Strelnikov
4th Level Red Feather
- Joined
- May 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,812
- Points
- 0
Still more on sonar...
Just saw the new submarine movie "K-19 the Widowmaker", and was inspired to revive this thread.
Passive sonar is basically computer-enhanced listening, with acoustic signatures matched to a database of such for identification. The systems used by the USN and Royal Navy are sophisticated enough to identify individual submarines within a supposedly identical class.
Active sonar is the type referred to by Joby in her original post. Think of the "ping...ping...ping..." in WW-II submarine movies and you'll get the idea.
I know a fair number of former sub-drivers and sub-hunters. They tell me that it's nearly always preferable to use passive sonar. Using active sonar from a submarine is like an infantryman standing up in the middle of a firefight to get a better sight picture. Surface ships don't risk giving themselves away (enemy subs know they're there anyway) and aircraft aren't at hazard, but using active sonar tells the enemy that you know (or are nearly certain) that he's there, and you're about to shoot him. This gives him a chance to take countermeasures. Better he should continue fat, dumb and happy. His first indication of your attack should be your torpedo in the water, coming his way.
So I doubt that the new sonar system will have consequences as dire as Joby predicts. As for why such systems are important, read the news story below.
Strelnikov
Far Eastern Economic Review magazine: August 15, 2002 issue
“We All Live For Another Submarine”
(A multi-billion dollar arms race is gaining speed in Asia's waters. Some countries are preparing new defence strategies; others simply seek symbols of maritime power. Either way, for manufacturers, there's a lot of money to be made.)
By David Lague, Hong Kong
A little more than a decade after the deadly Cold War cat-and-mouse between Soviet and Western submarines came to a close, underwater rivalry is intensifying in Asia as regional powers compete for control of strategic waterways.
A multi-billion dollar undersea arms race is gathering momentum as established powers and smaller nations rush to build or buy potent new submarines. The competition threatens to shift the power balance between some of the region's long-standing military rivals and poses a potential threat to key trade routes.
China, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, Japan and Australia are already taking delivery or have ordered advanced, stealthy submarines armed with state-of-the-art missiles and torpedoes that will give their navies the capacity to strike targets at sea or on land far from their home ports.
Defence analysts are already questioning whether the United States, the overwhelmingly dominant regional power, would risk sending aircraft carrier battle groups to intervene in any clash across the Taiwan Strait if China is successful in deploying an effective fleet of submarines by the end of this decade. To the experts, this is a clear demonstration of the attraction of submarines for regional navies despite the burden on limited defence budgets and technical challenges in operating these vessels.
"You get a fairly big bang for your buck in simple terms," says Peter Horobin, a Perth-based defence analyst and former Australian navy submarine commander. "With relatively little outlay in money and people, you can make it very difficult for anyone who wants to do you harm."
That doesn't mean submarines come cheap. Australia's new fleet of six Swedish-designed, Collins-class submarines will cost close to $3 billion when the final vessel is delivered later this year, and there are still costly teething troubles to be solved. And, the purchase price is just the beginning. Every six years or so, a conventional submarine needs a complex major refit that involves virtually pulling it apart in dry-dock. The submarine can be out of action for a year.
Despite these costs, as regional economies have recovered from the 1997-98 financial crisis, governments have found it easier to afford submarines.
To some, submarines are becoming a naval fashion item, a demonstration of technical and military prowess. "They are almost a status symbol of maritime power," says another retired Australian submariner, John Dikkenberg, a columnist with Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter magazine.
Tokyo-based security analyst Akio Watanabe agrees that some orders appear to be motivated by "non-strategic" factors. In any case, it's a bonanza for the world's major conventional submarine builders in Russia, Germany, Sweden and France. "Perhaps one can speak of an arms race among suppliers rather than among buyers," says Watanabe, president of Japan's Research Institute for Peace and Security.
The submarine rivalry between China and Taiwan is probably the most intense in the region, with Beijing now expecting to take delivery by 2007 of up to eight advanced Russian-built Kilo-class conventional submarines in a contract worth $1.6 billion, according to reports last month in the Russian press and defence industry media.
These extremely quiet and difficult-to-detect submarines, combined with the four Kilo-class submarines already in service in the Chinese navy, could form the core of a force to allow China to blockade Taiwan's ports.
China already has a fleet of more than 60 locally built conventional and nuclear submarines, but these are mostly obsolete or plagued by technical problems. In fact, some analysts believe that Beijing's latest submarine order is an admission that a decades-long effort to develop a domestic submarine-building industry has largely failed. Nevertheless, experts believe some of China's locally built submarines could still play a role alongside the Russian imports in a crisis.
Predictably, Taipei has attacked Beijing's submarine order. Defence Minister Tang Yiau-ming said it would assist Beijing in mounting a blockade of the trade-dependent island. "Communist China is seeking to expand its naval power from near sea to far sea which would threaten regional security," he told a news conference on June 28.
