Who Doesn't Want A$20Billion?

Background

This is an update to my article " Japan's Soryu Class : Collins Replacement Prime Contender ". A quick recap : Australia has a fleet of 6 Collins Class conventional diesel-electric guided missile submarines that needs to be replaced starting from the year 2025. These boats were designed by the Swedish ship builder Kockums AB and built in Australia by a newly formed joint venture the Australian Submarine Corporation. The entire Collins project was riddled with delays and huge cost overruns. Even to this day the submarines still suffer from multiple defects and have serious availability issues.




Digital Image of what Australia's future submarine might look like, as seen on ship builder ASC Pty Ltd's website.



The Royal Australian Navy is looking to replace them with 10 to 12 new submarines by the year 2030 to 2040, at an initially estimated cost of between A$36 to A$44 billion. The ruling Liberal Party came to power promising domestic construction of these future submarines but until recently looks likely to break that promise by buying direct from Japan. That development had prompted German, Swedish and French boat builders to come up with their own unsolicited offers, initiating a submarine bidding war down under, making the Soryu deal less of a certainty.

What's At Stake for Australia

The future of Australia's shipbuilding industry is at stake, as Australia might lose her capability to construct submarines and warships should the contract go to a foreign shipyard there by forcing ship builder ASC to retrench skilled labour or worse, go into receivership. It would be difficult and time consuming to rebuild a new team of professional workers once the existing ones have found work elsewhere.

Jobs could be at stake, as domestic construction at ASC's Adelaide facility could generate and support 3 to 4 thousand jobs.

At least A$20 billion or more is at stake for the winner. This is by far the single most costly defense related procurement by Australia, ever. Even the follow on order of 58 F-35A Joint Strike Fighter announced in April 2014 would "only" cost A$11.5 billion. The Australian Dollar has depreciated significantly in the past 2 or 3 years but is still worth USD0.77 as of today.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott's reputation could be at stake if he reneges on pre-election promises to have the submarines built in Australia, though adept politicians always have ways to wriggle themselves out of such situations.

Gimme Twenty Billion

AUD$20 billion is the magic figure quoted by all the potential submarine makers. Of course everybody wants A$20 billion, who doesn't? SAAB Kockums of Sweden, TKMS of Germany and DCNS of France have all come up with proposals and have indicated their willingness to work with Australia's ASC, giving Japan Inc. a run for their money.

 

SAAB Kockums : The Come Back Kid

Kockums AB of Malmo, Sweden was the original designer of the Collins Class submarines and the Stirling air-independent propulsion engine used in the Soryu Class boats. It was acquired by its German rival Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW) in 1999. Then HDW was itself bought by the German conglomerate Thyssen Krupp in 2005 and they all became a big dysfunctional family known as ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems ( TKMS ).

While all these mergers and acquisitions was happening, Kockums was working on the next generation submarine for the Swedish Navy with several innovative and advanced features, the A-26 Class with air-independent propulsion. However, the development of the A-26 was derailed by TKMS due to long standing conflict of interests. The Swedes believed that they have a great design on hand and wanted it developed not just for the Royal Swedish Navy but for worldwide export as well. The German masters of Kockums on the other hand are worried about cost escalation on a risky new project and cannot come into agreement with the Swedish Defense Ministry on how such additional costs should be managed between the two parties. Although 2 boats have been approved the Swedish by Parliament in 2010 for completion by 2020, long drawn contract negotiations between the Defense Ministry and TKMS came to nothing before failing completely in Apr 2014. Without any contracts to build Sweden's ( or anybody's ) next generation submarines, Kockums looked likely to have to lay off marine architects, engineers and technicians. And as Kockums go under,  the Swedish Kingdom looked set to lose its sovereign capability of building submarines and warships.



Kockums A-26. Source : SAAB

Added to this mess is the uncertainty as to who actually owns the intellectual property rights to the Collins design, is it Kockums / TKMS or is it the Swedish State ( through the Swedish Defense Materiels Administration or FMV ). This has resulted in Kockums being overlooked by Australia in its initial search for suitable supplier for the Collins replacement project.

The loss of the deal to supply the Republic of Singapore Navy with 2 new submarines in late 2013 and the Russian annexation of the Crimean Peninsula earlier last year was a rude wake-up call to the Swedes who realized that they had do something fast to reclaim their ship building industry and to safeguard the defense of their Kingdom.

Negotiations to buy Kockums back began between the Swedish defense conglomerate SAAB and TKMS. Things did not move until Sweden seemingly deployed strong arm tactics, including the FMV's raiding of the Kockums / TKMS office with armed military personnel to forcefully remove highly sensitive materials pertaining to the A-26 and Stirling air-independent propulsion engine designs, taking back what rightfully belonged to the Swedish State. SAAB also embarked on a widely publicised exercise that poached the entire technical management team at Kockums including the manager for the submarine division and more than 200 of Kockums' existing pool of engineers, effectively removing its core workforce. Facing such hostile acts, it is not surprising that TKMS threw in the towel shortly after and agreed to sell Kockums to SAAB.

SAAB has since completed the acquisition of Kockums on 2nd Jul 2014 and the new entity is called SAAB Kockums. This paved the way for the stalled and severely delayed A-26 project to move forward and for SAAB to offer a 4000 tonne version to Australia as the Collins replacement submarine. In the words of the CEO Håkan Bushke " ... the Swedish Kingdom now controls the intellectual property for Australia's currently-serving Collins class submarines. If there is an open competition, SAAB Kockums will be in it."

SAAB Kockums in its last minute declaration of interest on the Collins replacement project has also offered to take Australia's shipbuilder ASC and Royal Australian Navy engineers and technicians to work on the Swedish Navy's 3000 tonne A-26 of which five were to be built, with the first boat due to be operational by the year 2023. CEO Bushke said that SAAB's solution will be affordable and will be able to match the $20 billion price tag of its Japanese and German rivals.

Kockum's resurrection from a moribund subsidiary of ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems to becoming part of the Swedish defense giant SAAB within the span of a few months is nothing short of spectacular. It would be even more incredible if they could win this submarine bidding war and become the supplier of Australia's future submarines. Being a completely new design, the A-26 offer carried with it unknown risks of cost escalation and timeline slippages. Add to that volatile mix the uncertainty of ASC's competency as a ship builder and the RAN could end up in a very dangerous situation, third time in a row.

ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems : The Old Favourite



TKMS Logo. Source : Wikipedia

TKMS was until Jul 2014 the parent company of Kockums. It used to be the front runner for an evolved-Collins submarine that will see TKMS build on the strengths of the existing Collins Class and rectify known short comings and defects, since the Collins boats were designed with the help of Kockums in the first place.

The main stumbling block for the evolved Collins Class was that the ownership of the intellectual property rights for the Collins submarine as well as the Stirling AIP engine that will be installed in the future submarines, was in dispute as the spat between the Swedish government and TKMS escalated. Australia understandably have no wish to be caught in the crossfires of a patent ownership war and have ultimately looked towards Japan which has a fleet of the world's most advanced non-nuclear submarines, incidentally also using Kockums / TKMS's Stirling air-independent propulsion system.




TKMS Operational Headquarters, Essen, Germany. Wikipedia.

Another deep seated issue was that TKMS has been constantly stifling Kockums all these years after the merger, intending for kockums only to produce small submarines while its German subsidiary HDW will get to build the big submarines for export. It probably was never quite keen for an evolved Collins boat, preferring rather to have a German solution for the Australians. In fact TKMS already had a Collins replacement concept in existence for sometime. It is the HDW Type 216 diesel-electric submarine with air-independent propulsion. Its design is based on the smaller Type 212A and Type 214 submarines current in service with the German and Italian navies, using HDW's proprietary fuel cell AIP system.




