Submarines: Underwater Game Changers

The United States builds, arguably, the world’s most capable submarines. But at about $2 billion apiece, there are only so many subs the US Navy will acquire, and it’s widely recognized the supply will never meet the demand.

Meanwhile, building and acquiring modern submarines is a worldwide growth industry. Russia, China and even India are designing and building multiple new classes of subs, armed and fit with a growing variety of weapons and sensors — and a number of nations are building or purchasing foreign-designed undersea craft.

Retired Vice Adm. Michael Connor, a former commander of the US Navy’s submarine forces, explained this activity in a recent hearing on Capitol Hill.

“The undersea arena is the most opaque of all warfighting domains,” Connor said during an Oct. 27 hearingat the House Seapower subcommittee. “It is easier to track a small object in space than it is to track a large submarine, with tremendous fire power under the water. That is why countries with the technical wherewithal to operate in this domain are pursuing advanced capability. The two countries that present the biggest challenge in the undersea are Russia and China, with Russia being the more capable of the two.”

Rather than simply building more submarines, Connor and others are urging more sustained development of weapons and sensors to increase the power of US undersea forces. Among Connor’s top recommendations is the desire to extend the striking range of submarine-launched weapons.

“This multiplies the impact of each submarine and multiplies the search challenge that each submarine presents to a potential foe,” he said.

Connor specifically wants torpedoes with ranges of more than 100 miles.

“This is definitely doable with chemical-based propulsion systems and will likely soon be achievable with battery systems,” he said. Such a range also will need better command-and-control systems, including the ability to communicate with the torpedo, perhaps via manned or unmanned aircraft or by satellite, he said.

“The torpedo will come to be considered along the line of a slow-moving missile,” he said, “with the advantage that it is more difficult to detect, carries a much larger explosive charge and strikes the enemy beneath the waterline, where the impact is most severe.”

Connor also wants the US “to get back into the business of submarine-launched anti-ship missiles” with the ability to “confidently attack a specific target at sea at a range of about 1,000 miles. We should be pursuing this more aggressively than we are.”

Connor also wants better and more-capable undersea vehicles.

“We need to improve the endurance of the vehicles, expand the payload set, and get to the point where any submarine can recover the mission data, if not the vehicle. We need to do this while keeping the cost of the vehicle down. The cost should be low enough such that, while we would always like to get the vehicles back, it is not a crisis if we don’t. The value is in the data, not the vehicle.”

Bryan Clark, a naval analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, appeared alongside Connor and urged greater development in undersea sensors — onboard submarines, unmanned vehicles and weapons, as well as deployed in the water and fixed on the seabed.

To coordinate the development and fielding of underwater systems, Clark said the Navy should “make its undersea warfare resource sponsor and acquisition organizations responsible for all undersea vehicles and systems once they transition out of research and development.”

Clark urged continued development in a wide range of unmanned underwater vehicles (UUV), including looking at ways to arm some. He pointed to the compact, very lightweight torpedo — now under development — as having potential not only as a defensive, anti-torpedo weapon but also as a weapon that could be carried and launched by larger UUVs.

Connor and Clark said Congress could aid these efforts by providing funding not tied to specific programs of record. “Programs should be defined broadly so that they can incorporate innovation without recreating the program,” Connor said.

The failure of some efforts, he said, should not necessarily be taken as a negative thing. He said Silicon Valley failure rates sometimes approach 90 percent.

“If we are innovating aggressively enough, perhaps half of our initiatives will fail,” he said.

Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., chairman of the subcommittee, agreed with many of the recommendations.

“There’s a recognition that if we’re going to keep up with undersea dominance, it’s not just about creating more platforms, but we have to create relatively sophisticated systems of systems with the ability to multiply capability but not just adding a platform,” he said in a post-hearing interview.

“We can create a platform to last 20, 30, 40 years,” he said, noting that many systems will be developed over that time. “So it’s important to find the process or architecture to create innovation and put it out in three to four year cycles.

“What I’m excited about,” he said, “is we’ve got people in the Pentagon, the private sector and in policy sectors who understand this and can create partnerships to actually get them done.”

