PDA

View Full Version : Those Navies who make the mistake of neglecting ASW - Analysis



xav
10-03-2008, 07:38 PM
I took the time to translate this myself, so hopefully it is more readable than a straight google translation...




http://www.meretmarine.com/objets/500/11086.jpg
Japanese AEGIS Destroyer

A brand new 10,000 tonnes Destroyer helplessly faced to an unknown submarine... This happened mid-September in Japanese territorial waters. Only 1000 meters away, officers of the destroyer Atago had the bad surprise to see a Sub's periscope. If the Atago was able to confirm the presence of an unknown sub with a "ping" from its hull sonar, the weakness of its ASW detection suite has prevented it from tracking the intruder, who was lost 90 minutes after first contact. AAW destroyer equipped with US Aegis system and an arsenal of some 104 missiles, Atago does not have any towed sonar antenna or passive ways that could enable it to track the submarine. The maritime patrol aircraft P 3-C Orion came too late on the scene and despite 50 hours of research, did not get more results.
In peacetime, this weakness has left a wound in the pride for Japanese. But in wartime, a Vessel of this category, no matter how powerful, could be sunk before you even realize the presence of a submarine. This experience emphasize that any deployment of these destroyers in a crisis area without anti-submarine warfare escort ships would be a huge risk.

http://www.meretmarine.com/objets/500/8164.jpg
Torpedo hitting a Frigate

The submarine threat has never been more important

In the case of Japan, this problem is not serious, since the country has a considerable fleet (47 destroyers and 8 frigates, including 34 with towed antennas). However, globally, there is a clear tendency to overlook the sea submarine threat to focus their equipment on Anti Air Warfare. These choices seem even more dubious that many countries facing significant budgetary constraints, reduce the size of their navies. This means that ships will move most of the time alone and unprotected (wihtout appropriate ASW solution), and they would act as dream targets for submariners. The example of the consequences that may pose the submarine weapon remains the one of the Falklands war in 1982. The mere sinking of the cruiser Belgrano by the British submarine HMS Conqueror has nailed the ports throughout the Argentine fleet. Therefore a Navy with no or limited modern ASW means is very vulnerable in the open ocean.
Twenty-six years later, has the situation changed? Obviously not, indeed quite the contrary. While what is happening above the sea is more visible, the threat from the deep has never been more important. Never so many submarines have been sold and, it must be remembered, a simple torpedo is all it takes to blow a 4000 or 5000 tons vessel. No anti ship missile is capable of this, yet... It may be noted that the proliferation of submarines in the oceans comes with the sale on the international arms market of increasingly dangerous dangerous. Example: Russian's rising wake torpedoes. (this one is hard to translate...)

http://www.meretmarine.com/objets/500/12092.jpg
FREMM European Multi Mission Frigate

The emergence of truly multipurpose ships

In this context and to meet the budget requirements of their customers, manufacturers are relying increasingly on multi-mission platforms. Installing a few basic systems, such as a sonar hull, tube-launched torpedoes and possibly a helicopter is not enough anymore. The real deal is to design platforms to respond effectively to any threat, whatever the theater. France and Italy have led the way with the Frigate European Multi-Mission (FREMM), which comes in several variants for the job you want. For now, the example of the versatility of the most successful family is probably the model being sold to Greece: 142 meters for a displacement of 6000 tons, this vessel offers a range of weapons and equipment without equivalent to one unit of this size. The frigate is designed to board 16 surface-to-air missile Aster 30 (70 km range) and 24 surface-to-air short-range VL Mica (20 kilometers). With the Herakles multifunction radar and strong electronic warfare, it is capable of self defense and offers an anti air "umbrella" for ships in its battle group. Add 8 Exocet anti ship missiles, and in the field of ground attack, 16 Scalp Naval Missile (1000 km range) and a 127 mm gun can draw against land targets. Despite these impressive capabilities, the FREMM proposed to the Greek navy is not helpless against submarines, far from it. It has a hull sonar, a towed sonar active at very low frequency (CAPT UMS 4229), light MU90 torpedoes and a helicopter. It is also possible to install on this platform anti-torpedo decoy launchers.
In short, means to keep your head high if a submarine were to stick his periscope out a few meters away ...

http://www.meretmarine.com/objets/500/12409.jpg
FREMM European Multi Mission Frigate

The article hits the nail on the head...
1 Torpedoes causes more damage than 1 missile, yet everybody focus on AAW...
With all these minisubs pop up everywhere (for drug shipping only for now, but for how long?) and nations like Nk, Iran, China, Venezuela relying heavily on these small subs and probably getting access to AIP technology, some navies are really lacking in anti sub warfare.

