Replacing the Subs

[Kirkhill]

DRDC had been conducting some research for the Canadian Arctic Underwater Sentinel Experiment at the research center at Gascoyne Inlet on Devon Island. It was a network of ice resistant sensors, with UAV's and AI to analyse sounds from Lancaster Sound. The site during the cold war used to listen from submarines apparently. I was up in 2017 doing some things with HMCS Shawinigan in support of that.

What I would suggest is stationing a ice resistant fixed offshore platform and station it right in the middle of the chokepoint with personnel. Not too far from Resolute for helo transfers. You could station all manner of weapon systems on the platform or ashore that could make it a bad day for any submarine. The platform could also double as a SAR platform.

View attachment 94348View attachment 94349View attachment 94350

I knew they reminded of something

Maunsell Forts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

WW2 Maunsell Forts built in the Thames and Mersey estuaries to control the approaches to London (and prevent the Germans doing what the Dutch Admiral de Ruyter did in 1667) and to Liverpool. The picture shown is of the "Navy" style. Apparently the Army had different requirements.



....

Apparently they have been around for a long time

Forts had been built in river mouths and similar locations to defend against ships, such as the Grain Tower Battery at the mouth of the Medway dating from 1855, Plymouth Breakwater Fort, completed 1865, the four Spithead Forts: Horse Sand Fort, No Mans Land and St Helens Forts which were built 1865–1880 and Spitbank Fort, built during the 1880s, the Humber Forts on Bull & Haile Sands, completed in late 1919, and the Nab Tower, intended as part of a World War I anti-submarine defence but only set in place in 1920.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Is that any different for UUVs? For static or dormant UUVs? And where is the dividing line between a UUV and a torpedo or a mine?

The Arctic is a very difficult sound environment. At the ice edge and where there is a lot of moving ice, there is a lot of background noise (why do you think the large ice flows crushing into one another are called "growlers") and in the narrow and at times shallow waters of the Archipelago, you can get some weird sound effects.

This said, ships and submarines have different sound characteristics that can be distinguished from one another and from the background noise or from biologicals by highly trained operators with the right equipment or in a few years, I suspect by AI programs with the proper training.

That's where the line between mine, torpedoes and UUV is to be drawn: Torpedoes in and of themselves can neither differentiate, but they are launched and aimed by humans that can; mines are neither launched by humans nor capable of differentiating; UUV will soon be able to apply AI programs (mines and torpedoes are too small and underpowered to carry such equipment and run the required programming) to the issue of differentiating, even though human intervention will not be possible for the most part.

Given the water depth , bad charts etc is there that much submarine traffic?

The answer is no, if you are a submarine with under ice capability, why would you want to go there when you have the whole open space of the Arctic ocean to your North to use instead. However, if there are open hostilities and for some reason we have important facilities/assets up there, you never know: Gunter Prien did take U-47 into Scapa Flow.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Arctic is a very difficult sound environment. At the ice edge and where there is a lot of moving ice, there is a lot of background noise (why do you think the large ice flows crushing into one another are called "growlers") and in the narrow and at times shallow waters of the Archipelago, you can get some weird sound effects.

This said, ships and submarines have different sound characteristics that can be distinguished from one another and from the background noise or from biologicals by highly trained operators with the right equipment or in a few years, I suspect by AI programs with the proper training.

That's where the line between mine, torpedoes and UUV is to be drawn: Torpedoes in and of themselves can neither differentiate, but they are launched and aimed by humans that can; mines are neither launched by humans nor capable of differentiating; UUV will soon be able to apply AI programs (mines and torpedoes are too small and underpowered to carry such equipment and run the required programming) to the issue of differentiating, even though human intervention will not be possible for the most part.

The answer is no, if you are a submarine with under ice capability, why would you want to go there when you have the whole open space of the Arctic ocean to your North to use instead. However, if there are open hostilities and for some reason we have important facilities/assets up there, you never know: Gunter Prien did take U-47 into Scapa Flow.

Not to be argumentative, or at least no more than usual , but

Australia To Buy 'Smart Sea Mines' In Billion Dollar Deal That Can Differentiate Between Military & Civilian Ships

Australia is moving forward with its plans to purchase advanced sea mines to defend its territorial waters from Chinese and other potential enemies' naval incursions,

www.eurasiantimes.com

It seems to me that the lines between mines and dormant UUVs, or between smart torpedoes, especially tethered ones, and tethered UUVs/ROVs, are greying out.

