Defence`s Feeds

General Dynamics (GD) Electric Boat has been awarded a $95.5m contract modification from the US Navy to continue development of the common missile compartment (CMC).

What do you need to move people? How do you put some life into a machine? How do you take advantage of the power of Nature?

Information warfare is as old as warfare itself and an integral part of today’s modern hybrid warfare. It intends to undermine the very notion of objective information or ethical journalism and its tools are deployed to destabilise the political, economic and social situation of a country under attack. In the SEDE meeting of 4 May, Members will discuss, with the help of experts from Moldova and the EEAS, the case of Moldova in the information warfare against Eastern Partnership countries.
Further information
Draft agenda and meeting documents
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Following a proposal by Federica Mogherini, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Vice-President of the European Commission, as Head of the European Defence Agency, EDA Member States have decided unanimously to extend the initial three year mandate of Jorge Domecq as Chief Executive of the Agency for an additional two years, up to 1 February 2020. 

Jorge Domecq leads the EDA since February 2015. Mr Domecq’s prolongation comes at a crucial time for EU defence in general, and for the European Defence Agency in particular. As the Agency is crucially involved in the practical implementation of all recent European defence initiatives - from the EU Global Strategy and its Implementation Plan to the European Defence Action Plan (EDAP) and the implementation of the EU-NATO Joint Declaration – Mr Domecq’s extension will provide the necessary continuity in EDA’s top team to make sure the Agency can play its role to the full.

The implementation of the EDA’s Long Term Review, which was set in motion by the Head of the Agency last autumn and that Ministers will consider at the 18 May Steering Board and the upcoming launch of the European Commission’s Preparatory Action on Defence Research (PADR), in which the EDA will play a central managing role through the signing of a delegation agreement with the Commission, are two additional challenges lying ahead of the Agency and its re-confirmed Chief Executive.

More Information:

• Profile of Jorge Domecq 

On 3 May, SEDE will welcome Rini Goos, Deputy Chief Excutive of the European Defence Agency and Rear Admiral Waldemar Gluszko, Deputy Director General of the EU Military Staff to discuss the on-going review of the EU's Capability Development Plan. The discussion will provide an opportunity for Members of the committee to evaluate the EU's capability priorities and requirements and the progress made since the last review.
Further information
Draft agenda and meeting documents
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Americas

• Lockheed Martin has posted weaker-than-expected sales and lower profitability in three of four divisions, making it the first cut Lockheed has made to earnings per share estimates in seven years. Stock fell more than 2 percent as the company slashed their forecast by 10 cents to $12.15 to $12.45 per share, from $12.25 to $12.55. According to the firm, higher development costs for a United Arab Emirates’ missile defense system were partly to blame for the charges. In response, Lockheed is pursuing international expansion with a goal of growing the international customer base to 30 percent of total sales.

• BAE Systems has developed a new 3-Dimensional Advanced Warning System (3DAWS) to help protect military aircraft from threats. Designed to protect aircraft in a multi-threat environment using layered countermeasure defense, the 3DAWS maximizes the effectiveness of current flare and directable infrared counter-measures, and also provides tracking capabilities for future soft- and hard-kill counter-measures. The system uses a passively-cued, semi-active radio frequency tracker as an adjunct to the company’s Common Missile Warning System or any future passive threat detection system. Furthermore, the system is modular and built to open architecture standard allowing for easy integration with US Army aircraft.

Middle East & North Africa

• Kuwait has moved ahead with a planned purchase of 30 H225M helicopters from Airbus. The helicopters had been selected by Kuwait back in August but the deal had remained unfinished by the end of 2016. Now, it’s expected that the $1.8 billion contract will be ratified “over the next few weeks,” according to the company’s CEO, Guillaume Faury. News of the deal comes as Airbus gears up to release their first-quarter results today, where details on the company’s backlog, as well as the financial impact of the continued grounding of the civil H225 in Norway and the UK, are expected to be released. Heavy restrictions were put in place on operating the aircraft last April following the aftermath of a fatal crash of a H225 on Norway’s west coast.

Europe

• Two US F-35As have landed in Estonia for the first time, in what is being described as a show of NATO solidarity and reinforcement of US commitments to protecting NATO members along Russia’s borders. The visit of the Joint Strike Fighters, which flew from UK and spent several hours in Estonia, is part of broader US jet pilot training program across Europe as the NATO alliance seeks to deter Moscow from any possible incursion in the Baltics. Training with the fifth-generation fighters is expected to last several weeks and the F-35 pilots will undergo exercises with other NATO aircraft as well as showcase the fighter’s capabilities to allies that are also acquiring F-35 fleets.

• The French government has placed orders for two types of newly-designed armored vehicle platforms as part of the SCORPION program. Thales, Nexter, and Renault Trucks Defense will deliver over 300 models of the Griffon, a 6×6 multi-role personnel carrier, and the 6×6 Jaguar, which is armed with a 40mm gun and anti-tank missiles. The exact order by the French procurement agency, DGA, for 319 Griffons and 19 Jaguars, comes just after 27 months of vehicle development. Paris is likely to use the Griffon to replace the VAB Hot personnel carriers currently used by the French Army, while the Jaguar will replace the army’s wheeled light tanks.

• DCNS has been contracted to build five intermediate-sized frigates for the French Navy. The vessels are to be based on the company’s BELH@RRA digital frigate, with the French design featuring additional self-defence and special forces projection capabilities a new generation radar from Thales, the Sea Fire four flat antenna radar, and Aster 30 missiles supplied by MBDA. Unveiled during the Euronaval 2016 expo, DCNS expects to have the French vessels in active service by 2025.

Asia Pacific

• South Korea is looking to add two additional EL/M-2080 Green Pine early warning radars to the two currently operated by their armed forces. Capable of detecting ballistic missile threats within a range of 800 kms, the extra radars are being sought amid the recent round of rising tensions between Seoul—with their ally in Washington—and an increasingly belligerent North Korea. Deliveries of the Israeli-made radars are expected to be made by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the South Korean government has confirmed that parts of the US THAAD air defense system have been moved onto the site of its deployment in the south of the country and that the deployment is expected to be ready for full operation by the end of this year.

• With tensions in the South China Sea higher than ever, Beijing has launched their first indigenously built aircraft carrier for the first time, although the vessel will not be ready to enter service until 2020. Little is known about the secretive carrier project, but Chinese officials have said the new carrier’s design draws on experiences from the country’s first carrier, the Liaoning, bought second-hand from Ukraine in 1998 and refitted in China. It’s expected that the new vessel will be able to carry China’s Shenyang J-15 fighter jets, and it features Soviet-designed ski-jump bows intended to give pilots and aircraft enough lift to take off from shorter decks. Once in service, the carrier will participate in military and humanitarian missions, while the Liaoning will serve primarily as a training vessel.