Mike D
10-03-2008, 10:13 PM
I'm curious where you got this because something doesn't smell right. I agree with your premise in that ASW is being given short shrift, but AAW is sexy and missiles get all the funding.

But the story doesn't smell right. The Atago is essentially a Burke DDG. It has a very good hull sonar and an excellent towed array sonar and it carrys a helo. The Burkes, hence the Atagos have one of the best and most advanced ASW sensor suites in the world. So if they "saw" the periscope visually then it had to be less then 10nm away. If they "saw" the periscope with radar then is was less then 20nm away. At that range a sub would have to be damn quiet, say Type 209 or newer sub on batteries. To stay quiet the sub would have to stay less then about 8kts. The Atago could get to the sighting point on active sonar in less the 30 minutes and in that time launched the helo and begun a search. In that time the sub could have gone only 3-5km max. If the Atago already had an active contact on the sub then they would have continued to ping to get range, depth and direction of travel data.

It would take an increadable confluence of environmental factors and the worlds best sub driver and sub to escape. The only way I can see it is if the water was too shallow for the Atago to stream the tail and there was canyons or some features that could hide the sub and an increadable thermocline. If it was some ship other then an Atago, like any of their DD's, or the DDH's (but they would have prosecuted with their helos) or the old DE's. Also

I'd be interested in getting commentary from some of our submariners on this.

Again I agree with the premise but the details of the story don't smell right to me.

As an aside why have countries not developed long range ASUW torpedoes. If your enemy has an impenetrable missile defense then it seems silly to launch missiles at it. Develop an advanced 65-76 or Type 613 or Type 62 type of torpedo that has a 25nm+ range. Wire-guided and wake homing, hard to escape.

old_pop2000
10-03-2008, 11:19 PM
Mike:

Here is news article from Daily Yomiuri Online - http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080920TDY04303.htm

I wonder if it might have been a whale or a captain with an over active imagination.;)

Scott Chisholm
10-04-2008, 01:53 AM
Mike:

Here is news article from Daily Yomiuri Online - http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/20080920TDY04303.htm

I wonder if it might have been a whale or a captain with an over active imagination.;)

A whale spout does look like a periscope feather - I can attest to that.

I can also attest to submarines being scary quiet. On TEXAS, we tripped over an OHIO off the Washington State coast. At first, we thought it was self-noise showing up on our SQS-53A hull mounted sonar (no tails for CGNs). You can only imagine our shock when we pinged and got a hard contact 4kyds off the bow, and 6kyds away from the CVN!

We were right in the middle of a VICTOR box, so we went nuts (this was in 1988). Assisted by a pair of SH-3s and a pair of S-3s, we dogged her for nearly an hour before SUBPAC told us to cease and desist. She then disappeared like smoke on a windy day....

We got sent to the penalty box for letting a sub inside the screen....

Her CO got fired for being found while on patrol.

xav
10-04-2008, 03:10 AM
Mike, it comes from Mer et Marine... a French website specialized in Navy (armed or commercial) news: http://www.meretmarine.com/breves_rubrique.cfm?mer_rubrique_id=2

They generally know very well what they are talking about...

Can you confirm that Atago has towed sonar?

xav
10-04-2008, 03:21 AM
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/Photo-Jmsdf-atago2.jpg

Look at the pic above:

The Atago pic shows two "Nixie" ports (As in SLQ-25A "Nixie" torpedo countermeasures.) on the starboard side of the stern plate for the "Nixie" fish, but the ship appears to lack a TASS "a**hole".

In contrast, the KD's appear to have a TASS "a**hole" but do not have "Nixie" ports:
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/Photo-ROK-Sejong2.jpg

p.s. For you non-navy types, in guys the USN refer to the TASS exit port as the "a**hole".