A "mine" that can lay quiet on the bottom, sort out the signals from the noise, determine the signature of the vessel passing over head, AND, when required, start its engines and manoeuvre out of the way of the occasional growler, seems to be within reach. If it isn't already here.

I am guessing the Aussie plan also involves these things - The Anduril Ghost Sharks

Anduril unveils Ghost Shark XL-AUV prototype in Australia

Anduril debuts the first prototype of Ghost Shark, the Royal Australian Navy's new XL-AUV platform, on time and on budget.

www.naval-technology.com

....

The AOPS as a patrol vessel, could also act as a tender to manage both large and small UUVs. A fixed "SAR" platform with a pair of AOPS could supervise a field of replaceable sensors.

And if hostilities broke out drop a couple of IAMD/C-UAS containers on board all surface platforms and load up the UUVs with explosive payloads.

...

If we can solve the Arctic on the cheap, and the Atlantic and Pacific Approaches, then there will be more money for the Blue Water Fleet, the Army and Air Force, and for national infrastructure.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Interesting.....

Hanwha Ocean Adds Financing Deal to Poland Submarine Sale Proposal​

"We know that financing is a critical enabler of the Orka programme, and that is why we are already working with the new Korean government, which is also strongly committed to supporting defence exports, to prepare a financing package tailored for Poland," he added.

The commercial bank financing offer, the result of an international tender, is independent of EU funds, Hanwha Ocean said in a press release, adding that in parallel, long-term financial instruments supported by the South Korean government were also being considered.

"Hanwha Ocean can deliver the first (KSS-III) submarine within six years of contract signing, one of the shortest timelines in the industry today," Kim added.

"Our base proposal envisions delivering each follow-on submarine every 12 to 18 months. But, however, if the Polish Navy prefers, we can accelerate the delivery of the second and third submarines, potentially reducing the total programme timeline."

Hanwha Ocean Adds Financing Deal to Poland Submarine Sale Proposal

Hanwha Ocean has added a comprehensive financing deal to its proposal to sell Poland submarines, the South Korean shipbuilder said on Friday…

www.marinelink.com

 

[calculus]

Interesting.....

Hanwha Ocean Adds Financing Deal to Poland Submarine Sale Proposal​

"We know that financing is a critical enabler of the Orka programme, and that is why we are already working with the new Korean government, which is also strongly committed to supporting defence exports, to prepare a financing package tailored for Poland," he added.

The commercial bank financing offer, the result of an international tender, is independent of EU funds, Hanwha Ocean said in a press release, adding that in parallel, long-term financial instruments supported by the South Korean government were also being considered.

"Hanwha Ocean can deliver the first (KSS-III) submarine within six years of contract signing, one of the shortest timelines in the industry today," Kim added.

"Our base proposal envisions delivering each follow-on submarine every 12 to 18 months. But, however, if the Polish Navy prefers, we can accelerate the delivery of the second and third submarines, potentially reducing the total programme timeline."

Hanwha Ocean Adds Financing Deal to Poland Submarine Sale Proposal

Hanwha Ocean has added a comprehensive financing deal to its proposal to sell Poland submarines, the South Korean shipbuilder said on Friday…

www.marinelink.com

If we don't stop faffing around we're going to lose our spot at the front of the line....

 

[OldSolduer]

Thunder bird subs....

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Thunder bird subs....

You mean Number Four?

 

[YZT580]

You mean Number Four?

which would suit Carney. Gee, I tried but Poland, and probably a dozen others by the time he gets off his lieberal ass, were ahead of us in sequence. Sorry

 

[Underway]

which would suit Carney. Gee, I tried but Poland, and probably a dozen others by the time he gets off his lieberal ass, were ahead of us in sequence. Sorry

Relax. Its a 60 billion dollar project. There is going to have to be a competition. You can't just sole source that stuff. You have to go through the proper process as much as I'd LOVE to see a commitment right away. The Request for Proposal hasn't been written yet and needs to go out, then the companies that want to bid need to put their packages together and bid.

That's going to take probably a year from now for that whole process. Then they have to go over the bids and select a winner. Then probably fight a court battle from the losers somehow. And then away we go.