Today’s Video

• F-35s in Estonia:

ROK Flag

South Korea continues to modernize its forces, and take steps toward full sovereign control of its defenses. PAC-2 GEM+ missiles were ordered in 2008 to be operational in 2010 and fully in place by 2012. South Korea doesn’t appear to be aiming as high as Japan, with its license-produced Patriot PAC-3s and long-range naval SM-3 systems, but medium range SM-2 Block IIIA/B missiles fired from ROKN KDX-III destroyers do offer another limited option for the ROK’s coastal cities.

As countries like the UAE have been quick to recognize, turning a series of point defenses into a cohesive system that can respond in time requires long-range detection, and strong regional command-and-control systems. Now, a key contract has been signed, as South Korea prepares to field its Air and Missile Defense Cell (AMD-Cell) radars and command system.

Contracts and Key Events

Note that this article doesn’t cover every South Korean BMD purchase. It focuses on the core AMD-Cell command and control system, key radars, and overall assessments. Beyond that, it notes key milestones and decisions that may involve weapons within KAMD, like PATRIOT missiles, KDX-III destroyers, etc. Links to in-depth coverage of more specific systems are provided in the “Additional Readings” section.

2010 – 2017

KDX-III destroyer
(click to view full)

North Korea is believed to have deployed more than 600 short-range Scud missiles with a 320-500 km range, and around 200 Rodong missiles with a 1,300 km range.

April 26/17: South Korea is looking to add two additional EL/M-2080 Green Pine early warning radars to the two currently operated by their armed forces. Capable of detecting ballistic missile threats within a range of 800 kms, the extra radars are being sought amid the recent round of rising tensions between Seoul—with their ally in Washington—and an increasingly belligerent North Korea. Deliveries of the Israeli-made radars are expected to be made by the end of the year. Meanwhile, the South Korean government has confirmed that parts of the US THAAD air defense system have been moved onto the site of its deployment in the south of the country and that the deployment is expected to be ready for full operation by the end of this year.

April 18/17: South Korea will decide next month if their M-SAM air-defense system will be declared operational. According to sources, testing and evaluations of the low-tier missile system have been completed and it now awaits a final process next month to determine its suitability for intended combat missions. Seoul had initially intended to have the system deployed in the early 2020s, but ongoing tensions with North Korea caused the government to push the deployment between 2018 and 2019. Employing hit-to-kill technology, the system will intercept incoming hostile ballistic missiles at altitudes of around 20 kilometers.

May 27/14: Thinking THAAD through. The US government is considering exo-atmospheric THAAD interceptors as an option to protect American forces in South Korea, and has conducted a site survey in South Korea. The issue is that South Korea is developing its own national KAMD missile defense system, and continues to reiterate that it won’t be part of a joint system with the USA and Japan. Which means that interoperability with systems like THAAD is a potential issue.

The Americans are thinking in geo-political terms, as a visible response to North Korea, and there’s also that standard underlying “of course they want to do it our way and buy THAAD” flavor. Very American. The thought that perhaps South Korea is happy with its Green Pine radars, frequently says that terminal defense is all it can use, and would rather deploy its own Cheolmae 4-H missile developed in conjunction with Russia, never enters the picture. On the other hand, the Americans might reply that their own forces would rather have THAAD’s protection, that more than 2 long-range radars might be a good idea against an enemy whose war plan includes in-depth terrorist attacks, and that a shared set of PATRIOT PAC-3 and THAAD systems could create a basis for independent command and control systems that can still cooperate. Sources: Wall St. Journal, “Washington Considers Missile-Defense System in South Korea”.

May 26/14: KAMD. Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski looks at past and current regional tensions are preventing South Korea from fully participating in an integrated missile defense network with Japan and the US. The tensions have also prompted Seoul to modernize its defense industry, and to collaborate with Russia and Israel instead. It also has a good summary of KAMD’s current state and plans, though it fails to pay much attention to KM-SAM program efforts with Russia:

“Since 2006, Seoul has been working on low-altitude defence, the Korea Air and Missile Defence (KAMD), which would initially cost $3 billion. This is currently based on the Israeli C3I Citron Tree system and two Green Pine early warning radars. Since 2009, KAMD has included eight strategic location batteries with 48 launchers and 192 PAC-2 GEM-T missiles. Negotiations about the delivery of an additional 112 PAC-2 missiles from the U.S. are ongoing (at a cost of $404 million). Between 2008 and 2012, ROK Navy also received three modern KDX-III Sejong-class destroyers with Aegis systems and SM-2 missiles…. In the context of the growing threat, ROK has decided to augment KAMD further between 2016 and 2020, with American PAC-3 missile interceptors ($1.3 billion). Seoul is planning another three Sejong-class destroyers with SM-6 missiles, more advanced than the SM-2s. It is possible that Seoul will decide to buy more capable missile defence systems, such as THAADs, SM-3s, Arrows, or even S-400s. Due to the scale of the rocket threat, the large area of Seoul and the costs of interceptors, procurement of the Israeli Iron Dome system is much less likely. However, ROK is planning to buy 10 RPS-42 TASRS Israeli radars ($191 million) in the near future, for detecting drones and cruise missiles at very low altitude.”

Sources: ISN, “South Korea’s Air and Missile Defence: Below the Threat Level”.

April 28/14: PATRIOT. South Korea’s defense establishment formally confirms their intent to upgrade existing PATRIOT systems to PAC-3/Config-3 status (q.v. March 12/14). The budget is WON 1.3 – 1.4 trillion (about $1.25 billion), and they aim to deploy the system between 2016 – 2020. Sources: The Korea Herald, “Seoul to upgrade missile defense”.

PATRIOT upgrade OK

July 26/13: KAMD. South Korea is investing in deterrence and ISR capabilities that will complement its KAMD system, and plans to devote $63 billion of its $192.6 billion 2014 – 2018 budget period for KAMD and deterrent systems.

“The activation of a new Air and Missile Defense Cell (AMD-Cell) was planned for this month, after few months delay. This command and control center will support the entire KAMD enterprise. The AMD-Cell will integrate early warning and target tracks from multiple sources, including US Early Warning Satellites (DSP), SPY-1 naval radars deployed on the KDX-III AEGIS destroyers and the new, land-based Green Pine delivered by israel.”

Deterrent systems include their own ballistic missiles and mediu-long range cruise missiles, and the new budget also contemplates high-altitudes, long-endurance RQ-4B Global Hawk Block 30 jet-powered UAVs. These systems aren’t enough to seriously threaten China yet, but once deployed, they will create a full defense and kill chain that completely outclasses North Korea.

Even all of this equipment won’t stop the DPRK from destroying Seoul if the tense cease-fire reverts to full conflict. What it will do is make South Korean retaliation very thinkable if North Korea decides to shell populated areas, blow up a number of Cabinet members in a terrorist attack, sink South Korean ships, etc. as it has done in the past. An enemy that is comprehensively outclassed loses at least some of its escalation dominance, no matter how aggressive they may be. Sources: Defense Update, “Seoul to Invest US$63 Billion in Strategic Deterrence, Missile Defense”.