(explanations seen on keypublishing, but they actually make sense, looking at the pictures... Again Mer et Marine generally know their stuff, they are not mainstream but specialized in navy news)

xav
10-04-2008, 03:26 AM
Japan hunts mystery submarine intruder

Sep 14, 2008
TOKYO (AFP) — Japan's navy tracked a submarine that intruded into its waters for nearly two hours Sunday and then lost track of it without identifying its nationality, a military official said.
Naval vessel Atago spotted the submarine in Japanese waters at 6:56 am (2156 GMT Saturday) but the craft did not raise a national flag or surface, breaching international laws, a defence ministry spokesman said.
Atago, an Aegis-equipped warship, chased the submarine off the coast of Kochi prefecture in western Japan, facing the Pacific Ocean, until about 8:40 am (2340 GMT), he said.
"We have not identified the nationality of the submarine and we are still searching for it," the spokesman said.
Using sonar, Atago confirmed that the submarine does not belong to the Japanese navy nor its ally the US navy, he said.
"We will make a protest against the country through a diplomatic route" once Japan identifies the nationality of the submarine, Defence Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi said, according to Jiji Press.
It was the first time in four years that a foreign submarine had intruded into Japanese waters, according to the official.
In November 2004, a Chinese nuclear-powered submarine entered Japanese waters. Beijing apologised less than a week later.


http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jlVnNvYVrk5i98bXw1jM_Ajei-tQ

Mike D
10-04-2008, 04:00 AM
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/Photo-Jmsdf-atago2.jpg

Look at the pic above:

The Atago pic shows two "Nixie" ports (As in SLQ-25A "Nixie" torpedo countermeasures.) on the starboard side of the stern plate for the "Nixie" fish, but the ship appears to lack a TASS "a**hole".

In contrast, the KD's appear to have a TASS "a**hole" but do not have "Nixie" ports:
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/Photo-ROK-Sejong2.jpg

p.s. For you non-navy types, in guys the USN refer to the TASS exit port as the "a**hole".

(explanations seen on keypublishing, but they actually make sense, looking at the pictures... Again Mer et Marine generally know their stuff, they are not mainstream but specialized in navy news)

According to the Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World 2007 the Atago has a SQQ-89(V)15R suite running a NEC OQS-102 bow mounted low-frequency active/passive sonar and an Oki OQR-2 TASS towed array. The OQS-2 is an indigenous SQR-19(V) towed array and the OQS-102 is an indigenous version of the SQS-53C.

I actually trust the Naval Institute information more then Janes.

Rick
10-04-2008, 04:02 AM
For you non-navy types, in guys the USN refer to the TASS exit port as the "a**hole

Actually we called it the brass ass**** ;)

Heres a much better stern shot:

http://jmsdf.info/img/jmsdf_03075.jpg

Combat Fleets '05-'06 says her and her sister have the SQQ-89(V) Suite which includes a sonobouy processor, towed array and hull mounted sonars.

It could be one of the ports on the right is used for the Towed array sonar and the other for Nixie. I used to be a towed array tech and I dont see any problems with having the towed array off center, though it looks like it could be a bit cramped. Not knowing the below decks layout its hard to say.

Mike D
10-04-2008, 04:08 AM
Must be. If you look here http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/09NDgMbajBbSV/610x.jpg and here http://farm1.static.flickr.com/83/281521799_f8a5aec54b.jpg?v=0 at the transom of these Burkes you see the same two bung holes and nothing else you could stream a TASS from.

Rick
10-04-2008, 04:15 AM
(in the 2nd pic) The Flight 1 Burke on the left does, the port is just below the flag. The one on the right is a Flight 2 Burke, they traded a towed array for LAMPS capability.

Mike D
10-04-2008, 05:06 AM
(in the 2nd pic) The Flight 1 Burke on the left does, the port is just below the flag. The one on the right is a Flight 2 Burke, they traded a towed array for LAMPS capability.

Good catch, I missed it in the shadow under the flag.

Don't know. I'm stumped on this one. Pics don't show a hole but very reliable sources say it has a TASS.

JMS
10-04-2008, 08:55 AM
A whale spout does look like a periscope feather - I can attest to that.

I can also attest to submarines being scary quiet. On TEXAS, we tripped over an OHIO off the Washington State coast. At first, we thought it was self-noise showing up on our SQS-53A hull mounted sonar (no tails for CGNs). You can only imagine our shock when we pinged and got a hard contact 4kyds off the bow, and 6kyds away from the CVN!