Not sure where the hostility is coming from, seriously, this amount of money needs to be done properly, this isn't a 3 billion dollar radar or something! Lol

 

[YZT580]

Relax. Its a 60 billion dollar project. There is going to have to be a competition. You can't just sole source that stuff. You have to go through the proper process as much as I'd LOVE to see a commitment right away. The Request for Proposal hasn't been written yet and needs to go out, then the companies that want to bid need to put their packages together and bid.

That's going to take probably a year from now for that whole process. Then they have to go over the bids and select a winner. Then probably fight a court battle from the losers somehow. And then away we go.

Not sure where the hostility is coming from, seriously, this amount of money needs to be done properly, this isn't a 3 billion dollar radar or something! Lol

not hostility so much as we are aware of the time required for a project that should have been on the boards 10 years ago. If you are talking delivery starting in 35 with final acceptance sometime around 50 you are probably not going to be ready for the next war. The time since WW2 is the longest our nation hasn't been in a war since confederation and with things the way they are it appears that respite may come to an abrupt end. 2050 is 25 years from now. Think of all the mini wars over the last 25 years starting with Afghanistan and one might become a little concerned that we were starting off way behind the 8 ball. Google the chinese navy of 25 years ago and no look at . Brother we had better shorten those procurement times

 

[Nvlgzr]

not hostility so much as we are aware of the time required for a project that should have been on the boards 10 years ago. If you are talking delivery starting in 35 with final acceptance sometime around 50 you are probably not going to be ready for the next war. The time since WW2 is the longest our nation hasn't been in a war since confederation and with things the way they are it appears that respite may come to an abrupt end. 2050 is 25 years from now. Think of all the mini wars over the last 25 years starting with Afghanistan and one might become a little concerned that we were starting off way behind the 8 ball. Google the chinese navy of 25 years ago and no look at . Brother we had better shorten those procurement times

Carney needs to be given a chance to follow thru on his promises. I don’t expect him to do nothing like Prime Minister Socks. Heck he’s already on his second defence minister! Agreed the project should have started 10 years ago. It should have started as soon as we received the last Upholder from UK. My impression at the time was they were purchased as an interim measure so that we figure out what our navy should look like moving forward.

 

[Underway]

not hostility so much as we are aware of the time required for a project that should have been on the boards 10 years ago. If you are talking delivery starting in 35 with final acceptance sometime around 50 you are probably not going to be ready for the next war. The time since WW2 is the longest our nation hasn't been in a war since confederation and with things the way they are it appears that respite may come to an abrupt end. 2050 is 25 years from now. Think of all the mini wars over the last 25 years starting with Afghanistan and one might become a little concerned that we were starting off way behind the 8 ball. Google the chinese navy of 25 years ago and no look at . Brother we had better shorten those procurement times

Ok now I understand your motivation. I think we are moving pretty quick though given the situation. I would not be surprised if this takes to 2027/28 to get a final decision, depends on a few things. The supposed procurement reorganization is one of those things.

 

[GR66]

An interesting new capability being developed for Virginia-class submarines:

Project Revolver: The U.S. Navy's Concept for Multi-Packed Torpedoes in the Indo-Pacific - Naval News

The Revolver program in development by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) is rapidly moving forward into the fleet to provide much deeper magazine depth for torpedoes on Virginia-class SSNs.

www.navalnews.com

I wonder if these would be compatible with the torpedo tubes on the KS-III?

 

[Nvlgzr]

An interesting new capability being developed for Virginia-class submarines:

Project Revolver: The U.S. Navy's Concept for Multi-Packed Torpedoes in the Indo-Pacific - Naval News

The Revolver program in development by the Office of Naval Research (ONR) is rapidly moving forward into the fleet to provide much deeper magazine depth for torpedoes on Virginia-class SSNs.

www.navalnews.com

I wonder if these would be compatible with the torpedo tubes on the KS-III?

Sounds similar to the IDAS system developed for the 212 submarine a few years back

 

[Nvlgzr]

Sounds similar to the IDAS system developed for the 212 submarine a few years back

Whoops. At first I thought this was a missile system not a miniature torpedo.

 

[PHughes]

Sounds similar to the IDAS system developed for the 212 submarine a few years back

TKMS has development an antiairfaft missile system that is 4 packed into a standard 21 inch torpedo tube for the Type 21x family of subs

IDAS (missile) - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org