its huge price tag.




The Type-039A Yuan-class SSK of the People's Liberation Army Navy. At US$335 million each, a deal too good to miss?

Fast forward to 2015, in the past few days the internet has been abuzz with news that Thailand has more or less committed itself to buying three Chinese conventional diesel-electric submarines for USD 1.1 billion. Is this really such a good deal that Thailand cannot refuse or is it another mega-mistake in the making?

Do The Thais Need Submarines?

The naval brass would certainly like to convince anyone that they do need submarines. They NEEDED them and they needed them bad. So bad in fact, that in July 2014 they had setup their submarine squadron complete with submarine training school at Sattahip Naval Base without yet having acquired any submersible assets. The squadron is staffed by naval personnel who have previously been sent to Germany and South Korea for submarine training and has a Rheinmetall submarine command team trainer simulator. IHS Jane's reported that the facilities cost USD 23 million to set up.

To be fair to the Thais ( and to anyone else as well ), modern naval warfare is multi-dimensional and the undersea component forms an increasing important aspect which cannot be neglected or ignored. That alone is good enough reason for the RTN to aspire to own submarines.

Also, of the five original core members of ASEAN ( Association of Southeast Asian Nations ), Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, yes, even tiny Singapore, have already been operating submarines for decades. Only Thailand and the Philippines have yet to catch up.

On top of that Thailand also has an extremely long coastline to govern, from the western side facing the Andaman Sea to the eastern side around the Gulf of Thailand next to the resource rich but volatile South China Sea.

Of course we also know that the best platform to hunt a submarine is another submarine. So if I were a Thai naval brass I would definitely want to have subs. The short answer is YES. Whether the budget allows for it is another matter.

Can the Thais Afford Submarines?

This could be a much harder question to answer. They probably could if they budgeted their defense spending wisely. The military-run government had proposed a 2016 defence budget of USD 6.1 billion, equivalent to about 1.5% of GDP and constituting about 8% of all government spending. This represented an increase of 7% over the 2015 defence spending.

After much deliberation, the Thais had decided on the Chinese offer of three diesel-electric attack submarines for a grand total of USD 1.1 billion. This would constitute about a sixth of their annual defence spending, a significant portion by anyone's standards. They would have to seriously tighten their belts in other areas to afford this. But I wouldn't be surprised if the Chinese had also offered to finance the deal like what they usually do when trying to sell their high speed rail systems overseas. It would definitely be more palatable if the payment is spread in installments over a period of 7 to 10 years.

In retrospect, had the Thais not embarked on their disastrous Rice Subsidy Scheme from 2011 to 2014 which cost the Thai government an estimated USD 15.3 billion buying rice from farmers at above market rates, the RTN could have bought about 45 Chinese subs ( at $335 million each ) with that money.

Well maybe they don't ever required that many submarines, but how about 6 subs and a squadron of 12 Lockheed Martin F-35B V/STOL stealth fighters ( $200 million each ) for the Thaitanic, and best of all still have about $10 billion to spare ( minus a few dollars to thermal proof the deck, if necessary )? Mind boggling figures, I would say!

Are Three Submarines Sufficient?

Thailand has about 3200km of coast line split between the eastern seaboard of the Gulf of Thailand and the western seaboard facing the Andaman Sea. The two coasts are not directly connected as the Malayan Peninsula sits right at the southern end of the narrow Kra Isthmus and blocks direct maritime access between Thailand's two coastal regions. Unless a canal is dug linking the Andaman Sea to the Gulf of Thailand, to sail from Thailand's east coast to the west coast would require going around the Malayan Peninsula and Singapore, a round trip of some 1200 nautical miles that could take 3 or 4 days at an average transit speed of 12 knots.




Sattahip ( Gulf of Thiland ) to Phuket ( Andaman Sea ) Distance and Time

If Thailand acquires three submarines, they will likely all be based at Sattahip Naval Base, the RTN's headquarters as well as the submarine squadron's HQ. Assuming the usual availability rates of one boat on station, one in preparedness and one on maintenance, the RTN will at anytime only have one submarine on patrol and it has to be either in the Gulf of Thailand or in the Andaman Sea. This submarine cannot be at two different places at the same time. Should a crisis situation develop at the other Area of Operations it would be at least three to four days of sailing away. Clearly not desirable.

So ideally from the operational point of view the RTN should have six boats, three for the Gulf and three for Andaman. It is much cheaper this way compared to digging the fabled Kra Canal, with an estimated cost of USD 28 billion, the pipe dream of one too many Thai politician.

