Posted on 09/04/2017 11:32:37 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
With the Republic of Korea Navy currently operating the Type 209 and 214 submarines, the Moon Jae-in government is moving to build nuclear-powered submarines to better deter threats from North Korea's submarine-launched ballistic missiles. / Graphic by Cho Sang-won
South Korea is moving in earnest to build the nation's own nuclear-powered submarines as part of efforts to enhance its domestic defensive capabilities amid evolving threats from North Korea's nuclear and missile programs.
The move is in line with President Moon Jae-in's vow to better deal with North Korean submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) threats.
During his presidential campaign, Moon said, "We need nuclear-powered submarines in this era," pledging to make efforts to revise a nuclear cooperation deal between South Korea and the United States.
In accordance with Moon's aims, the Republic of Korea (ROK) Navy is working to commission a private institute to conduct a feasibility review for building such a sub.
In an apparent bid to gain support from the U.S., which virtually controls the uranium enrichment and nuclear fuel reprocessing of South Korea, Defense Minister Song Young-moo reportedly mentioned the need for Seoul to have its own nuclear submarines during his meeting with U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis at the Pentagon last Wednesday.
President Moon also broadly mentioned the need for the nation to have these during his phone conversation with U.S. President Donald Trump in early August.
Calls for developing the nuclear subs were reignited after the North successfully launched an SLBM in April last year. Another SLBM fired in August that year flew about 500 kilometers, indicating significant improvement compared to previous tests.
Defense officials and experts said Pyongyang's possible deployment of SLBMs could pose a grave threat as it is hard to detect when and where they will be launched.
Supporters for having nuclear subs say they are the only way to counter the North's SLBM threat, saying they could strike the North's submarine before it launches a missile.
They say a nuclear submarine does not have to surface frequently as it is powered by a nuclear reactor, making it difficult for the enemy to detect them.
The ROK Navy currently operates the Type 209 and 214 attack submarines.
The Type 209 sub is propelled by diesel-electric transmissions and is capable of remaining underwater for only about two to three consecutive days as it needs to surface frequently to access air. There is great possibility for this submarine to be detected by an enemy every time it surfaces because of its heat and noise.
The Type 214 sub, an improved version of the Type 209, uses air-independent propulsion that allows a non-nuclear sub to operate without access to the air. This sub is capable of continuing underwater operations for a maximum 13 to 14 days.
On the other hand, a nuclear-powered sub can operate underwater almost unlimitedly as long as other conditions such as food supply are met.
Currently, only six nations ― the U.S., Russia, Britain, France, China and India ― possess their own nuclear-powered submarines.
The South Korean military reportedly has the capability to construct a small nuclear reactor for a nuclear-powered submarine, but the problem lies in other challenges such as how to secure enriched uranium for fuel.
The first question is whether the U.S. would approve of Seoul's uranium enrichment activity to operate nuclear subs.
Some say that the Seoul-Washington nuclear cooperation deal, revised in 2015, would allow Seoul to enrich uranium to a level of 20 percent when using U.S. ingredients.
But critics point out that the agreement disallows the uranium enrichment for military purposes. This is why President Moon vowed to work to revise the deal.
Even if Seoul got the nod from the U.S., the development of a nuclear submarine could still provoke controversy over whether or not the South Korean government should shift its position from the 1991 inter-Korean denuclearization declaration. Ahead of this, South Korea ratified the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1975 and has remained formally committed to it since then.
"This can be a problem even though a nuclear sub is not armed with nuclear weapons but uses nuclear fuel as a power source only," a source said, asking not to be named.
Other problems are possible protests from neighboring countries, especially China, which is already protesting the deployment of a U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery on South Korean soil.
China believes that the deployment of the THAAD battery seriously harms its national interests. Park Won-gon, an international relations professor at Handong Global University, said, "From China's point of view, if the development of nuclear submarines is realized in Seoul, it would threaten Beijing's national security much more than THAAD would."
nuclear powered energy stations all over the country would be huge for manufacturing.
I wish they would do that in the USA. Build a self-contained site, bury it underground, when the fuel runs out dig it up and replace it.
The 214 boats with AIP may have advantages in ASW over the nuclear boats. And you can build a lot more for your money. Unless ROK plans to project power, the 214s are a better bet.
That’s weird, I thought AIP was good for one month or maybe even a little bit more, these days.
Why not? They’ve been one of the preeminent shipbuilders in the world for decades.
I despise any article that states what “China believes” based on the pronouncements of the Chicom thugs,the real intent of which is to get over on the rest of the world.
What is SoKo going to do with a nuclear sub?
The sub will what? ...circle in a 1 mile radius?
Considering nuclear-powered subs might be the best way to get the attention of the Chinese and their vicious little lap dog. But would the superquiet Swedish subs be a more economical solution? (AIP, air-independent propulsion, as others have mentioned.)
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/swedens-super-stealth-submarines-are-so-lethal-they-sank-us-18383
agree 100%
The Nork difficulties have the objective of making America NEED China’s most generous pacification skills, thereby inducing American debt, expenditure of political resources, etc.
“Norks do it so CHINA doesn’t have to”
Keeps our attention off of trade problems, South China Sea, etc.
“OMG thank you so much, China..!” —said by REAL suckers
Since Sweden appears doomed to become a 3rd world country before long, the Koreans should consider trying to lure away the country’s best and brightest engineers. For that matter, America should try to poach them.
Good point!
The AIPs are quieter. SK doesn’t need far-ranging nuclear subs. Sounds like SK is copying our very own military-industrial complex. Expensive unnecessary toys.
The money used for this diverted from civilian food production will cause how many starvation deaths?
True, but there are other considerations.
If you build more boats you have to man them. More men, more training, more space at the docks for berthing them.
And how many boats do you need? ROK on needs enough boats to keep an eye on NRK’s boats.
If ROK fields too many boats in a limited patrol area they increase the chances of collision with shipping traffic or other boats.
One Nuke boat may be able to do more than two diesel boats with fewer men more safely considering the size of the territory to be patrolled.
It is not an easily made decision.
Precises figures are not available for obvious reasons, but the Type-214s can reportedly go around 20 days submerged on AIP AT 4-5 knots.
The nuclear boats of today (on average) have about 100-110 personnel (based on British and U.S. subs); the current Type 214s of the ROK Navy have about 35-40 men, so you could in theory have 3 D/E subs for one nuclear sub in terms of manpower.
Given that the Korean Peninsula is not the biggest around, one would assume that they are looking at nuclear propulsion to carry a nuclear deterrent.
The Type-214s from Germany (and of which South Korea is the biggest operator) are said to have a more advanced AIP system and have won far more export orders than the Swedish subs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.