Sponsored by Ground News: Compare news coverage from diverse sources around the world on a transparent platform driven by data. Try Ground News today and get 40% off your subscription: ground.news/perun Note there is a correction for the JMSDF section - the slides describe the last two vessels of the Sōryū and all of the Taigei class boats as being AIP. They are actually post-AIP in a sense. They replaced the Stirling engines of the original Sōryū boats with lithium-ion batteries (and lots of them) for increased electrical energy storage. The slides should instead list 10 Sōryū (AIP) 2 Sōryū and the Taigei slide should not have AIP listed. Apologies for the slightly later release, I hope you enjoy.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 I understood it. However I'm not sure that ther younger generations did. After all it's an old song which I haven't heard played commercially for ages
I think the best part of this video might be that you just *know* that there will be at least a few sailors out there sitting underwater unseen on their nuke boats discussing this video at some point soon, and that makes me smile
If the security is at least ok, it will go like most grill nights on the eu-russia bordering nations. A bunch of dudes going "hypothetically, theoretically if we had x capability, we could consider y attack plausible...." And someone going "theoretically, there is a non0 possibility that the army has actually considered this problem, but not maybe just been vocal for all branches, due to security, but there are contingency plans, if theoretically they are aware" etc. At least in estonia, these conversations are typical for people who, legally have never seen an army barracks and people who, legally, served conscription as typists at the barracks and certainly did nothing fun ever never.... As the russians have kill-lists and whatnot, nobody knows nothing ever. But, somehow everyone is pretty laid back knowing the russians couldnt breach 100m into the border ;)
@@JM-mh1pp TLDR. In a country with conscription, they keep records. Said records may not be accurate on the skillsets of their conscripts, as a measure of opsec in the event said records are hacked or acessed by people who shouldn't. In addition, said conscripts disscuss hypothetical scenarios. For which, if said conscripts have thought of it. There's a good chance someone else in the higher leadership has too.
@@JM-mh1pp In EU nations that border Russia and have conscript armies, they might have conversations around the grill that are full of "hypothetically" "potentially" "maybe" because the record shows that they served as a janitor or whatever when in reality they did serious shit and learned things they wouldn't want the Russians to know about
Let’s not forget that Russia has been engaged in a monumental submarine procurement effort these last few years, with a significant part of the Black Sea Fleet being converted into submarines with the help of foreign contractors.
@@sebastianforbes1wrong, they have been giving away rubble piles where towns and cities used to exist. A monster from the wasteland of the north has ruined everything. Russia, I’m talking about Russia, they are assholes, they ruin everything and always have. So again, you are wrong. Go live in Russia, see how that goes.
Last year, Perun helped me get through suicidal ideation and reach out for help. This year, Perun is a treat and the ideation is just a signal that I am not getting enough rest. --- Edit: A number of setbacks had me stalled and I felt surrounded by stagnation. The Sunday morning presentation was the one example of progress and pursuit of excellence. Perun 's tenacity reminded me that I had not exhausted my options.
I too find @PerunAU and his presentations to be very theraputic. Perun fills my head with all kinds of good thoughts and he seems to make sense of a crazy world without getting politcal and maintains an insanely cool sense of humor.
Hell yeah, me and the other sound booth guys at church were discussing what this week would entail. I guessed it would be something with older systems and Tim thought it would be provocation in the middle east.
I'm having morning coffee and playing with my toddler. Haha I'm glad he uses PowerPoint voice and doesn't use graphic words as he talks about the machines or war and destruction
About as close as we shall get to the topic he won't cover and I'm fine with that. It does raise questions on whether Australia should go a similar path as the Japanese in numerous shorter range subs built in Oz. Such as one built every 2 years for example. Combined with a number of larger longer range subs as is currently planned with AUKUS
So does anyone think Perun was more onboard with the Japanese post Collins proposal given his three "examples" he gives here? (Shame he did not make a comment about "Quietly sinks the Rostov on Don").