June 11-12/13: Naval. The Yonhap news agency quotes “a senior government official,” who says that its KDX-III destroyers will have their SM-2 missiles supplemented by SM-6 purchases as of 2016, as part of KAMD. The SM-6 will complement the ROK’s existing SM-2s. By 2016, they’ll be usable as terminal point defense against ballistic missiles, while also providing long-range air defense against enemy fighters, cruise missiles, etc. If the 2016 delivery date is fixed, it implies a 2014 order for SM-6 missiles. It also implies a future system upgrade for the ships, from a standard Aegis combat system to Aegis BMD 5.0.

On land, South Korea is looking to upgrade its PATRIOTs to the latest PAC-3/Config-3 standard. The question is how compatible that system will be with the USA’s missile defense systems. A working group has been set up with the USA, and findings are expected in early 2014. South Korea hopes to have KAMD v1.0 fully ready by 2020. Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to deploy new surface-to-air missiles for Aegis destroyers” | Global Post, “S. Korea aims to establish missile destruction system by 2020”.

Naval BMD OKed

Dec 23/12: Issues. Korea and the USA are talking about integrating AMD-Cell in Osan with the U.S. Forces Korea’s PATRIOTs. The problem is that they need to create a firewall that would insulate that joint system from other US BMD assets outside South Korea. Which is to say, in Japan.

Korea was invaded by Japan during WW2, and Japanese atrocities left a lot of hard feelings. South Korean governments have faced firestorms of criticism when proposals have been made to share intelligence with Japan, even if that intelligence concerns North Korean missile launches. North Korea’s networks of sympathizers in South Korea are happy to stir up those hard feelings up whenever it’s convenient, of course. Sources: SLD, “Defending South Korea: The Challenge of North Korean Missiles.

Dec 5/12: Green Pine deployment. South Korea’s Green Pine radars are almost ready to deploy:

“South Korea brought in two Israeli-made “Green Pine” radars this year, one of them in August and the other last month, and has since been conducting tests to ensure they have no defects.

“Acceptance testing of the Green Pine radar No. 1 comes to an end today with a final assessment of 24-hour continuous operation,” the source said. “It will be deployed immediately after the acceptance testing and will be in service when North Korea launches its long-range rocket.”

Testing of the second radar will be completed by mid-December and deployed thereafter, the source said.”

Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to deploy newly introduced radar ahead of N. Korea rocket launch”.

Green Pine radars deployed

Oct 28/12: PATRIOT. A joint study by the Korea Institute for Defense Analyses and the US Missile Defense Agency concludes that the PATRIOT PAC-2 system has an interception success rate of below 40% against ballistic missiles. South Korea’s government looked at that, then concluded that they need to buy PAC-3 batteries, in order to push their odds above 70% for covered areas.

The PAC-3 systems appear to be a priority, with deliveries to begin in 2014. To achieve that, a DSCA export request will need to be issued in the very near future. As PAC-3 systems arrive, South Korea reportedly plans to divert their billion-dollar buy of German PAC-2 batteries to defend against aircraft and cruise missiles. ROK’s Yonhap News Agency, S. Korea moves to upgrade Patriot defense system” | Chosun Ilbo, “PAC-2 Missiles Flunk Intercept Test”.

Oct 26/12: Made in Korea. Despite American urgings, South Korea sees America’s system as unsuitable for their needs. American systems tend to focus on midcourse intercepts, but the Koreans see hundreds of missiles just 5-10 minutes flight from their territory, and prefer terminal intercept capabilities. They also aren’t about to give up their own research and capabilities in this critical area, given their doubts about US resolve, but it’s best not mention this to your ally:

“The MD system that the United States envisions is a multi-layered defense system, which is fundamentally different from the Korean type of missile defense system that is oriented to low-layer defense,” a defense ministry official told reporters on condition of anonymity. “We cannot but build a low-layer defense system under operational situations on the Korean Peninsula. Therefore, building the KAMD (Korean Air and Missile Defense) means never participating in U.S. efforts to build a multi-layer defense system,” the official said.”

It’s the “never” that tells you there’s more at work here than just operational considerations. Sources: Yonhap, “Defense ministry denies possibility of S. Korea joining U.S. missile defense”.

April 10/10: KAMD. South Korea is sticking to its course and deploying an indigenous missile defense system, with initial deployment scheduled for July 2010.

“South Korea, which decided not to join the U.S.-led global missile defense system, has gradually been building an independent, low-tier missile shield called the Korea Air and Missile Defense System (KAMD) since 2006 by acquiring Patriot missiles and long-range early warning radars.

The KAMD involves early warning radars, ship-to-air and land-based missile defense systems, arming Seoul with the ability to track and shoot down the North’s low-flying, short- and medium-range missiles, with help of U.S. early warning satellites.”

Sources: Yonhap, “S. Korea to deploy indigenous missile defense system in July”.

2009

EL/M-2080 “Green Pine”
(click to view larger)

Sept 23/09: Israel Aerospace Industries announces a $280 million pair of contracts with South Korea, one of which covers the Oren Yarok (EL/M-2080 Block B “Green Pine”) radar. South Korea will join Israel and India as customers for the system. Globes adds that IAI’s usual contract policies involve a down payment of 25-35%, suggesting that it will record $70-98 million revenue from these contracts in its consolidated financial report for 2009.

Reports as early as Sept 17/09 had indicated that the Israeli radar had won the AMD-Cell competition against Raytheon and Thales, and that a contract was imminent. Earlier discussions had revolved around figures of about $215 million for 2 Green Pine radar systems, and current reports offer a figure of $200 million for an undisclosed number of systems. The low number of TA-50 and F/A-50 fighter orders at this early stage of their development, and the EL/M-2032 fighter radar’s low R&D needs given its mature state, make those figures plausible in the absence of a detailed breakout between the 2 contracts. Ha’aretz adds that:

“South Korea is discussing with the IAI the possibility of purchasing the Arrow missile defense system [link DID’s]. Israel is making contacts with other countries on this issue as well, with Turkey among those that have expressed interest. Nonetheless, chances are slim that a foreign country will purchase the Arrow before a joint Israeli-American missile defense development occurs.”

Ha’aretz is referring to 2 trends. One is America’s government using blocking tactics or pressure, in order to stymie Israeli sales to mutual allies in international competitions. If the equipment might be said to contain any American or American-derived technologies, the sale can be blocked outright, or simply made untenable by dithering over permissions. Otherwise, diplomatic pressure and sales of advanced American equipment to Israel become the lever. South Korea’s E-X AWACS competition, India’s MMRCA fighter competition, and Turkey’s tank competition have all featured as recent examples. The other trend is an evolving jockeying between Boeing’s GBI and Arrow, Raytheon’s SM-3 (which Israel is reportedly considering), and Lockheed Martin’s THAAD missile for significant long-term roles in land-based missile defense. IAI release | Korea Times | Ha’aretz newspaper | Globes business | Agence France Presse | Flight International.