HDW's Fuel Cell Air-Independent Propulsion System. Source : TKMS

Now that Kockums had been sold to SAAB, TKMS can no longer be involved in any evolved Collins design. Nonetheless TKMS has still indicated that it can help Australia build her fleet of 10 to 12 next generation submarines domestically and within the budget of A$20 billion, presumably with the HDW Type 216 design.




HDW Type-216 SSK. Source TKMS

The Type 216 looks good on paper, but is again a yet to be built design and with so much uncertainties, nobody, not even TKMS can guarantee that the entire project could be on time and on budget, especially in the hands of an inept shipbuilder like ASC.

DCNS : Non-nuclear SSN?!

The latest to join the fray is the French ship builder DCNS with its SMX-Ocean diesel-electric submarine with air-independent propulsion. First revealed at the Euronaval 2014 exhibition in Paris in October, it is essentially a non-nuclear version of the Barracuda class SSN which DCNS is building for the French Navy. Although DCNS did not officially state that the SMX-Ocean concept was specifically created for the SEA1000 Collins replacement project, we all know what its purpose is. Incidentally DCNS opened a new subsidiary in Australia on 19th Nov 2014, DCNS Australia Pty Ltd, which just shows how badly they wanted a slice of the multi-billion dollar pie.




DCNS's SMX Ocean SSK ( Top ) and Barracuda SSN ( Bottom )

The SMX-Ocean is a huge boat at 4750 tonnes and 100m long. It is powered by conventional diesel-electric power-plants and a second generation air-independent propulsion system. It can carry a load of 34 weapons including torpedoes, mines, cruise missiles, anti-ship missiles and anti-air missiles. It will incorporate vertical launchers, a UUV Dock, SDV, dry dock shelter and lock-out chamber for up to 8 divers.

Its maximum diving depth is 350m. Its new generation fuel cell will enable a underwater endurance of 21 days. Maximum submerged speed is 20 knots while its usual transit speed will be 14 knots. Endurance at sea is up to 90 days with a maximum range of 18000 nautical miles ( 29000Km ) at 10 knots.

If Australia is going to buy into this mad French scheme, she might as well request the US to convert their Virginia-class SSN into SSKs, just pluck out the General Electric S9G reactor and replace it with the Stirling AIP engine and you can have the frequently craved for 100% compatibility in operations with the USN. No?

Kawasaki / Mitsubishi : Caveat Emptor?

Although the option of a modified Soryu Class built in Japan looks like the safest bet for Australia's Collins replacement project so far, skeptics have plenty of arguments against taking such an option.

First, Japan's war time past has come back to haunt her as pointed out that as recent as 70 years ago Japan and Australia were enemies at war with each other. The Japanese have even bombed Darwin in 1942, ahead of a land invasion which fortunately never materialized. And Australia had lost more than 300 ships to the Imperial Japanese Navy during World War II. To me that is at best a weak case against the Japanese because, well, times have changed. Australian skiers form the largest foreign groups at the Japanese ski resorts of Niseko in Hokkaido and Hakuba in Nagano every winter. Try convincing these Aussies to ski elsewhere. If one does not buy Japanese, then the Germans should also be excluded in the deal because they were part of the Axis powers with Japan and Italy during WWII!

Skeptics are also concerned if Japan will remain a staunch American ally throughout the projected life of the future submarines, and whether Japan's constitution will again be changed to prohibit arms export in the future.

Australia's opposition Labour Party has pre-emptively said that they would cancel any deal with the Japanese should they come into power after the next election.

In response to the flurry of unsolicited offers from the European boat builders, the Japanese have indicated that they too are willing to co-operate with the Australians to help the Aussies develop the special steel required for submarine construction. Assembly will still be done in Japan.

ASC Pty Ltd : Can't Be Trusted To Build A Canoe!!

ASC screwed up the entire Collins project. They then went on to mismanage the upgrade and maintenance programme of the Collins boats. Now the same story is repeating itself with the Hobart-class air warfare destroyers.

Late last year Australia's ex-Defence Minister David Johnston was censured by the Senate after saying he wouldn’t trust would-be contender for Australia’s new submarines, the government-owned ASC, to build a canoe. He later expressed regret that his remarks could have offended anyone, that he had expressed frustration over ASC's past performance in what PM Abbott had described as a rhetoric flourish. He further said that he was directing his remarks at a legacy of issues and not at the workers in ASC, whom he considered world class, eventually putting all blame on the former Labour government for mismanaging the troubled Air Warfare Destroyer programme.

Having barely survived a no-confident vote and in a move to save his own career as the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott had given in to political pressure and had promised that the procurement of the future submarines would be subjected to a "competitive evaluation process" and ASC would be allowed to bid for it. It will not be an open tender, meaning not everybody is welcome to bid, certainly not Dear Leader Kim, or Bloodymir Pootin, or Xi Jinping for that matter. So the Japanese are now not guaranteed to win the Collins replacement deal and they are extremely confused and worried at the moment about Australia's sudden change of heart.

What A$20 Billion Can Buy

Should Australia be spending A$20 billion on a dozen super-sized conventionally powered submarines with air-independent propulsion? Would she be better off buying a larger fleet of smaller submarines while at the same time constructing more submarine bases? Something like the HDW Type-218SG SSK might cost "only" 500 million Euros each. Buying fifteen of these smaller SSKs instead of the Soryu-class or similar to populate five submarine bases will probably save Australia enough money to construct the new submarine bases along the eastern, northern and western coastlines. Tony Abbott can then also sort of keep his electoral promise of local construction. You couldn't pre-fabricate submarine pens in Japan and then ship it over to Australia for assembly, or could you?

Update 26th April 2016

The Race is over. DCNS won the A$50 billion contract with its Shortfin Barracuda, aka SMX Ocean.

Can I have Two Mistrals, ... Please? Updated

 

Introduction

 




The French naval ship Tonnerre, a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship. Wikipaedia

The French build pretty good warships. Good enough for the French Navy and evidently also good enough for many other navies of the world to have contracted the French shipyards to have ships built for them. An example would be the six Formidable-class stealth frigates of the Republic of Singapore Navy, a derivative of DCNS's Lafayette-class frigate. The French shipbuilders also churn out other high-end stuff like the Barracuda-class nuclear powered hunter-killer submarines and the conventionally powered and widely exported Scorpene-class SSK.

Of course they can also build aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships, like the Mistral-class BPC, for which the French Navy had already acquired three. BPC ( French  bâtiments de projection et de commandement ) means " Projection and Command Ship ", the equivalent of the LHD or Landing Helicopter Dock amphibious assault carriers of the US Navy.

In Dec 2010 under the ex-President Nicolas Sarkozy's watch, the Russians too decided that they would like to have two of these Mistrals to equip their navy and a deal was made to have them delivered by 2014 / 2015. The two Russian ships, the Vladivostok and the Sevastopol was laid down in 2012 and 2013 respectively. The Vladivostok was undergoing sea trials when the Ukraine crisis erupted and Russia decided to annex Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine. That prompted French President Francois Hollande to cancel the planned delivery of the Mistrals indefinitely, even though some money had been paid, even as the Rouble became rubble....

Warped Logic

I could never understand why Russia had to buy the Mistrals from France. They had been constructing amphibious assault ships of their own designs in the past like the Project 775 Ropucha-class, Project 1171 Tapir-class large landing ship ( NATO reporting name Alligator ), the Project 1174 Ivan Rogov-class and the most recent and still in production, the Project 11711 Ivan-Gren-class large landing ships. They were also not new to constructing helicopter carriers and aircraft carriers, examples of which includes the Project 1123 Kondor Moskva-class helicopter carriers and the Admiral Kuznetsov-class aircraft carriers.





