It occurs to me that of the qualities ascribed to nuclear submarines that justify their expense over “conventional” boats — speed, range (more precisely: the practicality of operating in distant theatres), and submerged/total endurance — only the latter is of real significance for ballistic missile submarines.
As such, I am wondering whether ongoing development of SSK technology — AIP systems, lithium-ion batteries — could eventually bring us to the point where a non-nuclear ballistic missile submarine is a practical (and less expensive) option for the nuclear deterrence role.
What got me thinking along these lines was the following marketing copy from DCNS regarding their SMX Ocean concept being pitched (likely unsuccessfully) to Australia:
The French engineers working on the SMX Ocean project have pushed the capabilities of a conventionally powered submarine to the very limit. The result is a vessel that is unique in terms of range and operational capabilities. The SMX Ocean is designed for missions lasting up to 90 days – twice as long as the Scorpene – and boasts a continuous transit speed of 14kts, which is faster than any conventional submarine has achieved so far. DCNS can offer this performance by drawing on its latest innovations in propulsion systems. In addition to six 1250-kW diesel engines, the SMX Ocean is equipped with two fuel cell systems and three lithium-ion batteries. This state-of-the-art air-independent propulsion (AIP) system allows the submarine to complete two week-long submerged transits and remain submerged for one month after arrival in-theatre.
By: Rii - 18th April 2015 at 03:09
The DCNS concept was provided only as an illustration of what is possible with 2015 technology. Power density in battery technology has been increasing at the rate of 50%/decade for the last thirty years or so. Improvements in AIP technology are slower, I expect.
With issues like this and significant operational limits the question, for me, would be who has a requirement that this kind of SSB is the answer for?!!
This seems to be the sticking point. If you are already committed to supporting SSNs, from naval reactor design, to shore support facilities, the investment required for a nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine is correspondingly reduced.
Nonetheless the obvious candidate nations would be those looking to field nuclear weapons on conventional submarines anyway: Israel and Pakistan. In the event that they decided to pursue a nuclear deterrent, South Korea and/or Japan could be interested in such a platform as well.
By: Jonesy - 18th April 2015 at 00:38
Not a straightforward answer to that one. I think there would be opposite answers to the question of could you make an SSB out of the DCN design and would you make an SSB out of it.
Could you do it I’d imagine yes….been done before….the chacteristics and performance figures lend themselves to high discretion rates for extended periods.
Would you though…to my mind…only in a fit of lunacy!. First point of course is the reality test…the boat has to match the claims and there are some wild claims there. I’d need to see empirical data before I fully believed a lot written in the advertising.
There is much noise made about propulsion…not so much about hotel loads though. Nuclear boats have a surfeit of power generation to drive onboard processing and sensor suites….HVAC installations….fresh water generation etc. For SMX these things are driven at the expense of propulsion as the AIP fuel is finite. Then there is the hull volume constraint. DCN seem to suggest a diameter of about 29ft. Even the old Polaris A3s were more than 32ft long. Increasing hull diameter will hurt performance or endurance or both!. So to go with your smaller submarine you need a new smaller missile. Cheapo solution starts looking costlier!. This is even more the issue when you see that its also playing host to bootnecks, uuvs, sdvs, etc, etc….gotta fit it all in somewhere!!!.
With issues like this and significant operational limits the question, for me, would be who has a requirement that this kind of SSB is the answer for?!!
Sign In
April 17, 2015 at 4:10 pm