Dissecting India's "Second Strike Capabilities": A Threat To The Ocean Ways

The Indian Ocean can be saved from becoming a zone of conflicts if India stops thinking it owns it. If the West encourages New Delhi to build a blue-water navy, it would only be a matter of time before it ends up becoming a nightmare for the West itself. The Indian Ocean ranks as the fifth largest ocean, covering 20 per cent of the water on Earth. It consists of 60 islands owned by different states and has four major waterways — the Strait of Malacca, the Strait of Hormuz, Bab-el Mandeb and the Suez Canal.

 

A nuclear submarine (SSN, SSGN, SSBN) can go stealth for an infinite if there have enough supply and can be a nightmare for the foe ships & other targets.

 Interestingly, the Indian Ocean had never been nuclearised even during the Cold War. The shifting of Indian nuclear weapons capabilities from land to sea, in their deployment against Pakistan and China, could end up initiating a three-party nuclear competition. India is modernizing its navy at a rapid pace, and allocated it a budget of $4.8 billion in 2011. China, on the other hand, is not in a position right now to generate a stir in the contemporary strategic balance in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). India dragged the IOR into an intense arms race by introducing a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine, INS Arihant, in 2014; it is also in the process of building two more Ship Submersible Ballistic Nuclear submarines. India now has two platforms, INS Subhadra and INS Suvarna, to launch Dhanush missiles. The Indian Navy also has the ability to launch BrahMos missile, a joint venture between Russia and India, which can carry both conventional and nuclear payloads. In short, India is playing a dangerous game in pursuit of prestige and international recognition in the IOR where confidence-building measures or institutionalized conflict-resolution seem to be totally absent.

In the backdrop of the traditional rivalries in this region, the addition of nuclear-capable submarines in the Indian naval fleet is a serious threat to Pakistan and China. This provocation could force Pakistan and other regional states to launch drives to acquire similar capability, thus initiating an arms race in South Asia. It is not surprising that China is willing to sell eight diesel-electric, and not nuclear, submarines to Pakistan. As stated earlier, South Asia has no institutional mechanism that can be used to deal with confrontational behaviour that regional states may indulge in the IOR. If India is resolute about taking the route of sea-based nuclear strike capability, then it is highly unlikely that any possible escalation could be controlled. Pakistan needs to work on sea-based deterrence as this can provide it with strategic advantages, which could serve many implicit opportunities. The most vulnerable part of the Indian defence is its coastal belt, which the Pakistan Navy can exploit through the element of surprise.

Connecting the "Silk Route" project through Gwadar Port of Pakistan.

During the Cold War, India was not happy about US presence in the IOR. However, China’s presence is the main factor that transformed the dynamic of Indian strategic thinking and today, Indian and US interests are congregating , which has generated a more favourable strategic environment for both countries against China. Regardless of Russian and Chinese opposition, India has offered a foothold to the US in the Indian Ocean by signing a new 10-year Defence Framework Agreement with it.

The Indian approach, which projects China as a potential threat in the IOR, is an exaggerated one. China is more focused in the Pacific Ocean and South China Sea, with trade security its only interest in the IOR. It is still behind India and the US in gaining geographical advantages and maritime power in the IOR. The imaginary Chinese ‘string of pearls strategy’ is playing with the minds of Indian strategists. Last year, in November 2014, after a patrolling Chinese submarine docked in Sri Lanka, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi called a cabinet committee to clear an $8billion warships project to counter the Chinese Navy. The US, on the other hand, wants to encircle China via agreements with regional states. Pakistan provides China the best way out to reach the Indian Ocean, near the Persian Gulf.

Under construction Gwader port.

There are chances of a naval arms race emerging if we consider historical Indo-Russian naval cooperation and the current increased exchange of naval collaboration between the US and India. It is up to the global players, especially the US and Russia, to either promote global peace by denying India the acquisition of deadly war munitions like Akula-II or, to sell their weaponry and jeapordise global security.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 4th, 2015.

Pennsylvania (SSBN-735): Saga of an Incredible One's (Part-II)

After "Part-I"....

A torpedoman is checking the fire control console in the torpedo room of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

A torpedoman is checking the number two torpedo tube on board the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

Sailors man the periscopes on board the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735). One is the spotting scope and the other is the shoot scope.

A sailor mans the main conole of the ships Ballast Control Panel on board the nuclear-powered ballistic submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735), November 1995.

A view looking aft from the fairweather sail of the nuclear-powered ballistic submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) as the ship cruises off the coast of Georgia. The American flag is shown flying from the bridge staff, November 1995.