2 Green Pine radars

May 19/09: Competition. The Korea Times reports that 3 foreign bidders have submitted contract proposals for South Korea’s AMD-Cell program: Israel’s Elta, Raytheon of the United States, and Thales Nederland.

IAI Elta’s Green Pine radar has already been discussed below. Thales Nederland manufactures a number of advanced active array naval radars, some of which are capable of ballistic missile tracking; SMART-L is probably the best known, and South Korea already uses it on their Dokdo class amphibious assault ships. Raytheon’s products include a number of missile defense radars, including the AN/TPY-2 used as part of the USA’s THAAD theater defense system.

South Korea’s DAPA defense procurement agency plans to select the finalist by the end of the year after reviewing each firm’s contract proposal, and finishing price negotiations.

Feb 15/09: Competition. The Korea Times reports that South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) is likely to select Israel’s EL/M-2080 Green Pine radar systems, buying 2 radar sets by 2010 in a WON 300 billion/ $215 million deal. Green Pine radars are an integral component of Israel’s own national missiles defense system, where they are used in conjunction with Patriot PAC-2 GEM+ missiles and Boeing/IAI’s longer-range Arrow-2 interceptors. They may also become part of India’s emerging ABM system.

Green Pine radars have a claimed detection range of 500 km/ 300 miles, which can be extended to 800 km/ 480 miles in the most modern versions. Just one of those “Super Pine” radars cold cover all of North Korea from a position well behind the armistice’s front lines.

The ballistic missile early warning radars are part of the ROK’s planned Air and Missile Defense-Cell (AMD-Cell), a missile defense command-and-control center that will play a key role in monitoring, tracking and intercepting incoming cruise and ballistic missiles from North Korea. AMD-Cell will reportedly be interoperable with US Forces Korea’s own theater missile defense system.

An anonymous source told the paper that the USA’s Forward-Based X-Band Radar-Transportable (FBX-T) was denied due to export restrictions, which the French M3R radar failed to meet all requirements. Overall:

“The DAPA concluded negotiations with foreign bidders over the selection of the early-warning radar systems last week and believes the Israeli radar is the most suitable for the country’s theater missile shield in terms of price and capabilities.”

Israel and South Korea have had limited defense ties over the years, but those ties appear to be growing. South Korea has begun buying Israeli UAVs, and Israel is considering South Korea’s T-50 jets as its future advanced flight trainers. See also: Korea Herald | Ha’aretz, Israel.

Additional Readings

• IAI – ELM-2080 Green Pine Radar system

• Radar Basics – Green Pine Radar

• Army Technology – Arrow 2 Theatre Ballistic Missile Defence System, Israel. Technically, an IAI/Boeing collaboration. Includes information regarding the Green Pine.

• Wikipedia – Arrow (missile). Includes a section covering the EL/M-2080.

• IEEE Digital Library (Oct 15-18/96) – EL/M 2080 ATBM early warning and fire control radar system. “This paper describes the system concept and some of the hardware design…”

Related Systems

• DID – Korea’s KDX-III AEGIS Destroyers. Naval component of KAMD national ballistic missile defense, which will use SM-6 missiles for terminal point defense.

• DID – Timely Defenders: Keeping Patriots in Shape. South Korea bought PAC-2 systems from Germany, and will be buying new missiles and upgrading the ground systems to reach PAC-3/Config-3 status.

• Defense Update (Dec 17/11) – Cheongung – a New MR-SAM for the South Korean Multi-Tier Defense System. Medium-range M-SAM system and Cheolmae-2/ Cheongung missile, developed in conjunction with Russia’s Almaz-Antey. May develop ABM capabilities with a larger Cheolmae 4-H missile, which would benefit from Russian S-400 technologies.

News & Views

• Missile Defense Review (Sept 3/14) – Patch up Asian BMD.

• ISN (May 26/14) – South Korea’s Air and Missile Defence: Below the Threat Level.

• Yonhap (May 26/14) – Acquiring SM-3 missiles not an option for S. Korea: defense ministry.

• Yonhap (Oct 15/13) – S. Korea seeks multi-layered missile defense against North.

• The Diplomat (July 26/13) – South Korea Goes All In On Missile Defense.

• RUSI (March 12/13) – South Korea’s Emergent Missile Defence Capabilities.

• SLD (Dec 23/12) – Defending South Korea: The Challenge of North Korean Missiles. More specifically, of integrating AMD-cell with US Forces Korea’s PATRIOTs.

• DID (Dec 1/08) – Raytheon Begins SAM-X/Patriot Missile Work in South Korea. Eventually led to sales of ground systems, which were combined with ex-German PAC-2 missiles.

The US Navy has collaborated with Raytheon to conduct a preliminary design review (PDR) of the new Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR).

The US Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) has awarded a new contract to HALO Maritime Defense Systems for the delivery of a fully automated waterside security barrier at Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia.

iX Cameras, leading developer and manufacturer of high-speed, slow-motion imaging cameras, is proud to announce a sales and distribution partnership with Zermatt LLC of Annapolis, MD.

French naval contractor DCNS has signed a new agreement to operate as a supporting industry participant with Australia's Defence Materials Technology Centre (DMTC).

Tag: aircraft carrierChina

Suite à une conférence qui s’est tenue à Varsovie le 23 mars 2017 intitulée „Intégration européenne - nouvelle ouverture” organisée par l’Institut des Affaires Internationales de la Pologne (PISM) et la Chancellerie de Premier Ministre de la Pologne (Kancelaria Prezesa Rady Ministrów) l’auteur souhaite présenter la voix de la Pologne dans la discussion autour de l’Europe.

La conférence était organisée à l’occasion de célébrer la soixante anniversaire de la signature des Traités de Rome.
Selon Beata Szydło, la Première ministre polonaise l’Europe d’aujourd’hui se trouve devant les quatre questions majeurs:
1. l’avenir de l’Europe est mise en question;
2. les crises en UE - la crise en zone euro et le Brexit ;
3. la crise migratoire;
4. le terrorisme (les nombreux attaques terroristes dans les capitales européennes).

Face à ces problèmes qui mettent en doute l’idée de l’intégration européenne celle de Jean Monnet et de Robert Schuman il faut souligner deux règles qui sont des fondements de l’UE: l’unité et la solidarité.
Par ailleurs, le gouvernement polonais se prononce contre „une Europe à multiples vitesses” on y voyant une force qui désintègre l’Europe de l’intérieur. La Pologne est pour plus de compétences attribuées aux parlementaires nationaux, pour une „solidarité élastique” et pour „une Union des Nations”.
„D’ores et déjà la Pologne constitue une partie intégrale de l’Union européenne” constate Beata Szydło.

Comment les dirigeants polonais voient la sortie de l’Union européenne de la crise actuelle?

