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.”

India Forces Pakistan To Indigenously Build Nuclear Submarine

Maverick Report

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has been forced to build its own nuclear submarine, as India is building its own nuclear submarines besides acquiring nuclear submarines from Russia, defence sources have said.

Under this project, India launched its first indigenously built nuclear submarine in 2010 and it is presently undergoing trials and is expected to be fully operational by the end of the current year, the sources requesting anonymity.

“India has already initiated work on second such type of submarine and it is envisaged that India would be operating three nuclear submarines by 2015, providing her a clear edge over Pakistan in the strategic realm,” the sources added. 

 

Pakistan Navy Active Duty Submarines:

The sources said although Pakistan does not want to involve itself in an arms race with India, such a huge disparity in conventional and nuclear submarines needs to be given a thought to keep some balance of power in the region. They said if the challenge of building a nuclear submarine is given to Pakistani scientists, engineers and technicians, they would not disappoint the nation and would once again prove they could show miracles for the national defence. 

 

INS Arihant

“Pakistani scientists, engineers and technicians have already proven their skill and dedication by testing indigenously made nuclear bomb and by testing nuclear capable Shaheen and Babar cruise missiles, etc,” they pointed out. “Pakistani experts are capable of giving the Pakistan Navy a nuclear submarine for test and trial within six years, i.e. by 2018 or even earlier, after they are given a go-ahead signal while India took about 20 to 25 years to build a nuclear submarine.” 

The Qing Class, Which Will Be The Base for Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine:

Submarines pose immense threat to an adversary as these vessels can remain submerged for a prolong duration without detection through radar or naked eye. Owing to submarine’s stealth features and long endurance, these vessels can operate close to the enemy waters hence can destroy or damage severely the enemy shipping, particularly close to her ports. By virtue of its characteristics, the Arabian Sea poses many challenges vis-à-vis detection of the underwater vessels and is known to be heaven for submarines, elaborated the sources.

They said the conventional submarines are run with the help of batteries and such vessels are required to break the water surface and expose herself to induct air for running the engines to recharge the batteries, thus becoming vulnerable for detection by the enemy. The nuclear submarines are run with the help of a nuclear reactor and do not require to recharge their batteries, thus remaining submerged for months without exposing themselves to the enemy. “Owing to this very capability, countries possessing the nuclear submarines are said to have assured second-strike capability,” the sources said.

Presently, India has at least 14 active submarines whereas Indian Navy has contracted France for six modern submarines, the sources said. These submarines are being constructed in Indian shipyard and are likely to be inducted in the Indian fleet by 2018. The Defence Committee of India has also approved procurement of six more conventional submarines in addition to the six already being built with the help of France, thus it is envisaged that by 2025 India might have around 30 conventional submarines.

“On the contrary, the Pakistani Navy current has five active submarines and so far the disparity in numbers was somehow balanced through induction of modern weapons and sensors, however, with the induction of such a large number of submarines India will have a clear edge over the Pakistan Navy in the field of conventional submarines,” they said.

INS Chakra, SSN. Leased from Russian Navy for next 10 years.

Beside conventional submarines, India also embarked upon the programme of acquiring nuclear submarine and as a first step acquired CHAKRA class nuclear submarine from former Soviet Union in 1987 on 10 years lease so it was returned to Russia in late 1990s, the sources recalled.

Later, they said, India signed a contract with Russia for lease of two AKULA class nuclear submarines. They said one of the two leased vessels has been handed over to India and is likely to join the Indian Fleet this month. “With the induction of this submarine, India has acquired the assured second-strike capability shifting the strategic balance in the region in her favour,” the sources commented.

China's SLBM JL-2 is near initial operational capability

This would put China in the league of other major nuclear power (US, Russia, UK and France), the only nations with SLBM capability.

For the first time in the country’s history, China’s sea-based nuclear deterrence nears initial operational capability (IOC), according to a forthcoming report by a US congressional commission on China.

China’s JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missile could reach IOC later this year, according to an early draft of the report by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

With a range of 4,000 nautical miles, the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) will have its first credible sea-based nuclear deterrent against the US mainland, mated with the Type 094 Jin-class nuclear ballistic missile submarine (SSBN). China has deployed three Jin-class SSBN and “probably will field two additional units by 2020.”

The report also states that China is pursuing two new classes of nuclear submarines — the Type 095 guided-missile attack submarine (SSGN) and the Type 096 SSBN. The Type 096 will likely “improve the range, mobility, stealth, and lethality” of the PLAN’s nuclear deterrent.

Though China does not have the ability to strike land targets with sea-based cruise missiles, the report states China’s navy is developing a land-attack cruise missile capability, most likely with the Type-095 SSGN and Luyang-III (Type 052D) guided-missile destroyer. This will enhance China’s “flexibility for attacking land targets throughout the Western Pacific, including US facilities in Guam.”

In June, according to the report, the People’s Liberation Army Air Force accepted 15 new H-6K bomber aircraft. An improved variant of the H-6, the K variant (with new Russian Engines) has extended range and can carry China’s new long-range, land-attack cruise missile (LACM). “The bomber/LACM weapon system provides the PLA Air Force with the ability to conduct conventional strikes against regional targets throughout the Western Pacific,” including Guam.

The report states China is working on extending the range of the DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile. With its current range of 810 nautical miles, it can already threaten US naval vessels throughout the Western Pacific. At 1,600 nautical miles from China, Guam falls outside the DF-21D’s range.