Choices, Choices

In June 2010, due to budgetary constrains, the German Navy unexpectedly decommissioned the last six of its Cold War era Type 206A diesel-electric submarines originally slated for retirement between 2011 and 2015. The following year, two of the submarines were then offered to the Thai Navy at a bargain price of USD 220 million. The Thais agreed in principle to buy the submarines but the subsequent political turmoil resulting from change of government meant that they ultimately let the offer lapse. The Type 206As were rather small, displacing about 500 tonnes submerged, but modernised machines with littoral and special forces capabilities, two key features which made them ideal for the shallow waters around Thailand.




Revell Type-206A Box Art. A total of 18 Type-206 SSK were built in the early seventies for the West German Navy. 12 were subsequently modernized in the nineties and re-designated the Type-206A. All have since been retired from service by the Bundesmarine. Cost : $14.76 for the Revell plastic model kit and $220 million for a pair of the real deal.

Buying a pair of the used Type-206A would actually serve the RTN very well as they are compact and are not too complicated, the ideal training platform for a fledgling submarine squadron to quickly accumulate operational experience. They are also much more budget friendly compared to the other options available to the RTN. After this stint the RTN may eventually consider upgrading to bigger and more modern submarines, perhaps even new-builds. Sadly this option is no longer available.

Then there was the Korean offer of two Type 209-1200 SSKs for about USD 1.3 billion. As we know, South Korea has an advanced, world-leading ship building industry and they have capitalized on that advantage to licence build the Type-209 SSK from HDW ( now ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems ) not just for their own navy but also for export. In fact they were awarded a contract to construct three Type-209-1400 SSKs for the Indonesian Navy in 2011 for USD 1.07 billion. The Korean Type-209s are also known as the Chang Bogo-class. They are modernized versions of the original Type-209-1100 boats and have stretched hulls and indigenously developed torpedo countermeasure systems and may even accommodate an Air Independent Propulsion system in the 1500 tonne version. They are light-years more advanced than the second-hand Type-206As but also cost a lot more, so much more that the Thais decided that they could not afford them.

They also reportedly turned down South Korea's offer of two of their 20 year old Type-209s for 15 billion Baht or about USD 500 million. Old hulls like these need modenisation works ( obviously not for free ) and would probably last for another decade at most after which they would have to be retired and fresh funds would be needed for new boats.



Pacific Ocean (July 6, 2004) Republic of Korea Submarine Chang Bogo (SSK 61) heads out to sea during exercise Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC). U. S. Navy photo

The Thais then knocked on the doors of the Swedes, eyeing the Gotland class SSK, but the Swedish Navy do not have anymore surplus boats to sell, after divesting two of their four Type-A17 Vastergotland-class to Singapore, they were left with 2 upgraded A17s and 3 Type-A19 Gotland-class SSK, barely enough to cover their backyard. Their new A26s were delayed by the tactics of ThyssenKrupp who at that time were at the helm of the national boat yard Kockums AB, further dashing any hopes of a Swede deal.

The Chinese Option

Thailand has been a fan of Chinese weaponry for quite sometime. The Royal Thai Army deploys Chinese armoured personnel carriers, multiple launch rocket systems, combat engineer vehicles, rocket propelled grenades and various types machine guns and assault rifles. The RTN similarly has in its inventory four Chinese Type-053 Jianghu III guided missile frigate ( the Chao Praya-class ), two modified Type-053 ( the Naresuan-class ), various Off-shore Patrol Vessels and an auxillary ship. So they are no stranger to Chinese technology and their idiosyncrasies.

The Chinese had actually offered the Thais their Type-039 Song-class SSK as far back as 2007 but the Thais favoured the German offer of the Type-206As then, only to renege on their decision later.



The original Type-039 Song-class SSK with its distinctive stepped conning tower. This or perhaps its improved version, the Type-039G was offered to the Thais in 2007.

With all the failed attempts to acquire submarines in the past, the Thai Navy has in 2015 redoubled their efforts with a new round of proposals from vendors. And it seems that the Chinese have hyped up their submarine offer, throwing in three of their newest Type-039A Yuan-class diesel-electric SSKs, probably with air-independent propulsion ( AIP ) for $1.1 billion in total. The price is said to be inclusive of a eight year weaponry and parts support package, and training. They even try to seduce the Thais with the promise of significant technology transfer.

Navy chief Adm Kraisorn Chansuvanich said that a 17 man naval committee comprising of unbiased, smart and modern officers tasked to select the submarine evaluated offers from six nations including those from Russia ( Project 636 Kilo-class ), Germany ( ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems, Type 209-1400 Mod and Type-210 Mod ) , Sweden ( SAAB, A-26 ), China ( Type-039A ), Korea ( Hyundai, HDS-500RTN ) and France. They voted 14-3 in favour of the Chinese package because it was value for money, getting them three submarines where as the same budget will only get them two units from the other suppliers, without the weapons. It was also mentioned that the Chinese submarines were equipped with superior weaponry and technology, and that they were able to stay underwater longer compared to their rival bids. This I interpret as a hint that the Chinese offer will be fitted with AIP systems.

Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Prawit Wonsuwon has firmly extended his support for the project on the back of real or perceived territorial treats saying that the submarine force is a deterrence and the future of Thailand's security. He would forward the procurement decision to the Cabinet for approval once the opportunity arises. With a junta government in power and a large part of the Cabinet members being made up of generals and admirals, we know that this approval procedure rubbish is just a formality. The submarine purchase is as good as a done deal. Had a democratically elected government been in power, the outcome might be entirely different as there are always some who question the justification for a submarine force in the light of the white elephant Thaitanic. In fact, General Prawit has been quoted to say that if the submarines were not bought by the current government, the navy might not get the chance to acquire them again. He knows, that sly fox!

The entire deal is worth THB 36 billion ( USD 1.1 billion ) and the procurement will proceed through a government to government agreement. It would require an unspecified amount of funding from Thailand's defense budget in the next 7 to 10 years. Once the Cabinet approves the budget, the submarines are expected to be commissioned over the next 6 to 7 years. So it's back to the simulator and Chinese language class till then.

The Type-039A Yuan-class SSK / Type-041 / S-26T

The Type-039A is the successor of original Type-039 Song-class diesel-electric submarine. It evolved from the Type-039 but has little resemblance to it and is frequently referred to as the Type-041 SSK. It is the first Chinese submarine with AIP and is supposed to be quiet and have advanced features like anechoic tiles. It has a teardrop shaped hull and a large sail suggesting of a design stemming from Russia's Kilo-class SSK which China also owns. The original People's Liberation Army Navy ( PLAN ) version has a length of 75m, a beam of 8m and a draft of 8.2m. Its displacement is 2300 tonnes surfaced and 3600 tonnes submerged. Its armaments include 6 x 533mm torpedo tubes which can fire Russian or Chinese torpedoes as well as the YJ-8X series of submarine launched anti-ship missiles. The endurance is said to be 6500 nautical miles at 12 knots. Maximum speed is 12 knots surfaced and 20 knots submerged. Maximum diving depth is in the region of 300 metres.

There is also an export version designated the S-20 first revealed at IDEX 2013 in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. The S-20 appears to be a scaled down version of the Type-039A displacing 1850 tonnes surfaced and 2300 tonnes submerged. It comes without an AIP system but can be an option should the client choose. And now it seems we have the S-26T version with AIP which was offered to Thailand.



The PLAN Type-039A diesel-electric SSK with AIP. Still in brown waters?

The Type-039As have been in service with the PLAN since the year 2006. 13 boats are currently in active service with a total of 20 planned. As with most Chinese military hardware, very little information about the Type-39A is publicly available even though it has been around for close to a decade. Confusion with nomenclature is the norm, and even the reliability of existing information is sometimes uncertain.



Waterline view of the Type-039A.



Booster stage of the YJ-82 submarine launched anti-ship missile as it pops out of the water immediately after launch.

Apart from Thailand, the Bangladeshi Navy is in negotiations for acquiring two Type-039As and the Pakistani government had in April this year approved the purchase of 8 Type-039A submarines from China, representing a huge export success. China has not been a significant submarine exporter in the past, selling a few units now and then mainly to close communists allies and pariah states that could not have obtained weapons from the international market otherwise, like North Korea.

Submarine ( Non-nuclear ) Construction In China

It had began with the assembly of the Whisky-class conventionally powered submarine with kits provided by the Soviets in the fifties. Starting from the late sixties, China progressed to licence build the next generation Romeo-class SSK, known locally as the Type-033. They then started producing the indigenously designed Type-035 Ming-class SSK in the seventies, though it is somewhat similar to the Romeo-class. Following their purchase of Russia's Kilo-class and improved Kilo-class SSK, the next generation Chinese SSKs, the Type-039 and Type-039A again have uncanny similarities with the Kilo. One cannot help but suspect that out of sight of the international rivals and clients there must be a lot of reverse engineering going on inside the state owned Chinese yards. And that's nothing new. The Chinese have a " indigenously designed " copy of almost everything they had previously owned, and even of things that they didn't own. Would you trust a pirate?