One factor behind Beijing's move to add to its Kilo-class fleet is widely believed to be the Bush administration's decision last year to supply Taiwan with eight conventional submarines, worth up to $4 billion. Senior U.S. defence officials have long held that China is carefully tailoring its military build-up to force re-unification with Taiwan. This view was reinforced with the July 13 release of a Pentagon report that said Beijing was developing a range of strategies other than straight-out invasion to meet this objective, including missile strikes, blockades and cyber-warfare. "Preparing for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait is the primary driver for China's military modernization," the report said.
One strategy would be for China to blockade Taiwan's ports in a bid to force Taipei to begin talks on re-unification. Of course that might not work, and could bring the U.S. Navy to the rescue. From China's point of view, a top-class submarine fleet might make Washington think twice about sending major warships to the Taiwan Strait.
Instead, the Bush administration's pledge to sell submarines to Taiwan was aimed at giving Taipei the capability to resist a blockade on its own. While most modern militaries have a range of anti-submarine ships and aircraft, it is widely agreed that the most deadly submarine hunter is another submarine. "To prevent a blockade by Chinese submarines from taking place, Taiwan would naturally want to build counter-force by obtaining, if possible, a certain number of submarines for themselves," says Watanabe.
Unfortunately for Taiwan, the U.S. has not built conventional submarines for decades, preferring an all-nuclear fleet. And no other builder has shown a desire to risk Beijing's wrath by filling the order.
Despite this, the Pentagon appears determined to find a way to add to Taiwan's existing fleet of two old U.S.-built submarines and two relatively modern, Dutch-built Zwaardvis-class submarines.
Taiwan's Defence Ministry confirmed on July 23 that a high-level U.S. team had arrived in Taipei to discuss plans to build the submarines and there were unconfirmed reports in the local press that they had offered to build Taiwan a new fleet from German or Israeli designs. Two U.S. companies, General Dynamics Corp., the parent of nuclear submarine builder Electric Boat, and Northrop Grumman Corp. have shown interest in building the submarines in conjunction with a foreign partner, according to U.S. defence officials.
Speculation intensified that moves were underfoot to fill the Taiwan order when a Chicago-based investment company, One Equity Partners, moved in March to take a 75% stake in Germany's Howaldswerke Deutsche Werft (HDW) the world's leading builder of conventional submarines. The Berlin authorities have insisted that submarines for Taiwan will not be built on German soil but the 75% stake could give the U.S. access to the crucial design know-how.
Competition between China and India for maritime influence is also a key factor in New Delhi's determination to boost its force with 20 new submarines over the next decade. India is negotiating with Russia to lease two nuclear submarines and buy up to six conventional submarines. Talks are also under way with France's state-owned shipyard, DCN, to supply up to 12 Scorpene conventional submarines. New Delhi wants these deals to include technology transfers so that a domestic submarine-building industry can supply longer-term orders.
While most attention is drawn to these big-ticket defence transfers, Japan is quietly building one of East Asia's biggest and most advanced fleet of submarines. This 20-strong force could exert decisive influence over the regional security climate as the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force gradually emerges from decades of isolation, particularly if Tokyo plays a more active role in its alliance with the U.S. One of the most modern Japanese submarines has been converted to a new, air-independent propulsion system that would allow it to remain submerged for long periods without the need to surface and recharge its batteries. This means that future Japanese submarines could boast a performance similar to that of nuclear submarines.
Japan's build-up is believed to be the major reason behind the expansion of South Korea's submarine fleet. The German government last year approved the transfer of about $600 million in equipment so that Hyundai can begin building three new HDW Type 214 submarines at its shipyard in Ulsan. The South Korean navy late last year deployed its ninth HDW-designed submarine.
Similar rivalry with a neighbour was widely believed to be a factor in Malaysia's decision on June 5 to sign a contract with France's DCN and Spain's IZAR to take delivery of two Scorpene class submarines by 2008. Kuala Lumpur has also ordered an ex-French navy Agosta submarine for training. The three-submarine deal is reported to be worth over $1 billion.
In March, Singapore took delivery of its second ex-Swedish navy, Sjoormen-class submarine. Another two are on order. However, Malaysian officials have rejected suggestions that an arms race is under way with its tiny but militarily strong neighbour. With Singapore and Malaysia in the submarine club, Thailand is also considering its underwater options. The Thai navy has held talks about the possibility of buying three used Israeli submarines but most regional defence analysts doubt the deal will go through.
When all of these submarines on order come into service, Asia's key waterways could again become as crowded below the surface as they were at the height of the Cold War. "The security climate is changing rapidly as regional governments seek to boost their maritime influence," says Horobin, a veteran of deep-sea hide-and-seek with the Soviets. "It's really quite startling."