Other developments cited in the report include progress on China’s first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, which conducted its first successful carrier-based takeoff and landing with the J-15 Flying Shark fighter jet in November 2012, certified its first group of aircraft carrier pilots and landing signal officers during the ship’s first operational deployment in June, and verified its flight-deck operations process in September.

“The PLAN will continue to conduct short deployments and shipboard aviation training until 2015 to 2016, when China’s first J-15 regiment is expected to become operational,” the report states.

The document discusses other impressive surface ship developments. In 2012, China launched two new classes: the Luyang-III guided-missile destroyer and the Jiangdao (Type 056) corvette. Construction resumed for the Luyang-II (Type 052C) guided-missile destroyer and serial production continues for the Jiangkai-II (Type 054A) guided-missile frigate. “Most of these units will likely be operational by 2015,” according to the report.

Quoting Andrew Erickson and Gabe Collins, both renowned PLA experts, the report states that “by 2015, China will likely be second globally in numbers of large warships built and commissioned since the Cold War’s end ... by 2020, barring a US naval renaissance, it is possible that China will become the world’s leading military shipbuilder in terms of numbers of submarines, surface combatants and other naval surface vessels produced per year.”

One of the many disturbing conclusions in the report is the suggestion that China’s military modernization is “on track to alter the security balance in Asia over the next five to 10 years, challenging decades of US military preeminence.”

Pakistan's Nuclear Submarine Project

In late 2011 an internet rumor spread about Pakistan's development of nuclear submarines and in early 2012, we have heard major news networks in Pakistan announce the development of Pakistan's nuclear submarines "in 5-8 years". The earliest news of Pakistan's nuclear submarine project was in 2006 when General Musharraf announced that Pakistan now has the technology to build nuclear submarines. 

The first point to ponder is that Pakistan, unlike certain other countries, prefers to develop weapon systems quietly. If this kind of announcements are coming out, in all probability Pakistan already has a nuclear submarine, or at minimum critical components, well underway. The most critical component is the nuclear power plant, and the news thus points to the development of a miniature power plant. 

RUMINT suggests that Pakistan's nuclear submarine is likely to be based on the Qing Class Chinese SSK, which Pakistan is believed to receive 6 units of. Given the giant size of the Qing Class (5,000-6,000 tons), the submarine is ideally suited as the basis for a Pakistani SSN / SSBN. RUMINT also suggests that Pakistan is seeking a smaller sized nuclear sub that sacrifices speed for simplicity and ease of maintenance. The basic idea is that instead of hydraulic propulsion, the Pakistani subs will utilize an all-electric propulsion system that is charged by the nuclear power plant. 

Such an arrangement fits in perfectly for the following reasons:

1. Pakistani SSNs/SSBNs do not need to keep up with a carrier group or large-scale task force; They are likely to operate solo, making the loss of possibly 3-5 knots in speed less relevant.

2. The Qing Class (and other SSKs) already have a highly advanced electric propulsion system. The Pakistani nuclear submarine would thus be a replacement of the diesel engine power generation with a nuclear power plant. 

3. Electric propulsion has traditionally lagged behind hydraulic propulsion, but recent advances in the former has significantly reduced the gap in performance between the two. 

4. Sets up future improvements in technology which are headed towards magnetohydrodynamic propulsion, saving on investment in hydraulic submarine propulsion which would have been a technological dead-end investment.

Taking a closer look at the possible type of nuclear power plant to be utilized, it is likely to be a small pressurized light water reactor. Such a reactor would require some R&D given that Pakistan does not have much expertise in light water reactors, and because the need for miniaturization. However, given Chinese expertise and potential assistance, this should not prove to be a difficult challenge to overcome. Moreover, Pakistan has a highly qualified and competent nuclear establishment that should be able to meet the challenge, insh'Allah.

Another potential help may have been the transfer of technology from France with the Agosta 90B submarine purchase. A number of key technologies were transferred including design and development skills and tools. Building of hulls and experience with Western subsystems, many of which are used in the French nuclear submarines would help the Pakistani SSN / SSBN, if it already has not found its way to the Chinese Qing Class.

In sum, while India is preparing her first indigenous nuclear submarine, Pakistan is well underway in making an equivalent capability upgrade. While the time-frame given in the media is 5-8 years, it is very possible that Pakistan is capable of building and fielding such a submarine in 3-5 years. The timeline for building and deploying such a sub is mainly dependent on how quickly and successfully the Indian nuclear submarine program is able to field and operate a submarine.

UPDATE:

Two rumors from Pervaiz Shamim:
1. The nuclear submarine project and the Qing Class are separate developments
2. There is a South American country, rumored to be Argentina that is interested in some form of partnership in the (nuclear submarine) project.

Although I have a high regard for Brother Shamim, I think the first point is misinformation meant to shroud China's role and the extent of the Qing Class lineage. The second issue about Argentina is very speculative but is just possible. A more realistic partner would be Brazil. I would also throw in Turkey as a collaborator. Pakistan-Turkey-Brazil-Argentina (?) I think there is definitely loose collaboration on specific subsystems and technologies between at least the first three, if not Argentina.

I do think that the Argentinians are taking a closer look at the JF-17. However, there is very little to go by in terms of Argentina-Pakistan relations, and far more in terms of Brazil-Pakistan, where collaboration has gone to the extent of transfer of technology and weapon systems such as the MAR-1s and MAA-1As, and is likely to include the A-Darter and/or the MAA-1Bs in the future.