A Project 775M Ropucha III class LST-077 Peresvet of Russia's Pacific Fleet during Ex. Joint Sea 2015 at Vladivostok. Photo : Sputnik



A BTR-80 armoured personnel carrier driving off the ramp of the Project 775M Ropucha III class LST-077 Peresvet of Russia's Pacific Fleet during Ex. Joint Sea 2015 at Vladivostok. Photo : Sputnik



Project 1171 Tapir Large Landing Ship ( Nato reporting name Alligator ) Source : Wikipedia



 

Project 1174 Ivan Rogov class large landing ship. Source : Yantar Shipyard

 

They have the means to design and construct satellites, space rockets and even complete space stations like the Soyuz and the Mir. They were the first to launch a satellite into earth orbit ( the Sputnik ) and the first to put a man in space ( Yuri Gargarin ) but now you tell me Mr Pootin has to beg Mr Hollande to sell him two miserable Mistrals which he could not have built himself?

In today's world of out-sourcing and off-shoring, perhaps Pootin might have thought the French could build the amphibious assault ships more efficiently, given that they had already completed three ships which are currently serving with the French Navy, but it is not like him to admit that his own country is weak or incapable. That man has an ego as big as woolly mammoth's b****.

The truth might be that following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 90s, the Russian shipyards had been without any military orders for years and their industrial capacity might have deteriorated to such an extend it would not be easy for them to simply produce an amphibious assault ship on short order just like that. Indeed, the Ivan-Gren had been laid down in 2004 and will only be commissioned into the Russian Navy in 2015. A long latent period is not a good sign in ship building. If Pootin urgently needed the ships to invade Ukraine or the Baltic States, he jolly well has to buy them from somewhere.

On the other hand, it might not be inconceivable that Russia really cannot build her own amphibious ships. It has recently come to light of Russia's torpedo troubles, having to halt production because of her undue past reliance on a Ukrainian company. Now if you cannot even produce the parts for torpedoes, what else are you good for?

The Mistral-class Amphibious Assault Ship

 

Aerial view of the Mistral BPC from the official brochure of DCNS, the main systems integrator

These ships don't come cheap. Poor Mr. Pootin had to cough out serious dough, something like €1.37 billion for the first two ships, with a separate option for two more subsequently, if he is satisfied with the first two. The money had been paid in advance, and it seemed that France was more in need of the deal than Russia. As it turned out, the shipyard that was constructing France's third Mistral and the two Russian Mistrals, STX-Europe of Saint-Nazaire, was in dire straits financially and badly needed the Russian contract to keep its work force employed.






The Landing Helicopter Dock Dixmude (L9015) in Jounieh bay, Lebanon May 2012. Source : Wikipedia

The Mistrals displace 21300 tonnes fully loaded, with a length of 199m and a beam of 32m. They are capable of operating any helicopter type flown by the French military, including the NH-90 medium helicopter and the AS-665 Tiger attack helicopter. The flight deck has six helicopter landing spots with the #1 landing spot rated to 33 tonnes for heavy lift helicopters and the hangar can hold 16 medium helicopters. In addition, the Mistrals can transport 450 troops and 70 vehicles, including light and medium tanks. They can carry with them four LCM type landing barges or two LCAC-type medium hovercrafts. The Mistrals can be used as helicopter carriers and amphibious assault transports, with secondary capabilities as command ships and naval hospital ships. However, unlike the American LHDs and those operated by other navies like Australia's Canberra -class LHD, the Mistrals lack a ski-jump and cannot be used for operating fixed-wing aircraft.





The well dock of the Mistral-class BPC with two landing crafts. The well dock can be flooded with sea water to allow the landing crafts to be released or retrieved. Wikipaedia 

They are also lightly armed, with only four 12.7mm heavy machine guns and Mistral surface-to-air missiles in two Simbad launchers and provisions for the installation of two Breda Mauser 30mm naval guns. As such, the Mistral BPC cannot survive in a high threat environment and would require a protective task force of frigates and submarines when deployed.



This Mistral BPC Infographic summaries its specifications and capabilities nicely. Source : Sputnik



 

The Vladivostok-class BPC

The Russian Mistrals differ sufficiently from the French Mistrals to qualify as a variant class. Potential ice hazards in the Pacific Fleet and the Northern Fleet's areas of operation meant that they will have to reinforced the hulls with special alloy metals to protect against damage from sea ice during Artic navigation. The well deck door at the aft portion of the ship will also be modified to close completely for protection during adverse weather conditions common in the extreme northern latitudes, unlike the original design which has an opening at the top even when shut. The height of the ship was also increased to accommodate Russian helicopters that require a bigger overhead clearance due to their intrinsic co-axial / twin-rotor design. The thickness of the flight deck are increased to accommodate the heavier Russian helicopters, a mix of sixteen Ka-52K and Ka-29.
The Vladivostok-class will also be much more heavily armed than the Mistral-class and will have Russian communications equipment and radar installed.




The French Mistral-class have well deck doors that do not close completely, leaving a large gap at the top as seen here in this aft view of the Tonnerre. Wikipaedia

The Air Wing



They will be carrying the Kamov KA-52K co-axial scout / attack helicopters which are navalised versions of the KA-52 Alligator ( NATO reporting name Hokum-B ), with folding rotors and wings to enable them to fit into ship hangars. These rotary crafts pack a serious anti-armour punch and can also carry short-range air-to-air missiles. The naval variant is capable of carrying two Kh-35 anti-ship missiles with a range of up to 300km or two Kh-38 high precision air-to-surface missiles with a 40km range. A total of 32 have been ordered for the Russian Navy in Aug 2014 to equip the Vladivostok and Sevastopol and they are due for delivery between 2017 and 2018.


They will also likely carry the Kamov KA-29TB assault transport helicopters, the KA-27PL Helix in anti-submarine (ASW) and search and rescue (SAR) role and perhaps the KA-31 airborne early warning (AEW) helicopter.  





Kamov KA-52 Alligator attack helicopter. Source : Wikipedia



Kamov KA-31 Airborne Early Warning helicopter. Source : Wikipedia

The Missile Systems


The Russian BPCs will of course also have more teeth compared to their French counterparts, given the Stalinian paranoia that seems to afflict every Russian that I know of. Instead of the Mistral SAM, the Russians would install their Gibka 3M-47 Gimlet naval air defense missile system, NATO reporting name SA-N-10, a navalised version of the SA-24 ( Igla 9K338 / Igla-S ) man portable missile. The missile has an effective range of 5km. Two Gibka systems will be installed.





Gibka 3M-47 Gimlet Naval Air Defense Missile System. Source : Imgur



Having some kind of close-in weapon system (CIWS) like the American Mk15 Phalanx or the Dutch Goalkeeper for last ditch defense against shells and missiles would definitely be better than a quartet of centenarian Ma Deuce type machine guns that the Mistral totes. The Russians go a further step beyond just a gun based solution by selecting their newest Palma CIWS, a combined naval missile and gun system. The Palma is sometimes also referred to as the Palash naval air defense system. It is an all-weather, high precision ship defense system that packs two AO-18KD 6 barrel 30mm rotary autocannons combined with eight Sosna-R hypersonic missiles. According to IHS Jane's, the Sosna-R surface to air missile is a two-stage missile that carries two warheads totaling 7kg and two different fuzes. The first rod-fragmentation warhead has a proximity fuze while the second fragmentation warhead destroys its target on impact. The missile is radio-command guided during its boost phase, after which a laser beam riding guidance system takes over. The optical fire-control system makes the Sosna-R highly survivable, effective in clattered environments and difficult to jam. It has a range of up to 10km, maximum engagement altitude is 5km. The Palma's 30mm cannons which has a rate of fire of 5000 rounds per minute each ( combined 10000 rds per min ) can shred aircraft, UAVs, incoming missiles and shells, small boats etc up to 3km in altitude and up to 4km away. Two Palma naval ADS will be installed on the Vladivostok-class.





