Is there a case for a US production SSK/SSP?

[Swift Sword]

Thought of a lovely posting but figured a quick "yea" or "nay" query might be in order before delving into the nuts and bolts.

William

[surfgun]

Due to USN requirements; nay.

[Swift Sword]

Quick enough surfgun!

Understood. Current USN concept of operations does not fit SSK and/or SSP.

Moving on to maintaining defense industrial base, possibly supporting export orders, providing opportunities for career advancement of USN Officers, taking into consideration advanced standoff systems, etc., is there any potential?

William

[surfgun]

Only if the US was engaged in all out non-nuclear warfare and more hulls than could be produced in the active shipyards would require bringing secondary yards on line to produce lower tech surface combatants, could also result in the possibility of US built SSK's.

[Swift Sword]

Only if the US was engaged in all out non-nuclear warfare and more hulls than could be produced in the active shipyards would require bringing secondary yards on line to produce lower tech surface combatants, could also result in the possibility of US built SSK's.

surfgun,

I think I failed to adequately describe what I was thinking. The USN is currently using submarines to great advantage in ways that SSK/SSP could not perform those missions. I understand that.

What I was getting at is that US primes and shipyards are very good at building submarines, there is a global market for SSK and/or SSP boats, USN SSN hull count sure looks like it is going South in coming years and future submarine crews need to come from somewhere, stand off land attack capability against non peer problems without retasking more valuable assets, etc. I was not advocating a technological step backwards en masse, just thinking about things going forward.

In an ideal budget and political climate, I would advocate doubling down on SSNs, increasing numbers of SSNs forward deployed to places like Guam, etc., etc.

Thank you for your continuing input.

Regards,

William

[surfgun]

Swift Sword, the US going to SSK's during peacetime would most likely only happen if the US economy were to stay in the toilet or if Democats were to become dominant for several election cycles. If that were the case CVN production would also cease.

[Swift Sword]

Swift Sword, the US going to SSK's during peacetime would most likely only happen if the US economy were to stay in the toilet or if Democats were to become dominant for several election cycles. If that were the case CVN production would also cease.

surfgun,

Well if you insist on putting it that way!

W.

[jlvfr]

What I was getting at is that US primes and shipyards are very good at building submarines, there is a global market for SSK and/or SSP boats,

European builders have had the market cornered for years, specially now with the new generations of air-independent propulsion SSKs, of which the US has, afaik, zero experience; so the US would have to start from scratch. Add to that the fact that there are more and more non-european builders...

[kato]

possibly supporting export orders

Who would they be exported to? The only one that comes to mind that isn't already fiercely cornered and defended by (always cheaper) European SSKs would be Taiwan. And that mostly comes to mind because US defence companies tried to buy out German sub-building know-how a bit over a decade ago in order to finagle a deal to build SSKs for Taiwan.

[Shinytop]

Current SSK's are smaller short range boats built for local defense. As in WWII we would need larger long range boats so we would have to have our own design. Hopefully we could use lessons learned in design and manufacture of allied boats. But with today's detection systems they would have to be able to conduct entire cruises without surfacing. A strong design challenge.

[kato]

But with today's detection systems they would have to be able to conduct entire cruises without surfacing. A strong design challenge.

That depends on how long your cruises go for... the current European generation tends to have supposed ranges of around 2500-3000 nm entirely dived patrol.

[SteveDaPirate]

US defense exports are a great way to help defray production costs, but only if there is already a domestic market for the product. Without strong interest or actual orders from the USN, nobody is going to throw down the kind of investment required to get into SSK production, particularly with the already competitive market.

Pitching SSN exports to countries that could make use of their unique strengths (and that can afford to operate them) makes a lot more sense. The US has more experience building and operating SSNs than anyone else, and should play to that strength as more countries on the world stage acquire the resources to actually put them to use.

[jlvfr]

US defense exports are a great way to help defray production costs, but only if there is already a domestic market for the product. Without strong interest or actual orders from the USN, nobody is going to throw down the kind of investment required to get into SSK production, particularly with the already competitive market.

Not to mention the fact that the US hasn't sold new warships to anyone in decades. What were the last ones, the Perrys for Australia? The EU has cornered the market on export warships...

[Swift Sword]

Who would they be exported to? The only one that comes to mind that isn't already fiercely cornered and defended by (always cheaper) European SSKs would be Taiwan. And that mostly comes to mind because US defence companies tried to buy out German sub-building know-how a bit over a decade ago in order to finagle a deal to build SSKs for Taiwan.

kato,

Taiwan comes to mind, but Indonesia, Brazil and Austraila among others have demonstrated interest. The Japanese can build their own, of course, but perhaps there are technology transfer possibilities to get some of their know how on a joint program. Singapore could be shopping at least a half a dozen hulls by the time a clean sheet US SSK/SSP was in the water. Several navies operate small numbers of relatively obsolete SSKs and will no doubt be shopping replacements as time goes by. India and Pakistan may represent opportunities to pry some business away from the Europeans in time. As political and economic fortunes of various actors evolve, there will likely be new opportunities as time goes by.

After reading Jane's pretty much every week for the last couple of years, I perceive that there is quite a bit of interest in cruise missiles and submarines, both of which US manufacturers can build in quantity and quality. I understand that there are very established vendors for SSK/SSP boats but I also understand that a lot of people with the wherewithal prefer to buy US weapons. I figure it might be worth considering trying to get more of their money pointed in our direction instead of another. Just because other people are doing it well does not mean we might not be able to do it just as good or better or different enough or friendly enough to generate customer interest.

Regards,

William

[Swift Sword]

Shinytop,

Current SSK's are smaller short range boats built for local defense.

Understood. But people are putting money on the table for or otherwise demonstrating interest in local defense.

As in WWII we would need larger long range boats so we would have to have our own design.

I understand that the reason the USN moved away from SSKs was the concept of operations called for extended patrols way far forward for great lengths of time and the SSN is clearly superior for that sort of thing. I would not expect the USN to even consider moving away from this position and it would not be prudent to think of it.

A prudent future US SSK/SSP design would be readily adaptable to stretching for greater range, different engineering space concepts and requirements, etc.

However, the USN SSN hull count is--barring a wave of smart people quickly fixing things--going to shrink a bit within a decade. If I understand it correctly, there will be a dozen less SSNs out that way.

There are missions that might be better performed by an SSK/SSP to keep the reduced numbers SSNs available for doing what they do best.

Hopefully we could use lessons learned in design and manufacture of allied boats. But with today's detection systems they would have to be able to conduct entire cruises without surfacing. A strong design challenge.

Your first point I agree and that is probably possible. We know things about submarines they might not and horses and baseball cards may be traded. Your second point I am less likely to agree with because my hypothesis does not foresee the USN becoming involved with and SSK/SSP program to try to duplicate the SSN mission capability. Bad idea and not gonna happen we would hope. I merely assert that there are things an SSK/SSP might do and do more cheaply and with less risk then sending and SSN. The fleet composition and budget climate is going to change and it might not change for the better so Plan B might have to be in order.

Regards,

William