Just saw the new submarine movie "K-19 the Widowmaker", and was inspired to revive this thread.
Passive sonar is basically computer-enhanced listening, with acoustic signatures matched to a database of such for identification. The systems used by the USN and Royal Navy are sophisticated enough to identify individual submarines within a supposedly identical class.
Active sonar is the type referred to by Joby in her original post. Think of the "ping...ping...ping..." in WW-II submarine movies and you'll get the idea.
I know a fair number of former sub-drivers and sub-hunters. They tell me that it's nearly always preferable to use passive sonar. Using active sonar from a submarine is like an infantryman standing up in the middle of a firefight to get a better sight picture. Surface ships don't risk giving themselves away (enemy subs know they're there anyway) and aircraft aren't at hazard, but using active sonar tells the enemy that you know (or are nearly certain) that he's there, and you're about to shoot him. This gives him a chance to take countermeasures. Better he should continue fat, dumb and happy. His first indication of your attack should be your torpedo in the water, coming his way.
So I doubt that the new sonar system will have consequences as dire as Joby predicts. As for why such systems are important, read the news story below.
Strelnikov
Far Eastern Economic Review magazine: August 15, 2002 issue
“We All Live For Another Submarine”
(A multi-billion dollar arms race is gaining speed in Asia's waters. Some countries are preparing new defence strategies; others simply seek symbols of maritime power. Either way, for manufacturers, there's a lot of money to be made.)
By David Lague, Hong Kong
A little more than a decade after the deadly Cold War cat-and-mouse between Soviet and Western submarines came to a close, underwater rivalry is intensifying in Asia as regional powers compete for control of strategic waterways.
A multi-billion dollar undersea arms race is gathering momentum as established powers and smaller nations rush to build or buy potent new submarines. The competition threatens to shift the power balance between some of the region's long-standing military rivals and poses a potential threat to key trade routes.
China, Taiwan, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea, Japan and Australia are already taking delivery or have ordered advanced, stealthy submarines armed with state-of-the-art missiles and torpedoes that will give their navies the capacity to strike targets at sea or on land far from their home ports.
Defence analysts are already questioning whether the United States, the overwhelmingly dominant regional power, would risk sending aircraft carrier battle groups to intervene in any clash across the Taiwan Strait if China is successful in deploying an effective fleet of submarines by the end of this decade. To the experts, this is a clear demonstration of the attraction of submarines for regional navies despite the burden on limited defence budgets and technical challenges in operating these vessels.
"You get a fairly big bang for your buck in simple terms," says Peter Horobin, a Perth-based defence analyst and former Australian navy submarine commander. "With relatively little outlay in money and people, you can make it very difficult for anyone who wants to do you harm."
That doesn't mean submarines come cheap. Australia's new fleet of six Swedish-designed, Collins-class submarines will cost close to $3 billion when the final vessel is delivered later this year, and there are still costly teething troubles to be solved. And, the purchase price is just the beginning. Every six years or so, a conventional submarine needs a complex major refit that involves virtually pulling it apart in dry-dock. The submarine can be out of action for a year.
Despite these costs, as regional economies have recovered from the 1997-98 financial crisis, governments have found it easier to afford submarines.
To some, submarines are becoming a naval fashion item, a demonstration of technical and military prowess. "They are almost a status symbol of maritime power," says another retired Australian submariner, John Dikkenberg, a columnist with Asia-Pacific Defence Reporter magazine.
Tokyo-based security analyst Akio Watanabe agrees that some orders appear to be motivated by "non-strategic" factors. In any case, it's a bonanza for the world's major conventional submarine builders in Russia, Germany, Sweden and France. "Perhaps one can speak of an arms race among suppliers rather than among buyers," says Watanabe, president of Japan's Research Institute for Peace and Security.
The submarine rivalry between China and Taiwan is probably the most intense in the region, with Beijing now expecting to take delivery by 2007 of up to eight advanced Russian-built Kilo-class conventional submarines in a contract worth $1.6 billion, according to reports last month in the Russian press and defence industry media.
These extremely quiet and difficult-to-detect submarines, combined with the four Kilo-class submarines already in service in the Chinese navy, could form the core of a force to allow China to blockade Taiwan's ports.
China already has a fleet of more than 60 locally built conventional and nuclear submarines, but these are mostly obsolete or plagued by technical problems. In fact, some analysts believe that Beijing's latest submarine order is an admission that a decades-long effort to develop a domestic submarine-building industry has largely failed. Nevertheless, experts believe some of China's locally built submarines could still play a role alongside the Russian imports in a crisis.
Predictably, Taipei has attacked Beijing's submarine order. Defence Minister Tang Yiau-ming said it would assist Beijing in mounting a blockade of the trade-dependent island. "Communist China is seeking to expand its naval power from near sea to far sea which would threaten regional security," he told a news conference on June 28.