We were right in the middle of a VICTOR box, so we went nuts (this was in 1988). Assisted by a pair of SH-3s and a pair of S-3s, we dogged her for nearly an hour before SUBPAC told us to cease and desist. She then disappeared like smoke on a windy day....

We got sent to the penalty box for letting a sub inside the screen....

Her CO got fired for being found while on patrol.


What's a Victor box?

Small wonder the sub CO was fired, since he should have known he was driving in the middle of a CVBG, what was his business clowning around a group of surface ships in a boomer?.

xav
10-04-2008, 03:06 PM
Let's agree Atago has a TASS... How long does it takes to deploy it, when you get surprised by a sub like they did?

Is it possibe they did have time to deploy it, and had to use their hull sonar only?

The article I translated and the article from Japan I posted later both report that the Atago confirm the sub presence with an active sonar "ping"...

Rick
10-04-2008, 03:59 PM
With men on station in the handling room, I could deploy my tail out to the minimum length
(500 ft IIRC) in oh.... say....10-15 minutes. Add 10 minutes or to get people back to the handling room and to get the array prepped for deployment if no ones already there. (its a 3 person job minimum)

If she had a towed array at all, its unlikely it was deployed already. Even destroyers whose main mission is ASW wont sail with the array deployed unless they are specifically on an ASW exercise (or if the captain gets a bug up his ass to deploy the tail at 2 AM when i'm in my rack trying to get some freaking sleep:mad::mad: and then bring it in after an hour once the sonar team has all been woken up by the Chief since he's a gung ho twit who thinks this is an opportunity to get some training time in... :mad:stupid Captain Dean:mad:)

And I'll wager the Atago (once again if she even has an array, and im not convinced she does) has hers out even less since shes an Aegis ship and on an Aegis ship we bow to the gods of AAW regardless of how many other systems she has. In other words an Aegis ship is only "multirole" in name.


The article I translated and the article from Japan I posted later both report that the Atago confirm the sub presence with an active sonar "ping"...

Well this may be liscence on the part of the article writer, but technically a subs prescence can not be "confirmed" by an active ping return. At best this gives a "poss sub" the only way to get "cert sub" is if the sub surfaces and you get a visual ID or it fires a torpedo.

Scott Chisholm
10-04-2008, 06:56 PM
What's a Victor box?

Small wonder the sub CO was fired, since he should have known he was driving in the middle of a CVBG, what was his business clowning around a group of surface ships in a boomer?.

"Back in Thye Day", the Soviets used to park fast attack submarines off the entrances of our major naval bases so they could tail our CVNs and SSBNs when they left port. We knew they were there, and would frequently dog them so the CVNs/SSBNs could make their sorties "unopposed" as it were.

As the VICTOR series was one of their more numerous, we dubbed their "operating" areas "VICTOR Boxes". Whenever we found a submarine in one (or anywhere, for that matter), we contacted SUBPAC(LANT) to see if they had any subs in the area.

In this particular case, the SSBN was on its way home whent the battle group ran over her. The CO had apparently just left command of an SSN, had a "Fast Attack Flashback", and started taking photos. He cavitated trying to catch up to the CVN, and that's when we found him.

Warship NWS
10-04-2008, 07:10 PM
In this particular case, the SSBN was on its way home whent the battle group ran over her. The CO had apparently just left command of an SSN, had a "Fast Attack Flashback", and started taking photos. He cavitated trying to catch up to the CVN, and that's when we found him.


Definitely a "duh" moment on his part. No better way to stir up a hornets nest then to unzip your fly with prop noise. Hope his photos were worth his career. A bit surprised his XO didn't bitch slap him for trying to pull such a stunt.

killerr
10-05-2008, 09:59 PM
Actually we called it the brass ass**** ;)

Heres a much better stern shot:

http://jmsdf.info/img/jmsdf_03075.jpg

Combat Fleets '05-'06 says her and her sister have the SQQ-89(V) Suite which includes a sonobouy processor, towed array and hull mounted sonars.

It could be one of the ports on the right is used for the Towed array sonar and the other for Nixie. I used to be a towed array tech and I dont see any problems with having the towed array off center, though it looks like it could be a bit cramped. Not knowing the below decks layout its hard to say.


Hazegray lists the Kongo class as having :

Sonar: OQS-102 bow (SQS-53), OQR TACTASS towed (SQR-19)