You nailed it with respect to Russia's Yasen class 'very quiet - the most important aspect'. Despite US hubris about the supposed superiority of nuclear subs, such boats are inherently noisy. You simply can't switch off a nuclear reactor at will, and although the core is quiet, the associated pumps, turbines & gears continuously generate noise, which can be mitigated but never eliminated. I accept that you are not mentioning AUKUS, but your comments regarding the Japanese future programme are of relevance to Australia. Instead of spending a hideous amount of money subsidising the US & UK shipbuilding oligopolies, Australia could, for a fraction of the cost, acquire a fleet of, say, 22 ultra-stealthy conventional boats, capable of being deployed around our coastline & ideally suited for operation in shallower waters in the maritime denial role. After all what is the prime responsibility of the ADF if not protection from a hostile force?
@@richardstaples8621 That might be true, but given Australia’s long distance from any maritime areas of operation and the immense area of sea any Australian submarine force needs to cover, nuclear submarines seem like the best option for Australia given their extreme range. as a side note, I observe that conventional submarine designs have been examined in Australian procurement (most notably the Attack class), yet they have been rejected in favour of nuclear submarines
If sinking a ship from a submarine is ungentlemanly because the ship can't see you, then stealth bombers, long range conventional missiles and snipers are also ungentlemanly. But being able to see the enemy while the enemy cannot see you is the holy grail of combat. So the holy grail of combat is ungentlemanly.....
@@andersjjensen not what I was referring to, because quite clearly the US Navy has not been partaking in active combat any time recent. I mean underwater cable tapping and the like
Since this is a defense logistics channel, one thing worth noting (for those that are not already aware) is that a BIG advantage in nuclear boats is endurance. A diesel-elec SSK may be able to stay out for a couple of weeks, but an SSN/SSGN/SSBN can stay out on patrol for MONTHS. Their only real limiting factor is food and crew/ship health, because their nuke plants give effectively unlimited range and they can crack fresh water out of seawater.
@@allangibson8494 Yup, though with sufficient technical excellency (and excessive spending) you can make a more effective attack sub than what your opposition fields. The Soviets kept around SSK's for quite some time expressly for that reason if remember properly.
@@YoniBaruch-y3m A point, but not quite what I was talking about. I meant more that consumables are the limiting factor. Present nuke powerplants already have effectively unlimited range for a deployment.
First we run out of packaged store bread and we get fresh made bread and things actually improve. If you don't like the meal a PB&J with fresh baked bread is ways good. Then we run out of strawberry jelly and things go downhill fast. Next thing you know the grape jelly runs out and all there is left is apple jelly, but the real kick in the teeth is running out of the regular peanut butter and all the sudden all that's left is garden state peanut butter. That would still be livable except for the fact that our chain of command forbade us from roasting and eating our nubs even if they do go dink. Man they would be delicious if we slow cooked them into pulled pork sandwiches with some fresh baked bread.
Just a quick mention about the missiles carried by the SSBN's, it is worth noting that while both the USA and Russia have scaled back the amount they carry you still gotta remember each one of those missiles carry 6-8 MIRV's which is the actual nuclear warheads, so scaling back to 16 missiles per boat "limits" the amount of targets they can nuke to over 96-128'ish. So yeah, just worth remembering 1 boat has enough firepower to destroy basically any nation on earth. Cheers!
What more could U want on a rainy Sunday than an hour of PowerPoint that is both more interesting and more informative than almost any documentary? As always - great upload
I’ve been following you for years now. I look forward to episodes each week. That had to be one of your very best episodes. Absolutely killed it. You also sounded so happy and in the zone. Welcome back!
Only heard about the diesel electric boat recently myself. Was supposed to do work close inshore like pick up and drop off SBS, arrived after it was all over bar the shouting. 👍
Quick note about VLS-equipped diesel subs: one of the few states other than Russia that uses VLS on a diesel submarine is the ROK (on its newest class of KSS-III subs, which is also AIP-equipped).
So I am not the only one who thought of the Type 93 when a mention of a new advanced Japanese torpedo came up. It is like torpedoes are just something they are naturally good at for some reason.
Not sure if it's a translation issue, but all Japanese Soryu class subs have AIP. The difference is that the first 10 use a license produced sterling engine from Sweden, while the last 2 and the following Taigei (Great Whale) class use lithium-ion batteries, which can charge up a lot faster and run in silent electric mode for a lot longer than before. The latest South Korean KSS-III diesel electric subs not only carry VLS cells, but also Hyunmoo 4-4 tactical ballistic missiles (similar to Russian Iskander) in order to strike deeply buried North Korean bunkers and underground military facilities (e.g. nuclear weapons storage and leadership bunkers). As such, the latest Japanese plans to add VLS cells to next gen subs is not really that unusual, but merely following a regional trend. Then again, Japan has historically been quite inventive in submarine design. Just look at the WW2 I-400 submarine aircraft carriers.