One factor behind Beijing's move to add to its Kilo-class fleet is widely believed to be the Bush administration's decision last year to supply Taiwan with eight conventional submarines, worth up to $4 billion. Senior U.S. defence officials have long held that China is carefully tailoring its military build-up to force re-unification with Taiwan. This view was reinforced with the July 13 release of a Pentagon report that said Beijing was developing a range of strategies other than straight-out invasion to meet this objective, including missile strikes, blockades and cyber-warfare. "Preparing for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait is the primary driver for China's military modernization," the report said.
One strategy would be for China to blockade Taiwan's ports in a bid to force Taipei to begin talks on re-unification. Of course that might not work, and could bring the U.S. Navy to the rescue. From China's point of view, a top-class submarine fleet might make Washington think twice about sending major warships to the Taiwan Strait.
Instead, the Bush administration's pledge to sell submarines to Taiwan was aimed at giving Taipei the capability to resist a blockade on its own. While most modern militaries have a range of anti-submarine ships and aircraft, it is widely agreed that the most deadly submarine hunter is another submarine. "To prevent a blockade by Chinese submarines from taking place, Taiwan would naturally want to build counter-force by obtaining, if possible, a certain number of submarines for themselves," says Watanabe.
Unfortunately for Taiwan, the U.S. has not built conventional submarines for decades, preferring an all-nuclear fleet. And no other builder has shown a desire to risk Beijing's wrath by filling the order.
Despite this, the Pentagon appears determined to find a way to add to Taiwan's existing fleet of two old U.S.-built submarines and two relatively modern, Dutch-built Zwaardvis-class submarines.
Taiwan's Defence Ministry confirmed on July 23 that a high-level U.S. team had arrived in Taipei to discuss plans to build the submarines and there were unconfirmed reports in the local press that they had offered to build Taiwan a new fleet from German or Israeli designs. Two U.S. companies, General Dynamics Corp., the parent of nuclear submarine builder Electric Boat, and Northrop Grumman Corp. have shown interest in building the submarines in conjunction with a foreign partner, according to U.S. defence officials.
Speculation intensified that moves were underfoot to fill the Taiwan order when a Chicago-based investment company, One Equity Partners, moved in March to take a 75% stake in Germany's Howaldswerke Deutsche Werft (HDW) the world's leading builder of conventional submarines. The Berlin authorities have insisted that submarines for Taiwan will not be built on German soil but the 75% stake could give the U.S. access to the crucial design know-how.
Competition between China and India for maritime influence is also a key factor in New Delhi's determination to boost its force with 20 new submarines over the next decade. India is negotiating with Russia to lease two nuclear submarines and buy up to six conventional submarines. Talks are also under way with France's state-owned shipyard, DCN, to supply up to 12 Scorpene conventional submarines. New Delhi wants these deals to include technology transfers so that a domestic submarine-building industry can supply longer-term orders.
While most attention is drawn to these big-ticket defence transfers, Japan is quietly building one of East Asia's biggest and most advanced fleet of submarines. This 20-strong force could exert decisive influence over the regional security climate as the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force gradually emerges from decades of isolation, particularly if Tokyo plays a more active role in its alliance with the U.S. One of the most modern Japanese submarines has been converted to a new, air-independent propulsion system that would allow it to remain submerged for long periods without the need to surface and recharge its batteries. This means that future Japanese submarines could boast a performance similar to that of nuclear submarines.
Japan's build-up is believed to be the major reason behind the expansion of South Korea's submarine fleet. The German government last year approved the transfer of about $600 million in equipment so that Hyundai can begin building three new HDW Type 214 submarines at its shipyard in Ulsan. The South Korean navy late last year deployed its ninth HDW-designed submarine.
Similar rivalry with a neighbour was widely believed to be a factor in Malaysia's decision on June 5 to sign a contract with France's DCN and Spain's IZAR to take delivery of two Scorpene class submarines by 2008. Kuala Lumpur has also ordered an ex-French navy Agosta submarine for training. The three-submarine deal is reported to be worth over $1 billion.
In March, Singapore took delivery of its second ex-Swedish navy, Sjoormen-class submarine. Another two are on order. However, Malaysian officials have rejected suggestions that an arms race is under way with its tiny but militarily strong neighbour. With Singapore and Malaysia in the submarine club, Thailand is also considering its underwater options. The Thai navy has held talks about the possibility of buying three used Israeli submarines but most regional defence analysts doubt the deal will go through.
When all of these submarines on order come into service, Asia's key waterways could again become as crowded below the surface as they were at the height of the Cold War. "The security climate is changing rapidly as regional governments seek to boost their maritime influence," says Horobin, a veteran of deep-sea hide-and-seek with the Soviets. "It's really quite startling."
