Posted on 10/20/2006 12:01:51 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Pentagon: New Class Of Silent Submarines Poses Threat
POSTED: 6:54 pm PDT October 19, 2006 UPDATED: 6:15 am PDT October 20, 2006
SAN DIEGO, Calif. -- The Pentagon said it believes the greatest undersea threat facing the U.S. Navy since the end of the Cold War has arrived.
The threat involves a new a new class of silent submarines -- subs that the U.S. Navy is having trouble finding under water. In this exclusive investigation, NBC4's Chuck Henry looked into one of those submarines in San Diego.
Following is a verbatim script from the on-air report.
CHUCK HENRY: The threat is real. And it has the Navy so concerned that it's turning to Sweden for help. That's because the Swedes have those silent submarines.
And right now, one of them is stationed at Point Loma. Earlier this month, NBC4 had unprecedented access to the Swedish sub and its crew.
What NBC4 aired few people have ever seen and certainly not in the United States.
On the surface it looks like any other submarine, but the U.S. Navy said it could be the most dangerous sub in the world.
FREDERICK LINDEN: Being noisy is something that is dangerous for us.
HENRY: Fredrick Linden is the commander of the HMS Gotland. He and his crew of 29 call the sub base at Point Loma home. They came to San Diego because the Navy is worried about this new generation of silent subs.
The Pentagon leased the Gotland for one year, but now has extended the lease for a second year, as they try to learn why this submarine so difficult to find underwater.
Subs have always had two weaknesses: they make noise and can't stay submerged very long. But the Gotland runs on a high-tech system called Air Independent Propulsion -- or AIP.
LINDEN: With AIP, I can stay submerged for weeks.
HENRY: Not only can the sub stay submerged for up to a month, the AIP technology also makes it quieter than other subs, and almost impossible to pick up on sonar.
When the Gotland wants to be silent and undetectable, especially along coastal waters, there's not a place it can't go. And that's one of the reasons it's here.
Since last summer the Navy has spent months playing a game of cat and mouse with the Gotland off San Diego, and time after time the Swedish sub has eluded its pursuers.
HENRY (TO COMMANDER): As an adversary, how good are you at what you do?
LINDEN: Very good.
HENRY: Can you tell us about your accomplishments?
LINDEN: We are satisfied with being good.
HENRY: According to Swedish newspapers, in training exercises the Gotland has sunk our most sophisticated nuclear submarines. But perhaps even more disconcerting, it reportedly sunk our largest aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Reagan.
NORMAN POLMAR, NAVAL ANALYST: She's really run rings around our carrier groups.
HENRY: Norman Polmar is a military analyst specializing in naval intelligence. He says since the end of the cold war, funding of the navy's anti submarine warfare program has been scaled back dramatically.
As the U.S. funnels billions into the war on terror, countries like North Korea, China and Iran are building or trying to get submarines like the Gotland.
Two months ago in the Persian Gulf, Iran tested a new anti-ship missile fired by one of its subs.
If the Iranians are successful in getting a Gotland-class submarine, it could pose a new silent danger to vital oil tanker traffic in the region.
POLMAR: With more of these submarines being bought by countries that don't particularly like us, Iran being a good example, yes, there is a potential. There is a threat.
HENRY: And the commander of the Gotland knows just how vulnerable the United States could be if a sub like his fell into the wrong hands.
HENRY: If you look at our coast, North America, is there any place that you can't go?
LINDEN: No.
HENRY: No place?
Linden then shakes his head.
HENRY: Although this emerging undersea threat is a top priority for the U.S. Navy, the U.S. is committed to its nuclear submarine force, and has no plans to develop subs like the Gotland.
The Navy says it just wants to know how to detect and kill them.
Copyright 2006 by NBC4
Betcha my wife could hear 'em...
Bigger LOX tanks? I thought the Gotland was really clever when I first read of the joint exercise. But now I'm convinced that the German (fuel cell) technology is potentially better. It eliminates the necessity of dumping the combustion products of the Stirling engines' heater out of the pressure hull. It also reduces the moving parts count to a minimum.
Both the Swedish and German boats are very small and can offer only limited storage space for torpedoes and/or missiles. The Gotland was ferried to San Diego with a surface ship. It appears that these "pocket" subs are best suited to coastal defense and may have problems with "blue water" sailing. Our best defense may be to just stand off in deeper water with our missile boats.
Regards,
GtG
PS The Swedish boat is co-ed. What red blooded sewer pipe sailor could resist that duty?
NORMAN POLMAR, NAVAL ANALYST: She's really run rings around our carrier groups.
It must be appropriations time again. I cannot believe that the military would be casually informing the world about its weaknesses.
I would almost guarantee that there is some sort of countermeasure for the AIP boats, for the right price.
I find it surprising they agreed to allow the US Navy such close scrutiny of their boat. Wouldn't they want to preserve their advantage? What do they gain by cooperating with us?
-ccm
I still haven't gotten over my grudge against Toshiba for selling out to the Soviets. Toshiba products are not allowed in my house.
Not a patentable idea. The Japanese tried it 65 years ago.
I wonder why this news is even coming out of the Pentagon since it all seems like "loose lips" stuff.
Well for one thing we're paying them well for use of the boat and crew. For another thing it's great training for them. Finally I don't think they consider us high up on their list of potential threats.
I wonder if we get to inspect any detail of the construction and blueprints that we want.
-ccm
I have no doubt that there is a lively flow of information in both directions.
I hope they are not the only clueless ones out there on this subject.
WOW!
one way is to look for holes in the ocean... your passive detection decides on what the normal ambient background noise level is, then, you look for places that are LESS than the normal background level. because SOMETHING... is between you and what should be out there and if there's nothing on your charts, good chance it's not a good thing.
The Siemens fuel cells are also safer.The biggest problem with AIP now is that subs cannot go beyond 5-7 knots to achieve endurance.So the Stirlings can give you 15 days but at a speed of 3-5 knots.
Being only about 1,600 tonnes,they can hold only about 20 weapons,which is small by American standards(though a US boat weighs nearly 4 times that much for less than twice the weaponry!!!).Anyway,The Russians recently unveiled a conceptual version of their Amur-1650 class AIP submarine for the Indian navy which had an 8 cell VLS for long range cruise missiles in addition to 18 torpedo tube weapons.That's a pretty novel concept if you ask me.
I think industrial concerns can play a role in preventing the US from getting too close to the Gotland class blueprints.The firm that built it,Kockums is now part of a German firm.
excellent post!
Well, actually that sounds like their adapting the idea from our implementation with the tactical conversions of the four Trident Subs into mere "conventionally armed" ships. They are retrofitted to carry 4 VLS tubes in each regular launch tube space to launch non-nuclear Tomahawks.
Well hasn't the USN been into VLS SSNs as it is from the late 70s???
No. The Tomahawks were previously launched from the torpedo tubes, along with their predecessors the SUBROC missile/torpedo.
Ru sure???The L.A class attack subs built since the end of the 70s have all been armed with vertically launched Tomahawks.
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.