The X control surface configuration does cause navigation complication beyond the vertical-horizontal configuration. Pitch and yaw are controlled by the servo controller in both configurations. The navigator dials in the course and the servo executes the maneuvers no matter the control surface configuration. The remarks on efficiencies of the X configuration make a good point. Well done as always.
Minor error: The Taigei class is a conventional non-AIP submarine. Rather its large lithium-ion batteries allow it function similarly to an AIP submarine.
There are several approaches to air independence. The defining point seems to be that in AIP mode they should be as fast as in air breathing mode. So whether you do batteries, compressed oxygen, binary fuel or what have you, doesn't really matter. What defines a "diesel electric" is that it's significantly slower below snorkle depth than it is at snorkle depth.
@@andersjjensen wrong Anders - most all diesel electric subs are much faster when fully submerged. What defines diesel electric is the need to surface to at least snorkle depth to allow the diesel engines to operate. The AIP alternative doesn't produce enough power to fully recharge the batteries .. yet. Future AIP systems may become more efficient and powerful and/or the batteries may get more efficient, more powerful and easier/ faster to recharge - even by AIP systems - in which case there'd be no need for the diesel engines and no need to surface to snorkle depth or fully. And BTW - that's not yet the case which is why all modern AIP subs operated much more slowly in AIP mode so as to not totally deplete the batteries.
@@brodieboy3Lithium batteries have their own issues. You’re not gonna wanna get depth charged in a lithium battery submarine. Any amount of shock damage can basically turn your subs energy system into a Michael Bay movie effect.
Towards the end of your presentation, the approach of the Japanese is very smart. Every year a boat. In that way you are rolling replacing your force and have a standing ship building capacity.
Virtual guarantee that we'll get one on maritime drones eventually. Thing is, they're so dang new that there may not be enough content for a proper Perun video yet.
@@LukkaKuhaarski you know what...this makes sense. Like...I eat nearly twice the amount my wife eats. We could increase time of deployment by at least 40%... honestly...brilliant
Thanks again Perun. As a professional gearhead, and ex-army aviator during Vietnam, I am always fascinated with military tech. But when I step back, and lean on seventy plus years of perspective, I am horrified by the proliferation of global offensive and defensive capabilities.
For some reason I imagine the designing process going like this. The designers asked, 'what capabilities do you want the new design to have': In the US, the admirals answered: 'Yes'. In Russia: 'What the Americans have'. In Japan: 'Enough to push back against China and Korea'. And it shows in the price tag
I recall there is a quote regarding the possibility of building a large fleet of ships that goes obsolete prematurely. Something along: "We could either build it and risk losing money, or not build it and risk losing the nation."
Perun: So what tradeoffs is the SSN(X) program looking like it will make? Also Perun: There appears to be no capability it won’t have. Me: Ahhh. So each sub will cost a year’s worth of Chad’s economy. Very nice
I mean, Canadas response to nato not shutting up about us not spending 2 percent of our gdp on defence Was to be like cool… we’d like a dozen lithium powered long range submarines that can work for weeks underwater at a time, but don’t have a nuclear reactor Also they’re going to have tomahawk missles Also they’re going to have… all the missles And torpedoes And mines We’re also putting tomahawks and shorter range missles on the 12-15 frigates we’ll be buying We will be providing no explanation for there planned use but on an unrelated point; anhone wanna keep talking ? Because spending more then most countries entire defence budget to just… purchase the like 7th or 8th most powerful navy on earth While barely moving your defence budget by half a percentage point 🤣. Is a wild flex
It is quite a difference whether you plan a midlife update on a tank or IFV which are produced in hundreds or on a almost unique sub , a serie of four or so. First it takes years to design the update package with the risk the package ain't state of the art anymore when the updated sub is back in service again. Also opening up, rebuilding and testing take years. That sub and the others in that serie has gone older as well. And that is only when it works well. When the result is not good, you wasted years, meanwhile put higher pressure on the subs still in service.