Artist rendition of the Palma Naval Air Defense System. Source : Kutejnikov 



The combat module of the Palma Naval ADS. Photo : Nudelman Precison Engineering Design Bureau



Guns


Unlike the Mistral which does not have any large calibre guns at all, the Russians will install the A-220M 57mm automatic rapid fire naval gun mount on the Vladivostok-class BPC. This could be useful against air and surface threats, anything that you would not want to waste a missile on.




The A-220M 57mm Naval Gun Mount. Photo : Burevestnik

The Radar


The Vladivostok-class will be fitted with the Positiv-ME1 3D shipbourne radar that operates in the X-Band. It can simultaneously track up to 50 targets and has a maximum detection range of 250km. The original Mistral-class lacks such powerful radars.




The Positiv-ME1 active 3D radar. Photo : Concern-agat

 

Russian Act of Piracy in Saint-Nazaire



The Vladivostok, presumably on sea trials out of Saint-Nazaire. Photo : MaritimeTraffic.com

Nothing is quite new here. Pootin cometh, Pootin see, Pootin like very much, Pootin take. Count yourself lucky if he didn't hurt or kill you in the process or afterwards.

As the Vladivostok's sea trials were being concluded in the summer of 2014, a group of 400 Russian naval personnel arrived at Saint-Nazaire on their training vessel the Smolny to train on the BPC in groups of 200. They regularly took the BPC out to sea for joy rides and sea maneuvers. As the Ukrainian crisis dragged on and the likelihood of the non-delivery of the Vladivostok became higher and higher, the Russian hooligans attempted a hostile takeover of the ship right under the noses of the somewhat unsuspecting French.

It has been reported that for a brief moment on the original official date of handover which was 14th Nov 2014, the Maritime Mobile Service Identity or MMSI of the Vladivostok was mysteriously changed without authorization, from French (227022600) to Russian (273549920), all this happening while the Russian thugs were trying to move their personal belongings from their training ship the Smolny to the Vladivostok. Then the Automatic Identification System (AIS) for ship tracking was also switched off. It didn't help when the official website of the port of Saint-Nazaire also listed a departure of the Vladivostok on 21st Nov without a return date, unlike the usual sea trial trips around the port.

So the Vladivostok became Russian flagged and the Russians almost got away and underway to St. Petersburg if not for an alert social activist who spotted the change and alerted the French authorities. Thus the Russian crew were prevented from loading their belongings and by the next day the MMSI was again switched to the original French registration and the AIS system came back online as well. Was it a genuine attempt to steal the ship or just to test the reaction of the French? Needless to say DCNS and the French authorities became much more watchful on the BPC after that incident.

The Russian sailors completed their training but without a ship to bring back were finally ordered to sail home in the Smolny on 18th Dec 2014. Bon Vent, or good riddance as we would say it in English. The French always seem to be able to express an unpleasant word so eloquently.

No Mistrals For Putin

You'll be surprised but there is actually a social media campaign group that rejoiced in the denial of the BPCs to Pootin. You can check it out yourself here http://nomistralsforputin.com . They have snippets of news and videos about the BPCs as they were being constructed right up to 18th Dec 2014 when the Russian mafia sailed home. It makes interesting reading.




No Mistral For Putin Logo




No Mistrals For Putin Home Page

The Fate of the BPCs

As the Vladivostok languishes at the docks, the Sevastopol nears completion. Very soon the French government would have two brand new BPCs on their hands with no immediate prospect of delivery to Russia as Pootin is not likely to get his paws of Ukraine anytime soon. They could either integrate them into the French Navy ( which originally wanted to have four by the year 2020 ) or sell them off at a discount to some NATO ally like Canada or Poland, whom we know is interested in getting a smaller version of the Mistral (BPC 140). The original Mistral is BPC 210 (21000 tonnes). The fear is that by reneging on the Mistral delivery, other potential arms mega-deal like the Indian MRCA replacement involving 126 Rafale fighter aircraft might be compromised. They can also choose to keep the money already collected and do not pay any compensation for the broken deal. Give Pootin a taste of his own medicine, just remember to watch your back, especially as you walk across bridges, and do not accept any offers of tea, even from old acquaintances, under ANY circumstances.

Update : Cancellation of the Mistral Deal

As expected, the Ukrainian Crisis continued through the year without any signs of slowing down. Russian backed rebels and Russian military personnel continued to clash with Ukrainian government troops in eastern Ukraine despite ceasefire agreements. Heavy weapons are used in the fighting, violating truce agreements. After protracted talks with the French government failed to secure the release of the two Russian Mistrals, is official that on 5th Aug 2015, Paris and Moscow terminated the contract for the delivery of the Mistrals.

France promised to reimburse Russia all the money it had paid for the Mistrals, and negotiations continued regarding the exact penalty France has to pay.

Three days ago on 27th Aug 2015, Sputnik News Agency reported that France had transferred a sum of € 900 million ( USD 1 billion ) to Russia as compensation for not delivering the ships. One would logically think that the payment would be on condition that France should be free to dispose of the ships as she wished. However, Sputnik quoted a high ranking source in Russia's Federal Service For Military-Technical Cooperation that despite the fact that France had transferred all the funds for failing to deliver the Mistrals, permission has not yet been given by Russia to export the ships.

Things get complicated when we realise that Russian shipyards had been involved with 40% ( as they claimed ) of the construction of the Mistrals. The aft section of the hull being constructed in St Petersburg and then shipped on monster barges to Saint-Narzaire for integration with the forward section. They must also have been involved with some design work, especially those modifications specific to the Vladivostok-class and may have contributed to classified designs meant for the Russian Navy. So who owns which portion of the ship and who owns the intellectual property rights to the Vladivostok-class becomes a complicated issue. Russian equipment already installed on the Mistrals will also have to be removed by Russian engineers and technicians and that will be scheduled in September. In the end, the Vladivostok and the Sevastopol will be empty shells and the French government might as well scrap them.

Looking at the brighter side, all this bickering around the Vladivostok and Sevastopol had probably generated lots of free publicity for DCNS and their Mistral BPC. As news of the termination of contract spreads, potential buyers are queuing up to pick up a good deal. Egypt and Saudi Arabia had expressed interest, and so did China, India, Vietnam and Brazil. The latest enquiry came form Malaysia!


France certainly paid a heavy price for breaking the contract, but that is the only right thing to do in the face of Russia's naked aggression and land grabbing antics in the Black Sea. The Mistrals should never have been sold to Pootin in the first place, as the idiom says, a leopard never changes its spots.

Now the Russians have the blueprints of the Mistral and they must also have had some form of technology transfer from DCNS, one of which is said to be in the form of Large-Block Assembly technology, a shipbuilding process in which parts of a large ship are constructed separately in different places, then erected together in a single dry dock to form the ship's hull. The process is an efficient way of creating large vessels, but is logistically challenging. They could easily construct an amphibious assault ship based on a similar design, just that it would take a slightly longer time. In fact that was just what they claimed they wanted to do - build a helicopter carrier, perhaps even nuclear powered, that is bigger, faster and far more powerful than the original Vladivostok, with air defense and submarine defense systems, without blatantly copying the Mistral's design. So far two designs have surfaced, the 24000 tonne Lavina helicopter carrier and the 14000 tonne Priboy Large Landing Ship, each could embark 16 and 8 helicopters respectively.