Port side view of the fore section of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) underway off the coast of Georgia, November 1995.

An aerial starboard bow view of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) underway, November 1995.

Submarine Centennial Day Proclamation, 11 April 2000, signed by the Governor of the State of Pennsylvania in honoring the State's namesake, Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

The Ohio class ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) arrives at its new homeport, Naval Submarine Base, Bangor, Wash. on 17 October 2002, after transiting from the Navy's submarine base in Kings Bay, Ga. Strategic deterrence has been the sole mission of the fleet ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) since its inception in 1960. The SSBN provides the nation's most survivable and enduring nuclear strike capability.

Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) coal theme card / commemorative post mark on the occasion of Pennsylvania's 15th year on station, 9 September 2004.

The Naval Intermediate Maintenance Facility (IMF), Bangor completed its 500th TRIDENT refit on 4 June 2004, for the Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) at Naval Submarine Base, Bangor.
This important milestone consisted of more than 36,000 production man-hours and 600 jobs performed on the submarine to accomplish planned incremental overhaul and repairs. The four-week long TRIDENT submarine refits have been accomplished at Bangor ever since the arrival of the Ohio (SSBN-726) in July 1982. IMF (formerly the TRIDENT Refit Facility) was built specifically for the purpose of maintaining the fleet at Bangor and was the model used for TRIDENT Refit Facility, Kings Bay, Georgia.
IMF has expertise in hull, mechanical, electrical, electronics, and weapons systems repair and continually responds to meet the fleet's maintenance and repair needs with on-time, cost-effective and quality service.
"It's an honor to be here at IMF as we celebrate the 500th Trident refit at Bangor." said CAPT Thomas H. Barge II, commanding officer of IMF. "Even as we mark this special event, we should remember that we got here by more than twenty years of quiet excellence, IMF civilian employees and Fleet Sailors working day-in and day-out to keep the TRIDENT Fleet ready for operations at sea."

An american submarine (Trident) leaving Pearl Harbor for commencement in Exercise RIMPAC 2004. The naval assets for RIMPAC 2004 included four U.S. Pacific Fleet nuclear-powered attack submarines, Key West (SSN-722), Louisville (SSN-724), Charlotte (SSN-766), and Olympia (SSN-717).
There are forward 5-inch countermeasures and no rear 6-inch countermeasures. If my knowledge is correct, the west coast boats had been converted to 6-inch prior to 2004 (or at least for the most part) which means that this picture is most likely of a prior east coast boat.......being either the Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) or the Kentucky (SSN-737). Also, the location of the aft draft reading typical of the east coast boats, the west coast ones usually have theirs a little more forward.

Overhead view of the Ohio class ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735), with sailors spelling out the word "Fifty" as they return to Naval Base Kitsap, Navy Region Northwest on Whidbey Island, WA. 20 July 2005.
Pennsylvania has just completed its 50th Patrol at sea and a significant moment in history for the submarine.

Gen. James Cartwright, Commander, U.S. Strategic Command; Cmdr. Dave Knapp, Commanding Officer, Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) (Gold); John Whisler, Jr. - CEO of Leo Daly architectural firm located in Omaha, Neb.; Cmdr. Michael Dobbs, Commanding Officer, Pennsylvania (Blue); Rear Adm. Frank M. Drennan, Commander, Submarine Group 9 and Captain Scott B. Bawden, Commander, Submarine Squadron 17 stand with crewmembers of Pennsylvania and the Olympic mountains in the background during the presentation of the Omaha Trophy at Silverdale, WA, 25 July 2005. The trophy was given to Pennsylvania for being the "best of the best" Trident submarine in 2004.

Chief Culinary Specialist Bryan Syster, culinary specialist division leading chief petty officer of the ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) Gold crew, takes a 40-pound odor barrier bag of plastic saved during the most recent patrol to shore for disposal on 12 May 2008. Pennsylvania is the first ballistic missile submarine to go underway with the new zero plastic waste discharge instruction and successfully saved nearly 2000 pounds of plastic.

The Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) returns to its homeport of Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor following sea trials on 19 September 2012.

Pennsylvania (SSBN-735): Saga of an Incredible One's (Part-I)

Cut out of the Ohio Class submarine.

The Launching & Christening Ceremony of the Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) on 23 April 1988.