Sukhoi SU-27? Wrong. This is the Shenyang J-11 ( 歼-11 / Jian-11 ), the Chinese clone. Source : Wikipedia



The Real Deal : The Thomson-CSF ( now Thales ) Sea Crotale R440 SAM on the French frigate Tourville circa 1990. Source : Wikipedia



The Unaurhorised Copy : The Hongqi-7 or HQ-7 SAM on the PLAN Type-051B destroyer Shenzhen Source : Wikipedia

Chinese Workmanship

If you have worked or dealt with the Chinese before, you would have quickly noticed that the average Chinese worker cares little about workmanship and product quality. They are more concerned about meeting deadlines and getting their job done in as little time as possible, never mind if they are churning out rubbish in the process. Their idea about quality control is - as long as it works, it's good enough! They don't give a damn if it breaks down three days later. So if the guy making your shoe bag has this kind of attitude, do you think the worker at the state owned shipyards would fare any better??? Well maybe a little better, because a $5 shoe bag is not in the same league as a $335 million submarine, but you trust the communists?

The Thais should have known better as they found out the hard way with their China build Chao Praya-class frigates in the early nineties. These are actually the Chinese Type-053 Jiangkai III FFGs build to the then latest Type-053H2 standard. Although they cost only a quarter of what a frigate would normally cost if purchased from European or American suppliers, they came with multiple defects and deficiencies including exposed wirings that needed to be rewired, limited damage control capabilities with defects in the fire suppression system and problems with the water-tight locks. Considerable efforts was spent to rectify the defects.

Smart Choice Or Another Disaster In The Making?

The Chinese have alienated many of they traditional friends and trading partners in Southeast Asia by their increasingly aggressive pursuit of their territorial claims in the South China Sea, even to the extend of land reclamation and building airstrips at Fiery Cross Reef. They are desperate to improve ties with Thailand, one of the rare countries in Southeast Asia not directly involved in the territorial disputes with China. This they have certainly achieved by clinching the submarine deal.

Keeping in mind the potential problems with quality issues for Chinese products, would the Thais have done better by selecting submarines from other countries? After all, if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys! SAAB's A-26 submarines look particularly attractive at the SEK 8.2 billion ( USD 948 million ) price the Swedish government paid for two boats. These are the latest state-of-the-art Swedish submarines with AIP and European quality assurance. Thailand already has a good defense relation with the SAAB Group with their previous purchase of the JAS-39 Gripen fighter and the SAAB 340 AEW aircraft. Why not capitalize on this?

Hind sight is always 20/20 but I can't help but point out that had the Thai Navy bought a squadron of submarines instead of an aircraft carrier in 1992, they would by now have almost 2 decades of experience operating submarines. They really cannot afford to make another mistake like the Chakri Naruebet, because at $1.1 billion, the stakes are much higher this time.

Update

It seemed that on the very day that this article was published ( 15th Jul 2015 ), the Thai Government had already changed their minds about the purchase of the S-26T submarines from China. The postponement was announced following high levels of criticism questioning the rationale behind the acquisition and the quality of the submarines the government intended to procure. Defence Minister Prawit said that when the Thai Cabinet next convene to assess the procurement, he would not yet seek endorsement for the acquisition. A stronger mandate was necessary. " For now the navy must inform itself and educate itself on whether the submarines are worth it and how much they will add to the Thai navy. "

IHS Jane's Defence Weekly ( Vol 52 Issue 29 22 Jul 2015 Pg 7 ) carried this comment to its main headlines article Thailand Halts Purchase of Chinese Subs : " Critics of the plan, however, have questioned the need for the submarines given Thailand's lack of strategic assets in the disputed regions of the South China Sea; doubted the RTN's ability to operate the submarines effectively in the shallower waters of the Gulf of Thailand; and highlighted Thailand's poorly performing economy. Questions have also been raised about the quality of the Chinese submarines, which have yet to conclude any exports.", exactly the issues discussed in this blog.

This about turn barely two weeks after the initial announcement does not reflect well on the professionalism of Thai Defence Ministry and the RTN's top leadership. Shouldn't they have done all the necessary leg work to sound out the public opinion, secure the necessary funding and convince the skeptics that the project is doable before announcing it to the whole world? Nonetheless, loss of face aside, this could be a blessing in disguise as Thailand now has a chance to re-evaluate her requirements for a submarine squadron and re-think about buying from China, before the next round of acquisition talks begins sometime in the future.

Maybe the RTN is still unsure of what it wants, being so easily swayed by public opinion to abandon the submarine project, maybe it is just bad timing, or perhaps the Ghosts of Failed Projects Past have simply come back to haunt them ... like they say, you can't always run from your past.


Note : If you would like to read an adapted version of this article in Thai you can visit kapitaennem0.wordpress.com

 

Update 4th Jul 2016

Now, almost exactly one year after this article was published, the Thai Navy finally got the Cabinet approval they needed for the purchase of the submarines. The total cost for the 3 Yuan-class S26T will be USD 1 billion and payment will be made over a 10 year period. The first submarine will be purchased out of the 2017 budget. The Defense Minister claimed that there are assets in the Andaman Sea to protect too ....