I have a feeling this will not be the last we hear about the Russian Mistrals, and this article might be updated further when the time comes.

Second Update


On 23rd Sep 2015 the Office of the French President announced on their website that the two BPCs have been sold to Egypt for EUR950 million ( USD1 billion ), exactly the amount France had agreed to compensate Russia for the cancellation of the contract. IHS Jane's Defence Weekly even had a cover feature on its 30th Sep issue " Sevastosold! France sells Russia's Mistrals to Egypt ".

Before the deal with the Egyptians was finalized, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were all rumoured to be interested in snapping up one or both the Mistrals.

Meanwhile, after splurging on 24 Rafale multi-role combat aircraft, a FREMM frigate and 4 Gowind 2500 corvettes earlier in 2015, Egypt continues its weapons acquisition spree, signing a contract with Russia for 46 Kamov Ka-52K Alligator attack helicopters ( naval variant ). Some of these helicopters will eventually find their way onto the decks of the Mistrals.

Le Frégate pour l' Petit KRI Usman Harun Heading Home, Yet To Be Commissioned.

Bung Tomo Class Light Frigate




KRI Bung Tomo (357) docking at Portland, UK on 1st Aug 2014. Bung Tomo or Brother Tomo is the nick name of Sutomo, one of Indonesia's National Heroes. Photo : Les Blackaller / MarineTraffic

The Bung Tomo Class frigates were originally known as the Nakhoda Ragam-class, built for the Royal Brunei Navy based on the Yarrow F2000 light frigate design in 1999. 3 ships were constructed, customized in part for the smaller stature of Asians in general. For reasons not made public, Brunei rejected the frigates upon completion of their sea trials claiming that they were not built to specifications. The ship builder BAE Systems sort arbitration through the International Court of Arbitration in 2004 and after closed door hearings in 2006, eventually won the case the following year. Brunei took ownership of the vessels but commissioned the German ship builder Lurssen Werft to sell them off. It wasn't till late 2012 that the frigates were finally sold to Indonesia at a great discount. They were to be renamed the KRI Bung Tomo, KRI John Lie and KRI Usman Harun, after Indonesia's national heroes. The first 2 may be Indonesian heroes but Usman and Harun were undisputedly terrorists who infiltrated Singapore and carried out sabotage and bombings on non-military targets that killed 3 innocent civilians and wounded 33 more in 1965. They were captured, tried and convicted of murder and eventually executed.

For a detail account of that terror attack on Singapore and the naming of the frigate after the 2 terrorist, read my earlier blog "Discount Frigates For Small People with Hare Brains : The KRI Usman-Harun Saga".

Commissioning! But Only Ships One And Two

After languishing at the piers at Barrow-in-Furness in England for 7 years, the first and second-in-class KRI Bung Tomo ( Pennant number 357 ) and KRI John Lie ( Pennant number 358 ) had been inducted into the Indonesian Navy on 18th July 2014 in a ceremony presided over by Indonesia's Defense Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro. For reasons not openly revealed the third-in-class KRI Usman Harun ( Pennant number 359 ) was not commissioned together with her sister ships even though all three were physically at the same location. I was hoping perhaps it was the Indonesian President-elect Bung Dodo who postponed the commissioning because he understood the serious damage that was already done to bilateral relationship between Indonesia and Singapore from the naming saga. Might he be contemplating a name change for frigate number 3? Doubtful. The admirals will stage a mutiny before that can happen.

More probably we are seeing the effects of Singapore's strong protest against naming the frigate after the two terrorists earlier in Feb 2014. TNI-AL may not want to admit it least it be perceived as weakness but the defense ministry could be trying to keep the entire event low profile to avoid further stoking of tensions between Singapore and Indonesia. Face saving is very important for people with huge egos.

Going Home



All three frigates have since left the United Kingdom for Indonesia. The lead ship KRI Bung Tomo was the first to leave Barrow-in-Furness at the end of July, shortly after her commissioning, with a crew of 87 Indonesian naval personnel and 5 ship's technicians from the UK. She made port calls at Portland ( UK ), Malaga ( Spain ), Civitavecchia ( Italy ), Port Said ( Egypt ), Jeddah ( Saudi Arabia ), Cochin ( India ) before eventually arriving at the Indonesian Port of Belawan in Northern Sumatra on 8th Sep 2014, a 9740 nautical mile journey ( about 18038km ) that took 42 days. After throwing a cocktail reception, she continued her journey the next day to the capital city of Jakarta and will travel onwards to Surabaya in East Java.

It was revealed that all the Christian members of the crew performed a religious pilgrimage to the Vatican during the ship's stopover in Italy and then all the Muslim members perform the umrah ( minor pilgrimage ) when the ship docked at Jeddah.

While in transit, KRI Bung Tomo also took part in war exercises off Lebanon, Oman and Jeddah together with warships from several countries, like the United States, Canada and Japan. This is common naval practice among friendly nations to conduct passing exercises (PASSEX) and other more sophisticated exercises when they meet.





KRI Usman Harun (359) Leaving Portland, UK 13th Aug 2014. Photo : Les Blackller / MarineTraffic

AIS tracking information seem to indicate that the other 2 frigates are basically tracing the journey of the KRI Bung Tomo with a delay of about 10 days, and they have so far been travelling together as a task group / mini convoy. They are expected to arrive in Belawan, Indonesia around 20th Sep 2014, barring unforeseen circumstances. They are scheduled to sail to Surabaya where they will be involved in a display to celebrate Indonesia's Armed Forces Day on 5th Oct. The frigates will eventually be inducted into the Indonesian Navy's Eastern Fleet where they will assume offshore patrol duties.




KRI John Lie (358) and KRI Usman Harun (359) seen berthed together at Malaga, Spain 20th Aug 2014. Photo Paco Canela / MarineTraffic

Newly Built?!

Quote from the Jakarta Post " The Indonesian Navy’s Col. Yayan Sofiyan could not hide his sense of pride as he was entrusted by the government to bring home a newly built British-made light frigate, the KRI Bung Tomo." This was obviously an error as the journalist who wrote that article must have been absolutely ignorant of the frigate's tortuous and troubled past. If you can call a 14 year old warship Newly Built, then by the same account my nine year old car has to be better than Factory Mint! Wake up guys, in most other navies 14 years is about the time you start planning and conducting mid-life upgrades and service life-extension programmes ( SLEP ). After all, the useful lifespan of a hull is about 30 years, maybe 40 years, if you maintain it well.

Just Passing

So Le Frégates pour l' Petit, the frigates for small people, are finally sailing home. Their journey through the Straits of Malacca will bring them to the close proximity of Singapore but there will be no PASSEX with the Republic of Singapore Navy. They ( specifically the KRI Usman Harun ) are not even welcome to stop at the city state, missing the chance to call at one of South East Asia's most advanced naval facilities at Changi Naval Base*. If the Indonesian admiralty had any brains they would probably want the frigates to slip past Singapore as quietly as possible. They can continue to languish at some non-descript Kalimantan base for the next 20 years for all I care. Makes a formidable admiral's fishing boat!

* Singapore's Changi Naval Base regularly berths visiting ships of the USN, including the Nimitz Class nuclear powered aircraft carriers. It is also host to the Littoral Combat Ship USS Freedom (LCS 1) during her 8 month deployment to South East Asia recently.