Le 1er mars 2017 la Commission européenne publie un Livre Blanc qui désigne le besoin des réformes.
Les dangers les plus importants qui touchent actuellement la coopération européenne sont:
- les migrations;
- le marché commun est en crise;
- les dangers extérieurs.
Cette besoin de changements\réformes devrait venir de la volonté des citoyens européens. Ceux derniers démontrent de plus en plus souvent le manque de confiance aux élites politiques au pouvoir (et réciproquement - d’où la peur devant les électeurs). Les citoyens européens ont peur de perdre leurs sécurité:
- la sécurité économique (face à la crise économique montante de la zone euro);
- la sécurité vitale, celle de tous les jours (face à la crise migratoire et au terrorisme montant sur leur territoire).

Ici, il convient de souligner qu’une renaissance de partage Est/Ouest revient en Europe. Malheureusement, l’idée d’une Europe à plusieurs vitesses peut mener à des nouveaux partages stéréotypes en Europe, à la création des cercles intérieures d’intégration et à la création une „avant-garde d’intégration où les pays les plus forts domineront. Ainsi, une sorte de frustration est dirigée vers les pays de l’Est et leurs voisins. D’où vient encore une fois cette besoin de réformes qui est sans doute dans l’intérêt de toute l’Europe.
Andrzej Duda, le président polonais postule les priorités suivants:
- l’unité : les quatre unités européens - le droit, les institutions, le budget, le marché commun;
- la liberté : les quatre libertés : la libre circulation des biens, des capitaux, des services et des personnes.

En conclusion, les priorités de la Pologne dans le cadre de l’intégration européenne future sont suivants:
• plus de réactivité de L’UE (L’Union doit être plus réactive car souvent elle semble n’est pas prête de faire face aux problèmes qui apparaissent. Pourtant, elle est soumise aux processus globaux.);
• l’intégration élastique (pas de création de l’hiérarchie des forums d’intégration;
• question de libertés;
• l’intégration euro-atlantique;
• l’idée de „Trois-Mers” (Trójmorza) les mers: Adriatique, Baltique et Noire;
• plus de démocratie;
• une communauté des valeurs;
• l’élargissement de l’intégration européenne.

L’Europe face aux défis de la sécurité globale. L’Europe une forteresse ou un empire?

L’Europe d’aujourd’hui se retrouve confrontée aux défis suivants:
- le terrorisme;
- les conflits militaires;
- les empires extérieurs;
- le progrès technologique;
- l’impérialisme russe;
- la pression démographique - les migrations.

Aujourd’hui dans l’époque postatlantique, les dangers sont perçus des différentes manières - car les intérêts des États membres sont différents. Pourtant, face aux défis du monde de la globalisation, il est nécessaire qu’UE devient plus réactionnelle. Elle perds son attractivité et devient une institution qui se retire, se défend. De plus, elle constitue un obstacle pour elle même en approfondissant ses crises. La crise touche non seulement le continent européen mais aussi d’autres régions dans le monde entier. Tandis que l’Amérique mène une politique d’influences à l’extérieur, l’Europe prend une position défensive.
Pourtant, comme soulignait Fernand Braudel l’Europe constitue une Civilisation et les européens possèdent une Histoire plus longue.

écrit par dr Kinga Torbicka, chercheuse associée de l`Institut Europa Varietas

Tag: VarsovieKinga Torbicka

SMART HRS unveils a feature-rich, cost-effective, multi-level cell (MLC) Flash technology solution to applications requiring high-density storage for use in hazardous and / or critical environments.

will take place on Wednesday 3 May, 15:00-18:30 and Thursday 4 May 2017, 9.00-12:00 in Brussels.

Organisations or interest groups who wish to apply for access to the European Parliament will find the relevant information below.

Further information
watch the meeting live
Access rights for interest group representatives
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

SSBN-X concept
(click to view full)

The US Navy needs new SSBN nuclear missile submarines. Their existing Ohio Class boats will begin to retire at a rate of 1 hull per year, beginning in 2027, as they reach the end of their 42-year operational lifetimes. Hence SSBN-X, also known as the Ohio Replacement Program for now.

The first step toward recapitalization involved a new Common Missile Compartment and Advanced Launcher for current and future nuclear missiles. The next step involves finalizing a design that can serve effectively to 2080, without destroying the US Navy’s shipbuilding budget in the process. Good luck with that one, but they have to to try. The maintenance of the USA’s nuclear deterrent is too important, in a world where nuclear weapons are proliferating.

SSBN-X Background

Trident D5 (larger)
and C4 predecessor
(click to view larger)

The USA aims to begin construction of the new SSBN in 2021, and have the new type enter service with the fleet in 2031. A total of 12 boats would be produced, with the last boat expected to leave service around 2085. That’s a very long lifetime for a submarine, whose hull is alternately squeezed and released by water pressure as it dives and surfaces. Unfortunately, delays in starting the program mean that the USA is likely to end up with just 10 SSBNs from 2029 – 2042. If the Ohio Replacement Program suffers further development delays, this high-risk period will see corresponding extensions.

America isn’t alone in their pursuit. At present, Britain, France, India, Russia, and China are all working on new sub-launched ballistic missile systems and/or SSBN submarines. The American SSBN-X will be the end product of intense debate, especially given its aggressive production cost target of FY10$ 4.9 billion. So far, what’s known about the design includes:

Basics: The submarines will be about the same length as the Ohio Class at 560 feet, but may be a bit wider. They will be powered by a new-design reactor using 90% enriched uranium. Like the current SSN Seawolf and SSN Virginia Classes, the new reactor won’t need refueling during the submarine’s lifetime.

SSBN-X propulsion will be all-electric, which decouples the drive train from the turbines, and the pump-jet propulsor will use shrouded technology taken from the Virginia Class. The usual sail-mounted dive planes will be present, along with X-shaped stern surfaces.

One suggested way to save money was to reduce the submarine’s maximum speed from 20 to 15 knots. That would cut maximum power needs sharply, and reduce maximum required diving depth because the submarine won’t require as much space to pull out of a jam dive. The penalty would be poorer evasion of enemy torpedoes if the sub is found.

Sensors: SSBN-X is expected to use the horseshoe-shaped Large Aperture Bow Array (LAB) sonar that was developed for the Virginia Block III submarines. The submarines will undoubtedly deploy an array of other sensors, including flank sonars, towed sonar, fiber-optic masts that don’t have to penetrate the ship’s hull, ESM signal recognition and location technologies, etc.

The key will be making these sensors upgradeable at low cost. The 65 years from 2015 – 2080 is a huge amount of time in the technology world. If upgrades are too expensive, the entire SSBN force could find itself compromised mid-way through its life.

ULRM
(click to view full)

Weapons: The new CMC/AL assemblies are slated for production in blocks of 4 tubes, allowing the USA and UK to tailor the total number of missile tubes to their final submarine designs. Current American Ohio Class SSBNs have 24 tubes, but SSBN-X currently plans to reduce that to 16 tubes. The Trident II D5 missiles, which are being refurbished and improved, will switch over to the new boats as their initial nuclear weapons.