He pretty much said everything there is to be said on it when he discussed Japan's fleet. He even pointed out that nuclear SSN are likely to bankrupt smaller nations. AUKUS will optimistically cost Australia as much as the UK spends on its nuclear deterrent (missiles, warheads and submarines). SSN only make sense for nuclear deterrence and global power projection. Unless Australia is aiming for either, it clearly should focus on buying and building a larger AIP fleet.
@@lacdirk it’s marketed as Australia’s best alternative to a nuclear deterrent. Yes it’s expensive, but the capability is immense. Nuclear being chosen because won’t just be engaging targets in its territorial waters. But that’s about all I know. There’s not many good publications for this sort of stuff in Australia, and the few good sources like Perun are well working for the military and would never talk about it
@@zachb1706 But it's not a deterrent. Nuclear propulsion is nothing like a nuclear weapon. The main advantage of nuclear propulsion is that it allows very long underwater deployment (needed for nuclear deterrence) and very high speed. But both of those only work in blue water (deep ocean), and that's not where Australia's naval concerns are. Perun's discussion on why Japan sticks to diesel is very much relevant to Australia.
@@lacdirkthat’s not strictly true. A nuclear powered submarine fleet means that Australia can actually aid its allies rather than sit on the sidelines and depend on others to fight for Australia. By the time the enemy’s assets reach Australian shores to make AIP submarines useful, events have already regressed to the point where a somewhat optimal outcome is no longer possible.
That was _so_ interesting! I'm consistently impressed by how you churn out such high-quality presentations, week after week. Mr Perun is, indeed, the GOAT.
It’s weird that Perun didn’t mention the German 212CD with its stealth hull and camera based periscope. It’s one of the most modern subs with innovative design.
It's a German-Norwegian collaboration. Initially they were to get the first two vessels and 4/6 overall. Now it's 3/3 for the first batch. And yeah I think Perun once got his heart broken by some Blonde German Visiting Professor.
Yes! Yes! Yessss! I've been watching Sub Brief obsessively for the last couple of weeks and I am SO up for some submarine content! Thanks Perun! And maybe today i will learn why the US doesn't have purpose-built, pure-bred SSGNs although it would be the most obvious thing ever. Probably not. Still looking forward to watching this.
@@davidgoodnow269 well the Ohios originally are/were ballistic missile boats. Some were converted into tomahawk carriers and special ops support boats. Okay, they do that well. But the mission profile of an SSBN and an SSGN are not exactly the same. Now that the US navy is building a new class of strategic missile sub and also plans for a new attack boat (which will likely be a more pure-bred attack boat), why not build a mission-specific sub for land attack and special ops support?
I probably commented something along these lines a dozen times already, but man your videos are just amazing. So much information delivered with just the right amount of wit in moments where you might not expect it. Just excellent, and i've learned so much from them already.
Hey Perun, for future videos could you consider putting the graph legend on the left or right? Closed captioning tends to block it with present layout.
56:07 there is actually a mistake here, all but the last 2 of the Soryu class submarine are actually AIP system, the last 2 of the Soryu and the later Taigei class are actually using a more advance propulsion system of Lithium-ion battery replacing the older ALP system.
Yeah - this is a rather obvious miss by Perun who normally researches these topics pretty well. I figured I scroll thru the comments before posting it myself as I assumed that others would catch this mistake. Worth exploring is the Japanese claim that the longer duration charging of the Li batteries and the faster re-charging of same - obviated the need for a separate AIP power source. It'll be interesting to see what the Koreans decide on this point as they are currently planning to combine their fuel cell AIP w/ Li batteries on their Batch 3 KSS-III boats. Of course, knowing the answer to this question likely requires access to some military secret data - so the only way we'd know that the Koreans reached the same conclusion is if they eliminated the fuel cell AIP system from future boats. Of course, Li tech continues to advance as well and there continue to be all sorts of claims about future solid state batteries that are supposedly safer, more efficient, longer lasting and quicker charging and those advancements may change how the Koreans and other countries feel about the need for AIP systems - or the recharging efficiency could get so much better that the AIP systems could recharge the batteries w/out any need to resurface so that the diesel engines are only there for back-up or maybe not needed at all and you'd just need the AIP system. More efficient and more powerful batteries might also increase the power output available from the electric motors - perhaps leading to similar underwater speeds from the advanced SSK boats - in which case the huge expense and safety and decommissioning issues surrounding nuclear reactors might mean that there's no good reason to continue building and operating SSNs. There's also research and development work being undertaken by the French and others to create more powerful and longer lasting non-weapons grade reactors that mitigate some of the downsides associated w/ the kind of weapons grade nuclear reactors that the US and the UK currently utilize. Still - safe, powerful, long lasting and quick to recharge soldi state batteries might make them the preferred choice over any form of nuclear propulsion - especially w/ advancements in the efficiency and power output available from various AIP options - namely fuel cell or Stirling Engines.