15th Jul 2013 The littoral combat ship USS Freedom (LCS 1), right, and the guided-missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald (DDG 62), top, are moored at Changi Naval Base, Singapore, with the Republic of Singapore navy formidable-class frigate RSS Stalwart (72), bottom. The ships will participate in Cooperation Afloat Readiness and Training (CARAT) Singapore 2013. USN Photo



Japan's Soryu Class Submarine : Collins Replacement Prime Contender

The Collins Class Submarine

 

HMAS Sheean SSG-77 conducting air sea safety assessment with a Seahawk helicopter from HMAS Adelaide off Garden Island, Western Australia. RAN Photo.

 

The Royal Australian Navy (RAN) currently has a fleet of 6 Collins class diesel-electric hunter-killer submarines (SSK) in its arsenal. They were designed in collaboration with Kockums AB of Sweden and largely built in New South Wales, Australia, by the then newly formed Australian Submarine Corporation. They are essentially enlarged versions of the original ( non-AIP )Vastergotland class submarine which then served the Royal Swedish Navy. The RAN classifies them as " Guided Missile Submarine, Diesel-Electric " or SSGs, obviously referring to the Sub Harpoon missile launching capability. The are named after distinguished former members of the Australian Navy. They have pennant numbers from SSG-73 to SSG-78.

At 3100 tonnes surfaced and 3400 tonnes submerged, they were then the world's largest modern non-nuclear submarines. Among the first to be totally designed with computer-aided techniques, they were supposed to be highly automated, have long endurances, quiet, fast and pack a powerful punch. From the RAN webpage "Designed to be as quiet as advanced technology can achieve, Collins Class submarines have been developed from five generations of submarines designed and built by the Swedish Navy."

However, the reality was that the entire Collins project was fraught with problems and delays right from day one and even to this day. The Aussies made the fundamental mistake of taking a completely new submarine design and having it built domestically at a new boat yard with no prior history or experience of submarine construction.

First of class HMAS Collins was laid down in 1990 and commissioned in 1996 while the 6th boat HMAS Rankin was laid down in 1995 and commissioned in 2003. Shortly after that in 2005 the boats were to undergo extensive upgrades to the combat control system just to remain operational, although they also gained additional weapons capabilities like the Mk 48 ADCAP torpedoes.

With availability between 0 to 2 boats at any one time in the past few years, the RAN's submarine force only exist on paper. It is no wonder that the planning for the Collins replacement started as early as 2009, barely 6 years after the last boat HMAS Rankin was commissioned.



SSG-78 HMAS Rankin, the newest of the six Collins class SSK. Royal Australian Navy Photo.

 

 

 

 

 

Ship's Crest of all six Collins boats according to seniority from top to bottom. Source : RAN

Australia's SEA1000 Future Submarine Project




Boldly sailing into the sunset? HMAS Waller SSG-75 off the Fremantle coast in preparation for submarine escape and rescue exercise. RAN Photo

 

The SEA1000 Collins replacement project, otherwise known as the コリンズ級潜水艦更新計画 to the Japanese, aims to have the 6 troubled Collins Class conventionally powered submarines replaced by 10 to 12 boats by the year 2030 - 2040. It is expected to cost the Australian Government an estimated A$36 to A$44 billion. The four broad options they have would include :

- Buying military off the shelf designs. Though safest might not meet RAN requirements.
- Buying military off the shelf designs modified to Australian specifications and built in the country of origin. This mitigates some of the risks relating to both the design and the construction.
- Buying military off the shelf designs modified to Australian specifications and built in Australia. Deja vu.
- Commissioning a completely new design solely for the RAN built anywhere. Synonymous with kamikaze.

With the Collins fiasco still fresh in their minds, the Aussies naturally would want to focus on a proven design this time round. To have made the same mistake twice would be really moronic and unforgivable. So the most likely option to be selected would be the modified off the shelf design built elsewhere.

 Like I have mentioned in my previous article, there are not many options when shopping for a submarine as there are only a handful of exporters worldwide. In the past 20 years since the commissioning of HMAS Collins, the submarine's designer Kockums AB had become part of the German ship building conglomerate ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) through a series of mergers and acquisitions. The submarine's builder the Australian Submarine Corporation which initially started out as a joint venture between Kockums AB, the Australian Industry Development Corporation and 2 other private companies was also nationalised and is currently known as ASC Pte Ltd.

TKMS actually has a design that is supposedly catered for Australia's special needs in its subsidiary Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft's (HDW) Type 216 diesel-electric submarine. Although its design is somewhat based on the existing Type 212A used by the German and the Italian navies, the Type 216 is substantially bigger ( 4000 tonnes versus 1800 tonnes ) and has yet to be built. That alone would make it much lass palatable to the Aussies.



Artist's impression of the TKMS HDW Type 216 SSK Source : TKMS

To sum it up, Australia needs a conventional diesel-electric submarine (SSK) with almost the size of a nuclear powered submarine (SSN), this to enable it to have the range and endurance to patrol her vast coastline. Australia also needs it fast, like yesterday. Ok I exaggerate, by 2025 or thereabouts, when the first Collins boat are due to retire, not a lot of lead time by naval procurement timelines actually. Lastly Australia is looking for a proven design, and that sole candidate came from an until recently unexpected source - Japan with her Soryu class ocean going fleet submarine with air-independent propulsion (AIP), quiet, big, lethal, in operation since 2009.

As an added bonus to the Aussies, the Soryu class SSKs have onboard the Sterling AIP engine made by Kockums AB / TKMS so in that sense there would be some continuity with the Collins class should the Soryu be chosen. Japanese? Hey, these guys were building fleet carriers during our grandfather's time.

The History of Submarine Building In Japan

Japan has a long history in submarine construction which started as far back as 1904 when 5 Holland  Class submarines were bought from the United States of America. They were originally built at the Fore River Ship and Engine Company in Quincy, Massachusetts and shipped to Yokohama in knock-down kit form from Seattle. They were assembled at the Yokosuka Naval Arsenal (横須賀海軍工廠), then Japan's largest naval shipyard, with the assistance of an American naval architect Arthur Leopold Busch.



The first Japanese submarine of the Holland Class, aka Type 1 Submarine ( 第一型潜水艦 Daiichi Gata Sensuikan ). Photo : Wikipedia

 

That same year, the Kawasaki Dockyard Company or Kawasaki Zosensho (川崎造船所) as it is known in Japanese, purchased modified plans of the Holland Class submarine from the designer John Philip Holland directly and went on to build 2 boats with the help of 2 American engineers who had been Holland's assistants.

The following year, Japan bought 2 British C class submarines from the shipbuilder Vickers, Sons and Maxim and went on to assemble another 3 from kits at the Kure Naval Arsenal, Kure Kaigun Kosho (呉海軍工廠),, as it is known in Japanese. By 1909, Japan had launched her first submarine tender ( support / supply ship ) and had built a sizeable fleet of ocean going submarines before World War I had ended.

As one of the Allied victor countries at the end of World War I, Japan not only took control of the numerous German territories in the Southern Pacific like the Caroline Islands ( modern day Micronesia and Palau ) as mandated by the League of Nations, she was also given several captured German submarines as the spoils of war. This greatly accelerated her submarine design and building efforts and by the outbreak of World War II, the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) would have the greatest variety of submarines available for all sorts of mission. From fleet submarines that could cross oceans to transport and supply submarines, mine laying submarines, even aircraft carrying monsters like the 6500 tonne I-400, midget submarines that are designed to infiltrate naval bases and harbours and eventually to suicide submarines like the Kaitens towards the end of the War.