Beyond that, there are questions. Should the new boats have torpedo tubes, in order to protect themselves from enemies under, on, or even above the water? Or should they eliminate that feature and its accompanying space? Sometimes the best defense really is a good offense, but even if the torpedo or missile destroys its enemy, the act of destruction is a beacon to enemy forces as soon as they’re aware of it. Attention is the last thing an SSBN wants, so this is a last resort action. On the other hand, torpedo tubes are useful to keep up SSN training and testing roles, ensuring that American submariners remain proficient enough to be assigned between types.

Then there’s the question of non-nuclear payloads in some of the CMC missile tubes. Converted Ohio class SSGNs, for instance, have already replaced nuclear missiles with American special forces, land attack missiles, and UAVs. In a similar and related vein, the Virginia Class Block III fast attack submarine replaced their 12 vertical-launch cruise missile tubes with 2 Common Weapon Launcher (CWL) “six-shooters” derived from the SSGNs’ converted missile tubes. The size of those CWLs allows Virginia Class Block III submarines to launch cruise missiles, UAVs, UUVs, and more from these same tubes.

Nuclear missile submarines are a nation’s most strategic assets, because they are its most secure and certain deterrence option. One does not commit them casually, to any purpose. As key trends like cheaper sensors and the Robotic Revolution grind onward, however, the next 40 years will see big changes underwater warfare. SSBNs will need the flexibility to adapt and leverage these changes if they intend to survive. For the USA and Britain, their weapon launchers need to be part of that adaptation.

Contracts and Key Events

Note that Common Missile Compartment design, and refurbished Trident nuclear missile production, are covered by their own articles. Unless otherwise indicated, the US Strategic Systems Programs in Washington, DC manages the contract.

FY 2017

April 25/17: Electric Boat Corporation has been selected by the US Navy to produce 17 ballistic missile tubes for submarines constructed under the Ohio Replacement Program. Valued at $95.6 million, delivery is expected to be completed by December 2023. These upcoming Columbia-class submarines are being produced under the Common Missile Compartment program—joint effort with the UK to use the Trident ballistic missile as primary underwater nuclear deterrent—and will eventually enter service after 2031. Once in service, the vessels will serve as the primary undersea nuclear force for the United States for at least 50 years.

FY 2016

Shipbuilders Growing Impatient

October 6/15: The US’ top shipbuilders are growing impatient with the Navy over the Ohio-class Replacement Program (SSBN-X), with General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries both calling for the service to comment on a proposed workshare between the two yards. The two yards submitted a proposal for a working arrangement in March, which will see Electric Boat complete the majority of work for the twelve new subs; however the Navy has yet to finalize its procurement strategy for the program, despite advanced procurement scheduled to start in 2017 after a DoD review of the Navy’s acquisition strategy in mid-2016.

FY 2015

Mar 5/15: Congressmen praise new refresh effort.
At trade association forum, senator and representative both stressed the importance of replacing the boomers. They also, coincidentally, come from states with the major East Coast sub bases.

Feb 5/15: FYDP puts $10 Billion in kitty.The Future Years Defense Plan calls for a $10 billion investment, split between research and long-lead-time procurement, over the next five years. After that, the real money really starts to add up. The Navy today estimates that it will cost $100 billion to replace the existing 14 boomers with 12 new ones – an amount equal to Saudi Arabia’s gross domestic product at the end of the first cold war. Over their service life, they would be expected to cost roughly four times that. Several rear admirals have suggested that the navy will need budget relief to get this accomplished, yet still have funds to afford other shipbuilding programs. The idea of moving this big project off their books appears to be more and more frequently floated.

FY 2014

Specifications “finalized”; GAO and DOT&E reports; Proposal to move it outside of Navy budgets.

Plans 2014-2023
(click to view full)

June 10/14: GAO Report. The US GAO releases GAO-14-373, “Ten-Year Budget Estimates for Modernization….” of American nuclear forces. With respect to SSBNs:

“…the Navy’s Ohio Replacement Program included $27.8 billion in research, development, test, and evaluation and ship construction estimates over the 10-year period for a new SSBN. However, the Navy’s submarine-replacement program is further along in the acquisition process than either the Air Force’s ICBM-replacement effort, or its new bomber program.”

May 27/14: Sub-contractors. Northrop Grumman announces a contract from General Dynamics Electric Boat to design and deliver the Ohio Replacement Program’s 1st turbine generator units, which will provide all of the submarine’s propulsion and other electrical power. They add that the award “…follows separate ORP contract awards from General Dynamics to Northrop Grumman’s Marine Systems business unit for other ORP components.” Sources: NGC, “Northrop Grumman Selected to Provide Turbine Generator Units For US Navy’s Ohio Replacement Submarine Program”.

May 23/14: Politics. The Senate Armed Services Committee’s FY 2015 mark-up calls for the establishment of a separate budget to finance SSBN-X construction, instead of consuming the Navy’s shipbuilding budget for several years:

“Establishes a National Sea-based Deterrence Fund, to provide resources for ensuring that we implement the Ohio-class replacement program at the appropriate level of priority assigned to it by the Secretary of the Navy and the Chief of Naval Operations, with an [initial] authorization of $100 million.”

They’re going to have to reconcile that with the House bill before that becomes any kind of organizing structure for the program. Sources: SASC, “Senate Committee On Armed Services Completes Markup Of The National Defense Authorization Act For Fiscal Year 2015”.

April 7/14: Specifications. The US Navy has reportedly finalized the specifications for their new SSBNs. They’ll be about as long as the current Ohio Class, but with 8 fewer missile tubes (16 total). The submarines will have a new electric propulsion system, and the same kind of no-refuel reactor enjoyed by recent American fast attack boats. All of this was already established wisdom, and they aren’t saying much more than that publicly.

The latest Navy figures reportedly estimate $110 million per boat per year in operating costs. US Navy estimates at this stage of a program have a bad record, so caveat lector. Sources: DoD Buzz, “Navy Finishes Specs for Future Nuclear Sub” | USNI, “Navy Has Finalized Specifications for New Ohio-Replacement Boomer”.

SSBN spec done?

March 31/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2013, plus time to compile and publish. With respect to SSBN-X, the numbers are very large: $95.103 billion total for 12 boats, split $11.718 billion RDT&E and $85.385 billion in procurement costs.

“The Navy has set initial configurations for areas including the torpedo room, bow, and stern. In 2014, the program expects to complete initial specifications, set ship length – a major milestone – and start detailed system descriptions and arrangements.”

Navy officials are trying to reduce costs for boats 2-12 from an estimated FY10$ 5.6 billion to FY10$ 4.9 billion, and one approach is to seek commonalities with the Virginia Class and the UK’s Successor SSBN. The CMC itself is already doing some of that.

Jan 30/14: UUV launcher. A joint effort between the US Navy and General Dynamics Electric Boat is now testing a prototype Universal Launch and Recovery Module (ULRM) system that would launch and capture underwater drones from SSBN/SSGN vertical launch tubes, and from the Virginia Payload Module on forthcoming Virginia Class submarines. Diagrams show payloads up to a pair of Bluefin-21 (future SMCM mine countermeasures) UUVs, but the extend and launch method itself is adaptable to any new UUV that fits within the space.

