Share this comment
And, dare I say it, since we can't build them ourselves buy some Diesel/AIP from other countries. I don't suggest them as replacements for SSNs but as taking up some of the work load. These could be used for the inevitable close to home missions should war breakout as well as operate from tenders or foreign bases closer to the lanes in t…
And, dare I say it, since we can't build them ourselves buy some Diesel/AIP from other countries. I don't suggest them as replacements for SSNs but as taking up some of the work load. These could be used for the inevitable close to home missions should war breakout as well as operate from tenders or foreign bases closer to the lanes in the Pacific/Indian ocean. These boats could concentrated on the Chinese merchant fleet while the SSNS undertake strike missions and go after Chinese Navy assets. They are smaller, smaller crews less maintenance demands and can use smaller dry docks.
That's why I am all for the US Navy buying some Diesel/AIP submarines to free up the workload from the SSN's. The Diesel/AIP Submarines can be used for Forward deployed missions. Even for Close to home missions such as defense of CONUS and US territories. It would free up the SSN's for Strike missions and Carrier escort missions. On top of that, the Diesel/AIP subs can be used by USSOCOM in inserting and extracting special ops teams in the littoral waters. Imagine sneaking in a special forces team in the littoral waters and extracting them in the littoral waters. On top of that Diesel/AIP Submarines can make a great adversary training platform, similar to TOP GUN school and Red flag.
Forward deployed modern AIP diesel boats akin to what our allies use will be very effective in ASUW and even ASW. Getting in and out of the mission area is the hard part. Once on station, they are hard to kill and very deadly.
having served on USS BARBEL SS580 i can say they are no replacement for a SSN, I am guessing the even the modern Diesel/AIP boats would take a few days from Japan to SCS to engage.. they do add the stealth aspect when submerged. I was a eager convert to SSNs and looked fondly at my SS580 days...
Their was an article that was written in 2010 that made the case for the US Navy to acquire a small number of SSK submarines for Forward deployed missions in the shallow waters. The Article is linked below
The Right Submarine for Lurking in the Littorals by By Milan Vego
https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2010/june/right-submarine-lurking-littorals
Name your pool of countries with a 21st century AIP design and the yard capacity and workforce necessary to meet their own countries needs for construction and maintenance AND still be able to produce AND maintain a score or so of boats for the United States.
Spain, Japan, Germany, France, Korea, Sweden, maybe Italy could probably step up. a lot of submarine builders out there.
Spain-2 (21st century design x 0)
Japan-22 (Sōryū-class x 12, Taigei-class x 2)
Germany-6 (Type 212A x 6)
France-8 (21st century design x 0)
South Korea-19 (Dosan Ahn Chang-ho class x 2, Son Won-Il class x 9)
Sweden-6 (Södermanland-class x 1)
Italy-8 (Todaro x 4)
So across the pool of proposed countries we have a total of 36 submarine hulls of seven 21st century classes. Color me skeptical that they could meet their own navy's needs for construction and maintenance along with a hypothetical US demand. We should maybe purchase from our adversaries who seem to have a bit more capacity even if they lack quality controls.
PLAN - 59 (Type-035B x 5, Type-039 x 13, Type-039A x 17)
Russia - 49 (Improved Kilo x 10, Lada x 1)
It's still better than 1-2 boats a year from EB and NPN. Remember this is an addition to what the US builders are doing with SSNs not a replacement.
And you're under counting the shipbuilding capacity.
France has capability to build they just lack funding. May smooth over
ruffled feathers after AUKUS.
Germany Siemens -Thyssenkrupp builds for many other countries: Israel, ROK, Greece, Egypt, Italy, Norway, Greece, Portugal, Turkey, Singapore. They have capacity.
Same thing with Sweden's Kockums, Japan's Kawasaki-Kockums and ROK's Hyundai HI and Daewoo SME.
Just license the 212, 214, Scorpiene and/or KSS III designs and send the order and funding to any allied ship building firm that will take the contract.
The point is to rapidly build up the fleet with combat credible boats.
I am sure all these manufacturers will jump into the SUBSAFE program to. Or was the intent that foreign builds wouldn't require that?
Buy French subs, run'em in the Med.
About SUBSAFE - Metallurgist Admits To Falsifying Navy Submarine Steel Strength Test Results For 36 Years
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43069/metallurgist-admits-to-falsifying-navy-submarine-steel-strength-test-results-for-36-years
Lets say Korea, Japan and Europe each deliver two hulls a year. In two years that 12 subs - doable once they start building. Some say that the Korea and Japanese shipyards are all in range of China's missiles. My response is that if we don't have those boats in the water before the shooting starts we are already too late.
What they build for themselves is what they can afford, we string out our own procurement over multiple fiscal years. It also does not account for what they export or reflect capacity. Japans and Korea's combined shipyard capacity exceeds China's. We sadly are hardly a blip on the statistical chart. I think wee rank 19th in the world. Hard to call yourself a maritime power with that stat.
A license build of one class in different countries is not that far fetched.
Look at our Constellation class frigates. Nor is operating different classes of ships /boats. Look at our WWII fleet.
Spain's S-80 is a 21st Century design
The Latest version of the French Scorpène is certainly a 21st century design. 12 hulls built 6 more on the way all for export.
Sweden's design are good and upgradable. and they have built for export - Australia, Demark and Singapore.
With the money and persuasion (counting these boats towards their NATO contribution each year), it can get done.
Just need the design then send the contracts to every yard in NATO and US that can build them. Most of the maritime powers build these boats. Hell, even Chile builds them.
100% They just need to be based close enough to the fight to get in and out quickly. Once on location they are deadly and hard to kill. They are also proven technologies that are A LOT cheaper than SSNs and quicker to build and easier to crew. Again not replacing the SSN but if you need to double your sub fleet size in a short amount of time, this is how you do it.