Kaiten Type 1 human torpedo displayed at the Yasukuni War Memorial Museum in Tokyo. Kaiten (回天) literally means return to heaven but the name actually originated from an older man-of-war of the Edo era, a wooden steamer known as the Kaiten Maru (回天丸). Photo : Wikipedia 

  

The I-400 sea plane carrier submarine. Note the aft deck gun and the crane for lifting the Aichi M6A Seiran seaplane (see below). Photo : Wikipedia

  

The Aichi M6A1 Seiran (晴嵐) seaplane. The I-400 can carry 3 of these seaplanes internally. One of the M6A actually carried out a bombing raid on continental US, attempting to start a forest fire in Oregon by dropping incendiary bombs. Photo : Wikipedia

 

Following her defeat in World War II, the naval yards in Sasebo, Kure and Yokosuka were either converted to commercial entities or became facilities to support and maintain the ships of the US Navy and the newly formed Japan Maritime Self Defense Force (JMSDF), also known as the Kaijojieitai (海上自衛隊) in Japanese. There was a lapse of more than ten years where Japan did not build any submarines. That changed in 1957 when the first generation Oyashio (おやしお) class submarine was constructed by the Kawasaki Heavy Industries in Kobe based on the old IJN I-200 design and some US innovations.

 

SS-511 JDS Oyashio ( first generation ) : The first post war Japanese built submarine. Source : Wikipedia

 

Since then, there had been several successive generations of diesel-electric submarines constructed by Japan, including the Oshio class (1963), the Arashio class (1964), the Uzushio class (1968), the Yushio class (1976), the Harushio class (1987), the new generation Oyashio class (1994) and of course the latest Soryu class (2005) with air-independent propulsion.




The new generation Oyashio Class SSK currently in service with the JMSDF. Photo : JMSDF




The new generation Oyashio Class SSK performing the emergency main ballast blow maneuver. Photo : JMSDF 

The Soryu Class SSK

The Soryu class submarine is the latest generation of conventionally powered hunter killer submarine with air-independent propulsion built for the JMSDF. It has a displacement of 2900 tonnes surfaced and 4200 tonnes submerged, the largest displacement of any submarine used by post war Japan. Although all previous generations of JMSDF submarines have been named after ocean currents ( 潮 shio in Japanese means current ), the Soryu class breaks away from this half a century old tradition by being named after auspicious mythical creatures, some of which might include the dragon, the phoenix, the pheasant and the kirin. In this case, the entire class is named after dragons (竜 ryu).

SS-501 Soryu ( そうりゅう, in kanji 蒼竜 ) Blue Dragon
SS-502 Unryu ( うんりゅう, in kanji 雲竜 ) Cloud Dragon
SS-503 Hakuryu ( はくりゅう, in kanji 白竜) White Dragon
SS-504 Kenryu ( けんりゅう, in kanji 剣竜) Sword Dragon
SS-505 Zuiryu ( ずいりゅう, in kanji 瑞竜) Auspicious Dragon
SS-506 Kokuryu ( こくりゅう, in kanji 黒竜) Black Dragon
SS-507 Jinryu ( じんりゅう, in kanji 仁竜) Humane Dragon
SS-508 Sekiryu ( せきりゅう, in kanji 赤竜 ) Red Dragon  ( named on 2nd Nov 2015 )

SS-509 is under construction and yet to be named. SS-510 and SS-511 are planned. Now I am no naval historian or ship naming expert but if I were to hazard a guess, likely names for these future boats may include Shoryu (翔竜) Flying Dragon, same pronunciation but in different kanji character, Shoryu (祥竜) Blessed Dragon, Hiryu (飛竜) Soaring Dragon, Tenryu (天竜) Heavenly Dragon, Kairyu (海竜) Sea Dragon.

Update 7th Jan 2017 - SS-509 had been launched on 12th Oct 2016 and is named the Seiryu ( せいりゅう, in kanji 清瀧, after 清瀧権現 Seiryugongen, the guardian goddess of a Kyoto temple ). The character 清 means clear but could also mean pure. So Pure Dragon be it. Note that 竜 and 龍 both mean dragon and could be pronounced as ryu. With three additional dots used to denote something to do with water, 瀧 could mean water dragon but is much more commonly used in everyday life to mean a waterfall ( 瀧 or 滝 pronounced taki ). Confused? Nevermind, that's Japanese for you.

Update 8th Nov 2017 - SS-510 had been launched on 6th Nov at KHI's Kobe facilities. It was named Shoryu, blessed dragon. Shoryu is expected to enter service with the JMSDF in 2019.

Note that the name Soryu had previously been used on 2 predecessors, including the World War II Imperial Japanese Navy fleet carrier the IJN Soryu, which took part in the Pearl Harbour Raid in Dec 1941 and was sunk during the Battle of Midway in Jun 1942.



The Soryu Class SSK underway. It has a conning tower with a shape resembling that of the Virginia Class SSN, minus the hydroplanes. JMSDF Photo.



Third of class SS-503 JDS Hakuryu arriving at Joint Base Pearl Harbour - Hickam, Hawaii for RIMPAC exercises.

Photo : USN / Wikipedia

 

Soryu Class Characteristics

Length : 84m
Beam : 9.1m
Draught : 8.5m
Displacement : 2900 Tonnes Surfaced
                         4200 Tonnes Submerged
Propulsion : 2 x Kawasaki 12V 25/25 SB-type diesel engines
                    4 x Kawasaki Kockums V4-275R Stirling engines ( air-independent propulsion )
                    producing 3900hp surfaced and 8000hp submerged

Speed : 13 knots Surfaced
             20 knots Submerged

Range : Unpublished but estimated at 6100 nautical miles at 6.5knots with AIP

Operational Depth : Unpublished but estimated at 500m.

Complement : 65 ( 9 officers 56 enlisted )

Radar : ZPS-6F Navigation / Surface Search Radar

Sensors : Hughs/Oki ZQQ-7B Sonar Suite with
               1x Bow Array
               4x Low Frequency Flank Array       
               1x Towed Array

Countermeasures :

ZLR-3-6 electronic support measures (ESM) system
2x 3 inch Underwater Countermeasure Launcher Tubes for acoustic device countermeasures (ADCs).                      
Torpedo Countermeasure System (TCM) for SS-508 and later

Communications :

X-band High Speed Satellite Communications Device for SS-507 and later

Armament :

6 HU-606 21 inch ( 533mm ) torpedo tubes with 30 reloads for the following
     
Boeing UGM-84C Submarine Launched Harpoon SSM
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Type-89 Heavy Weight Torpedo
Mines

Construction :

Kawasaki Ship Building Industries, Kobe (川崎造船 神戸工場)
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Kobe (三菱重工業 神戸造船所)



SS-502 JDS Unryu being launched. JMSDF Photo.

The Soryu Class SSK in ceremonial light-up. JMSDF Photo. 

Soryu Class : A Formidable Naval Deterrence

The Soryu Class submarine is the world's largest submarine equipped with air-independent propulsion, and it has been in serial production since 2005, in other words, a well proven design. This represents a tremendous leap in capability for the JMSDF as they never had such AIP capable boats before. Collaborating with Kockums AB to licence produce the Stirling AIP engine was a smart move that allowed immediate access to a relatively risk-free proven technology. Kockum's proprietary Stirling Engine is a silent and vibration-free external combustion engine that had already been installed on the Gotland Class SSK and was also later retrofitted on the older Swedish Navy Vastergotland Class and Singapore Navy Archer Class SSK. The air independent propulsion system drastically reduces the need for frequent battery charging with the air breathing diesel generator which requires the submarine to be either surfaced or in snorkeling mode. It effectively increases the submerged endurance of the submarine and makes its detection much more difficult.