This isn’t a development that touches the CMC directly, nor is it new. Indeed, engineer Steve Klinikowski’s idea was tabled in 2005, and a model was exhibited at DSEi 2011 in Britain. This article is particularly helpful in showing pictures of the mechanisms, and in confirming that ULRM has progressed to testing. If there was any doubt that the CMC’s tubes are likely to include payload options beyond nuclear missiles, those doubts are effectively removed. The time to contemplate those needs is right now, during the CMC’s design phase. Engineering.com Designer Edge, “Navy Begins Test of UUV Launch System” | Fox News, “Navy, Electric Boat test tube-launched underwater vehicle”.

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). CMC is included indirectly, as part of the “SSBN Ohio Class Replacement Program”.

SSBN-X is currently slated to include a new propulsor, a new electric drive system, and a degaussing system, all of which should make the new submarines harder to detect. The new nuclear reactor won’t require mid-life refueling, a long refit whose operational impact would have forced the USA to build 14 submarines instead of the planned 12. CMC provides the main weapons interface, and there’s currently a debate about whether to even give the SSBNs torpedo tubes. The Strategic Weapon System includes the Trident II D5 Life Extension missile, launcher, fire control, navigation systems, and associated support systems. Most of the SWS will be carried over from existing submarine classes, as will items like communications, sonar, and internal computer networks.

From September 2012 – July 2013, the Navy conducted an Early Operational Assessment (EOA) – an extensive review of Ohio and Ohio Replacement documentation to identify program risks, and a modeling and simulation study to compare the survivability of the existing and future submarine classes. The EOA did come up with some program risks, which are classified. The modeling and simulation was informative, but the acoustic and threat models need updating.

FY 2012 – 2013

The case for the program; Some specifications finalized, incl. all-electric propulsion; Navy decides not to adapt Virginia Class.

Ohio class SSBN, tubes open
(click to view full)

Jan 9/13: Long-lead. GD Electric Boat in Groton, CT receives a $15 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract modification for integrated tube and hull long-lead-time material in support of the Ohio Class Replacement Program. This contract combines purchases for the US Navy (50%) and the Britain (50%).

All funds are committed immediately, using FY 2014 RDT&E budgets and UK government monies. Work will be performed in Groton, CT, and is scheduled to be complete by November 2016. The USN’s Supervisor of Shipbuilding Conversion and Repair in Groton, CT manages the contract (N00024-13-C-2128).

Jan 26/13: All-Electric. TG Daily reports that the next American SSBNs will be doing away with their mechanical drivetrain, which connects the reactor turbines directly to the boat’s propellers. In order to make the boat quieter, and free up electricity for other functions, power from the reactor would flow into an all-ship electrical grid. Some of that power would be harnessed by electric motors connected to the shortened propeller shafts, and it would probably be more than the 20-25% available in more conventional nuclear designs.

This kind of “all-electric” system is becoming more and more common on naval surface ships, so its adaptation to next-generation submarines is unsurprising. Even so, the cramped, no-failure world of submarine design always adds new engineering challenges. The USN also plans to field its new SSBN submarines with reactors that don’t require mid-life refueling, something they’ve already accomplished on the Virginia Class fast attack boats.

Sub design 101
click for video

Dec 21/12: SSBN Design. General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $1.849 billion cost-plus-fixed-fee with special incentives contract to design America’s new class of ballistic missile submarines. GDEB will also undertake shipbuilder and vendor component and technology development; engineering integration; concept design studies; cost reduction initiatives using a design for affordability process; and full scale prototype manufacturing and assembly. Additionally, this contract provides for engineering analysis, should-cost evaluations, and technology development and integration efforts. This contract includes options which could bring the cumulative value to $1.996 billion.

Other efforts contemplated under this contract include the continued design and development of US unique Common Missile Compartment efforts; and continuing the design and development of the joint US Navy/UK CMC. About 8% of the contract involves foreign military sales to the United Kingdom.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (91%); Newport News, VA (7%); Quonset, RI (1%); and Bath, ME (1%), and is expected to be complete by September 2017. $183.1 million is committed immediately, with the rest allocated as needed; $8 million will expire at the end of the current fiscal year, on Sept 30/13. This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with FAR 6.302-1 by US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC (N00024-13-C-2128).

Initial SSBN design ordered

Sept 27/12: Integration. Lockheed Martin Space Systems Co. in Sunnyvale, CA receives a sole-source $51.6 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for engineering efforts to support next-generation SSBN programs. The firm was deemed to be the only company that could integrate the TRIDENT II Missile and Reentry Strategic Weapon System subsystems into the CMC, and design an updated missile service unit that will be compatible with both current and new submarine fleets. With options, this contract could rise to $52.2 million.

Work will be performed in Cape Canaveral, FL (50%); Sunnyvale, CA (34%); Syracuse, NY (10%); Magna, UT (2%); Washington, DC (1%); yet to be determined locations (2%); and other locations of less than 1% (1% TL); and will run until Dec 31/17 (N00030-12-C-0058).

Sept 24/12: Program Risk. US Navy Director, Undersea Warfare Rear Adm. Barry Bruner answers questions about the Ohio Class Replacement Program. He defends the Navy’s vision of 12 submarines instead of 14, with 16 tubes each instead of 24, at a target cost of $FY10 4.9 billion per hull for boats 2-12. At the same time, he acknowledges that the existing SSBN force will have a problematic period, which will become very problematic if the replacement program suffers any significant delays:

“Because ship construction of the Ohio Replacement shifted from the year 2019 to 2021, there will be fewer than 12 SSBNs from 2029 to 2042 as the Ohio-class retires and Ohio replacement ships join the fleet. During this time frame no major SSBN overhauls are planned, and a force of 10 SSBNs will support current at-sea presence requirements. However, this provides a low margin to compensate for unforeseen issues that may result in reduced SSBN availability. The reduced SSBN availability during this timeframe reinforces the importance of remaining on schedule with the Ohio Replacement program to meet future strategic commitments. As the Ohio Replacement ships begin their mid-life overhauls in 2049, 12 SSBNs will be required to offset ships conducting planned maintenance.”

If the Ohio Class Replacement Program manages to come in on time, and anywhere close to its budget, it will be a very unusual example within recent US Navy shipbuilding programs. The higher-odds bet, unfortunately, is that the USA is headed for serious problems with the readiness of its SSBN deterrent. With respect to costs, and proposals to use the Virginia Class or existing Ohio Class blueprints:

“To date, the Navy has reduced costs by reducing specifications to the minimum necessary to meet national strategic deterrent requirements, implementing modular construction design, re-using the Trident II D5 Strategic Weapons System, and re-using Virginia- and Ohio-class components where feasible….. has already reduced approximately $1.1 billion in construction per ship and ~$3 billion in design from its fiscal year 2011 plan (calendar year 2010).