Pennsylvania (SSBN-735), under construction at the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corp., Groton, CT. 1988.

Louisville (SSN-724) slides down the building ways at the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics, Groton, CT., 14 December 1985. The nearly complete boomer in the background is the Tennessee (SSN-734). The other parts belong to the Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

The officers and crew of the Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) stand on her bow during her after her launching at the Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics Corp., Groton, CT., 23 April 1988. The partly completed West Virginia (SSBN-736) appears on the left.

Pennsylvania (SSBN-735), probably during her alpha sea trials off the Atlantic coast, 1988-89.

Capt. Norman Cram, chaplain, delivers the invocation during the commissioning ceremony of the nuclear-powered strategic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

Guests depart from the deck of the nuclear-powered strategic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) following the vessel's commissioning ceremony on 9 September 1989.

Acrylic on canvas painting by the artist William H RaVell III entitled 'Pennsylvania (SSBN-735)'. It is currently hanging in the boat's Ward Room.

A view of an enlisted berthing area aboard the nuclear-powered strategic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735), 9 September 1989, at New London, CT. The lower bunk at center has been propped up to show the gear storage space located beneath it.

Scaffolding surrounds the sail structure of the nuclear-powered strategic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) while the submarine undergoes maintenance at the Trident Refit Facility dry dock at Kings Bay, Georgia on Mar 1992.

Crewmen gather on the deck of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) as the ship prepares to depart for sea from the Naval Submarine Base.
Note the "Lower all masts and antennas" sign in the nearby facility, November 1995.

Low oblique stern view of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) departing the Kings Bay Submarine Base under escort of two commercial tugboats.

A view of the complexity of the Ballast Control Panel on board the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

A view taken through the spotting periscope of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) showing the ship's stern, November 1995.

A view looking forward from the top of the fairweather sail of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) as the ship steams off the United States coastline. A lookout uses binoculars to scan the horizon.

Members of the ship's security force of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735) carry out a security drill. Note all personnel are wearing gas masks.

Quartermaster Second Class (QM2) Warrick checks the navigational chart at the plotting table in the ship's control center of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

Personnel are shown manning their post at the Fire Control Station of the nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Pennsylvania (SSBN-735).

To be continued to the "Part-II"....

The Largest Submarine in The U.S. Navy

China To deploy New Type of Strategic Missile Submarines From 2014

China’s navy is expected to begin the first sea patrols next year of a new class of strategic missile submarines, highlighting a new and growing missile threat to the U.S. homeland, according to U.S. defense officials.

“We are anticipating that combat patrols of submarines carrying the new JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missile will begin next year,” said one official familiar with recent intelligence assessments of the Chinese strategic submarine force.
China’s strategic missile submarine force currently includes three new Type 094 missile submarines each built with 12 missile launch tubes.

The submarine patrols will include scores of new JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) on the Type 094s. The submarines are also called Jin-class missile boats by the Pentagon.

 Type 094 Missile Submarine (SSBN)

The missile submarine patrols, if carried out in 2014, would be the first time China conducts submarine operations involving nuclear-tipped missiles far from Chinese shores despite having a small missile submarine force since the late 1980s.

The Washington Free Beacon first reported in August that China carried out a rare flight test that month of the JL-2, a missile analysts say will likely be equipped with multiple warheads.
That test was carried out in the Bohai Sea near the northeastern coast of China, according to officials familiar with reports of the test.

Defense officials said the JL-2 poses a “potential first strike” nuclear missile threat to the United States and is one of four new types of long-range missiles in China’s growing strategic nuclear arsenal.

The Air Force National Air and Space Intelligence Center earlier this month published a report on missile threats that identified the JL-2 a weapon that “will, for the first time, allow Chinese SSBNs to target portions of the United States from operating areas located near the Chinese coast.” SSBN is a military acronym for nuclear missile submarine.

The Pentagon’s most recent annual report on China’s military stated that Beijing’s Navy has placed a high priority on building up submarine forces.
In addition to the three Type 094s currently deployed, China will add at least two more of the submarines before deploying a new generation missile submarine dubbed the Type 096, the report stated. It was the first time the Pentagon has revealed the existence of the follow-on strategic missile submarine.

“The JIN-class and the JL-2 will give the PLA Navy its first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent,” the Pentagon report said.