Its large displacement translates to having an extremely long range of close to 11000km, exactly what the JMSDF needs to patrol the vast open ocean between the Ryukyu Island Chain ( Okinawa ) and mainland Japan. For littoral operations, like patrolling the shallow Seto Inland Sea, the Soryu is fitted with an X rudder to provide high manoeuvrability to the submarine when operating very close to the seabed. This X rudder configuration was initially developed by Kockums for the Swedish A-19 Gotland Class SSK.




The X Rudder of SS-505 JDS Zuiryu seen clearly in this JMSDF photo.



Close-up view of the X rudder. Photo : Wikipedia

The quietness of the air-independent propulsion and the advanced sonar suite would allow the Soryu to stalk Chinese ballistic missile boats and SSKs with relative ease.

They are armed with Japan's Type 89 torpedo which is wire-guided with both active and passive acoustic homing modes and has very similar characteristics as the USN's Mk 48 ADCAP ( Advanced Capability ) heavyweight torpedo. With a diameter of 533mm, a length of 6.25m and a weight of 1760kg, this torpedo has a 267Kg High Explosive warhead. The effective range is said to be 27 nautical miles (nm) at 40 knots (kts) or 21 nm at 55 kts. The maximum speed is in the range of 70 kts and the operational depth is up to 900m.

These very same torpedo tubes can also launch the Boeing UGM-84L Harpoon Block II all weather, over the horizon, submarine launched anti-ship missile which also has a land attack capability. So the Block II Harpoon is essentially a cruise missile in disguise. It has a range of 124km and will post a serious threat to any Chinese or North Korean surface ship or land installations. It is guided by a GPS/INS unit and also has active radar terminal homing. The Block IIs being available to the USN since 1998, I am assuming that Japan has already either bought the newer version or had already upgraded her Block I Harpoons to Block II standard by now. South Korean certainly had!

The only glaring deficiency of the Soryu Class is the lack of Tomahawk tactical cruise missile launching capability. This is most likely a self-imposed limitation as the Post War Constitution forbids Japan from arming herself with offensive weapons.



RGM-84 the surface launched version of the Harpoon anti-ship missile being fired from the decks of the USN Arleigh Burke Class destroyer USS John S.McCain ( DDG-56). USN Photo

The First Post War Major Weapon System Export?

The 1947 Japanese Constitution is most famous for its renunciation for the right to wage war contained in Article 9. Its recent reinterpretation by the Abe government also allowed an easing of the self imposed blanket ban for arms export which had been enforced since 1976. It made possible the July 2014 agreement between Japan and Australia to partner on marine hydrodynamics ahead of a replacement for the Collins-class boats which quickly morphed into what might become an outright buy of 10 to 12 submarines from Japan.  If this export deal is realized, it would the first and most significant post war foreign military sales by Japan and is said to be worth about 20 billion dollars, hard cash which Japan desperately needs for rebuilding after the Tohoku earthquake and reforming to cater to a rapidly ageing population. It would also be a devastating blow to the Australian ship building industry who in my opinion really deserves losing the deal.

Although the Abbott government had previously said that the Collins replacements would be domestically built, consistent poor performance by the state-owned ASC on not only the entire Collins project and its subsequent upgrade works but also on the current Hobart Class air warfare destroyer project which is suffering from delays and huge cost overruns ( A$600 million over budget and 3 years late ), makes it much easier for them to justify an outright purchase from Japan.

Also, to have the Soryu built in Australia would incur a much higher cost, with some estimates at AS80 billion, almost double the original estimate of A$36 to A$44 billion. As Prime Minister Tony Abbott puts it, "The most important thing is to get the best and most capable submarines at a reasonable price to the Australian taxpayer". It would be really tragic if all that money is paid and the RAN gets another 12 Collins II instead. With the quest for precision and quality being almost a national obsession, you can be assured that anything that is made in Japan is nothing short of perfection. The Soryu Class will be no different. The Japanese worker takes tremendous pride in his work. The Aussies shall not regret that decision should Tony Abbott make that announcement by year end.

But all is not lost for the ASC. With the projected savings from buying directly rather than building domestically, there may be plans to fast track the Australian ship building industry by getting ASC to build new "super" frigates using the hull design of the 6500 tonne Hobart Class destroyer. ASC will likely get service and maintenance contract for the upkeep of the new boats.

The extra money saved could also be used to fund further purchase of the F-35 joint strike fighter which the Australian government had already pledged to buy. Another likely development could be the creation of a new submarine base, possibly at HMAS Coonawara in Darwin, New Territories, though I really do not know how *. With 12 boats projected, the current submarine base at HMAS Stirling in Perth, Western Australia will be swarmed. Having a northern base in Darwin will greatly reduce the transit time to the area of operations in South East Asia and the Australian East Coast.



Aerial view of HMAS Coonawara. Darwin City's CBD can bee seen in the background 2km away. RAN Photo.

* HMAS Coonawara is currently a small naval base supporting 8 Armidale Class patrol boats, within walkable distance of Darwin's central business district and close to the famous Doctor's Gully fish feeding attraction. The seabed will have to be dredged, the Larrakeyah Barracks and the marina next door will possibly have to be relocated to make way for the submarine pens.

Possible Modifications of the Soryu for SEA 1000

The operating range of the Collins Class SSK is in the region of 11830 nm (21000km) at a speed of 10.5 kts while that of the Soryu Class is about 6100 nm at 6.5 kts. The Aussies will likely want a bigger boat with longer range. The magnitude of increase may well be determined by whether a new submarine base is going to be built in Darwin.

The Aussies will also want "inter-operability" with their greatest ally the US Navy. So sensors and weaponry will have to be as identical as possible. The Type 89 torpedoes may have to give way to Mk 48 ADCAPs which the Americans use and which the RAN already has a stockpile of.



A Mark 48 ADCAP heavyweight torpedo being offloaded from the Los Angeles Class nuclear attack submarine USS Oklahoma SSN-723. USN Photo.

 

The ability to fire torpedo tube launched (TTL) Tomahawk Block IV cruise missiles on the Collins replacement could also be a likely modification. Unlike the Los Angeles Class Flight II boats and the follow-on improved Los Angeles Class boats which all have a 12 tube vertical launch system (VLS) for launching Tomahawk cruise missiles, the Soryu Class lacks such a capability. It would be expensive to integrate a VLS into a mature design if not technically difficult. Fortunately the TTL version exist and is currently used on the Royal Navy's Astute Class SSN.



Model of the Tomahawk Block IV tactical cruise missile. USN Photo.



Vertical Launch System (VLS) in the fore section of the Los Angeles Class nuclear attack submarine USS Santa Fe (SSN-763) Photo : USN

 

 

Final Words

The Collins project and the resulting 6 boats are a blemish to the proud reputation of Australian Navy and a disgrace to the entire ship building industry of Australia. It is a sad chapter in the long and illustrious history of the RAN that is best forgotten. The Australians should learn from their numerous mistakes committed in the past 2 decades and simply move on to the next chapter without making the same mistakes again. 12 boats sound like a huge fleet but I assure you it is not. Australia is Big, and the surrounding seas even BIGGER.

To Tony, please buy from the Japs, because if anything were to go wrong this time, it will be their problem, not yours.

To Abe the travelling salesman, you have done the sales pitch, please deliver well when the first order arrives, hopefully by Christmas. And may there be many more new orders for you to fulfill in the future.