….Although some savings would be realized due to lower design costs, an SSBN class based on a Virginia hull would require additional platforms, additional nuclear refueling, increased personnel costs, and its acoustic signature would be vulnerable to projected threats. Ultimately, the Navy would receive an SSBN class that is more expensive and less capable. Similarly, rebuilding Ohio-class SSBNs would save on design costs. However, the Ohio-class does not have sufficient stealth to stay viable out to the 2080s, and construction of more Ohio-class ships would not be able to take advantage of efficiencies of modern construction techniques.”

Sources: USN’s Navy Live, “Next Generation Ohio-Class”.

Sept 6/12: SSBN-X Specifications. US Navy, “Navy Signs Specification Document for the Ohio Replacement Submarine Program, Sets forth Critical Design Elements”:

“The Navy formalized key ship specifications for both the United States’ Ohio Replacement and United Kingdom’s Successor Programs in a document signed Aug. 31 at the Washington Navy Yard…. Ship specifications are critical for the design and construction of the common missile compartment, which will be used by both nations’ replacement fleet ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) programs. Specifically, the First Article Quad Pack Ship Specification establishes a common design and technical requirements for the four missile tubes and associated equipment that comprise each quad pack.”

CMC specifications

Oct 18/11: No Virginia. The US Navy has reportedly shelved the idea of a Virginia Class SSBN variant (vid. July 20/11), in favor of a new and quieter SSBN design that will carry the CMC. The question is whether that stance can last, given the new design’s current estimated cost of $7 billion per boat. If those costs rise, or budgets shrink, that Navy may find itself with fewer submarine platform choices than it would like. AOL Defence

FY 2008 – 2011

Britain joins common CMC program, launches its own future SSBN program; US Navy considering SSN Virginia Class adaptation.

Virginia Block III bow
(click to view full)

July 20/11: Virginias? To date, the assumption in America has been that CMC would equip a newly designed SSBN submarine, and GD Electric Boat has been hiring with the idea in mind. Connecticut’s The Day now quotes vice-Adm. Cartwright, Vice-Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as saying that budget cuts may force the Navy to lengthen its Virginia Class attack submarine, in order to fit ballistic missile compartments and act as an SSBN.

By nature, fast attack submarines tend to be less optimized for stealth than SSBNs. The Virginia Class is said to be remarkably stealthy, but the USA will still want improvements, and the weight/ size gap is very challenging. Ohio Class SSBNs are about 18,750 tons submerged. Britain’s Vanguard Class SSBNs are 17,800 tons, and France’s Triomphant Class SSBNs are 15,800 tons. In contrast, the basic Virginia Class is about 7,800 tons. Even with fewer missile tubes on board, finding a solution that offers an affordable extension, instead of a full submarine redesign that defeats the point of starting with the Virginia Class, won’t be easy. The Day.

July 6/11: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corp. in Groton, CT receives a $15.8 million modification to previously awarded contract (N00024-09-C-2100) for continued engineering, technical services, concept studies, and design of a common missile compartment for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the Ohio replacement SSBN submarine.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (93%); Quonset Point, RI (3%); Newport News, VA (2%); and Newport, RI (2%). Work is expected to be complete by December 2011. US Naval Sea Systems Command in Washington, DC manages the contract.

May 18/11: British go-ahead. Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox announces government approval for the early phase of design to replace the existing Vanguard Class. The new “Successor Class” submarines will use the same CMC launcher system as the USA’s SSBN-X, and fire the same Trident II D5 MK6LE missiles. They’ll also be powered by a new nuclear propulsion system known as the Pressurised Water Reactor 3, which is more expensive but safer. The design phase as a whole could be worth up to GBP 3 billion.

The Initial Gate approval ensures that more detailed design work will be undertaken and long-lead items ordered, even though the main build decision for the submarines will not be taken until 2016. Under current plans, the first replacement submarine is expected in 2028. For all further coverage of Britain’s new submarines, see “New Nukes: Britain’s Next-Gen Missile Submarines“.

Britain’s related SSBNs

Dec 23/08: General Dynamics Electric Boat Corporation, Groton, CT receives a $75.6 million sole-source, cost plus fixed fee contract to perform concept studies and design of a Common Missile Compartment (CMC) for the United Kingdom Successor SSBN and the USA’s Ohio Class Replacement program. This contract includes options which would bring the cumulative value of this contract to $591.8 million, and take design work to December 2013.

Work will be performed in Groton, CT (92%), Newport News, VA (4%), Quonset, RI (3%), and Newport, RI (1%), and is expected to be complete by December 2009 for the base contract, and December 2013 if all options are exercised. This contract was not competitively procured, and is formally run through the Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, DC (N00024-09-C-2100). At present, this contract involves Foreign Military Sales to the United Kingdom (100%), but that may change.

CMC: initial concept studies

Additional Readings Background: Related Technology

• US Navy Fact File – Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines – SSBN.

• GlobalSecurity – SSBN-726 Ohio-Class FBM Submarines.

• DID – Trident II D5 Missile: Keeping Up with Changing Times.

• DID – CMC Program Defining Future SSBN Launchers for UK, USA.

• DID – SSGN “Tactical Trident” Subs: Special Forces and Super Strike. the 1st 4 Ohios had their 24 tubes converted to cruise missile arsenals via rotary 7-slot launcher inserts, and also became mobile special forces bases.

• DID – New Nukes: Britain’s Next-Gen Missile Submarines.

Official Reports

• US GAO (June 10/14, #GAO-14-373) – Ten-Year Budget Estimates for Modernization Omit Key Efforts, and Assumptions and Limitations Are Not Fully Transparent. Not a problem for SSBNs, but it is for the USAf’s bombers and missiles.

News & Views

• Defense One (April 30/14) – Funding to Replace Nuclear Subs Up in the Air. It may be moved outside the Navy shipbuilding budget, as a national strategic item.

• Defense Tech (Oct 24/13) – Ohio Replacement Submarine Starts Early Construction. At least, CMC does.

• USNI Proceedings Magazine (September 2013) – The Future of Deterrence? Ballistic-Missile Defense. In other words, remove the USA’s SSBN capability. Doesn’t get a great reception from readers.

• USN’s Navy Live blog (Sept 24/12) – Next Generation Ohio-Class. Q&A with Rear Adm. Barry Bruner.

• USNI Proceedings Magazine (June 2012) – The Incredible Shrinking SSBN(X).

TOP 10 LIGHT UTILITY VEHICLES

General Dynamics (GD) Electric Boat has awarded a new contract to BWX Technologies’ (BWXT) subsidiary BWXT Nuclear Operations to develop additional common missile compartment (CMC) tube assemblies for the US Navy's future Columbia-class nuclear subma…

German engineers give speech on early procurement process in Singapore.

The French Defence Ministry has contracted DCNS to develop and build five intermediate-size frigates (FTIs) for the French Navy.