@@davidgoodnow269 Because Toshiba hasn't been making them for years already or are they a Toyota only force? Not to mention Toyota has been mouthing off about their new amazing way for years with absolutely nothing to show.
@@jankoodziej877 they're actually a lot safer than batteries that *literally produce hydrogen gas as you charge them*, which have been the main submarine battery technology for a hundred years
Perun, when we get to all unmanned its easier to push a button. This scares me the most , when war means nobody gets killed until everyone gets killed.
29:36 if "a larger salvo rate" applies to torpedo, we are seeing the SSN(X) moving away from the 4 tubes configuration of past US submarines; all US submarines to date only have (4) torpedo tubes (except the Seawolf class's (8) 660m tubes), arranged diagonally to the sides instead of the bow - to save space for the massive sonar array in the bow; the torpedo room takes up 2 decks, and has 2 torpedo tubes on each deck splitting toward each side, so (4) tubes in total that is
The pre-nuclear US submarines had ten torpedo tubes (six forward, four aft) all on one deck. With the larger circumference, a return to broadside torpedoes tubes like the British E and L class would be an additional option.
Seawolf's torpedo tubes arrangement were not new in US submarine design (aside from number of tubes and being spread across two decks) every US submarine from Thresher onwards had the same layout. The Team 2020 and ForwardPASS concepts from the way 2000s had their weapons stored in external clips, I would imagine that would be the best way of increasing salvo size (not to mention liberating weapons design from the constraints of the 21" torpedo tube).
I took USS South Dakota on her maiden deployment in fall 2022. I screamed when you mentioned the Acoustic Superiority Package and SDK. Everything they put into her made her an absolute beast of an ASW platform
@@ryancollyer2046 I feel like it's really niche. And you know, Silent Service. The Navy has said a lot about how it put all of this cool stuff on the SDK, but you can't really find a lot of info on what that means.
@ryanmenke5305 Even reading through tech manuals, I've found very little. A lot have little bits of i formation that you can put together to figure out some capabilities.
The US Navy may want to refurbish the old MK14 torpedoes to use as the "cheap" torpedo option. We have a ton of them, and it fits in existing torpedo tube's and storage racks.
@qbi4614 The bugs have all been fixed. The MK 14 torpedo is both the most produced torpedo in US history and the longest serving (it was phased out in the 80s and 90s)
I appreciate the high quality free content you’re making and I am very grateful. I hope you feel healthy and make many more of these kinds of videos, for as long as it pleases you. Thanks.
The fade to black on the left edge of the image for the X-shaped stern does make it quite hard to see it in detail. Otherwise excellent content as ever.
@PerunAu, this was a banger of an episode. I'd love to see another in the series on the approach of other countries. Swedish, India, China, Sth Korea, Germany, France etc
Just for clarification. The X-form configuration utilizes computer mixing of the control surfaces for maneuvering. Having all surfaces deflect for a given maneuver increases effectiveness, while reducing the actual deflection angles of those surfaces. Decreasing drag and noise.
@@adambebb99 Thy data come, thy formulae be done, under sea as it is above atmosphere. Give us this day our weekly powerpoint; and forgive us our data errors as we forgive those who mis-count visual confirmation losses; and lead us not into false information, but deliver us from false conclusions. Amen.
My step-dad worked on the Carter when it was drydocked for some kind of modification/repair/maintenance. Never said anything aside from that but it was still cool! :D Great video as always Perun, may Blake's blessings be with you.
Bro. Russia and navy are antonyms. Russia’s navy is the best example of where Russia will say they nominally have these top systems, that they nominally have top hardware, but because of Russia’s incompetence these “top” hardware platforms get massively neutered
People keep screaming about this-or-that being obsolete. But as long as you need a big cannon on the battlefield, or a sneaky ship, or to be able to interdict and project power against an enemy behind his lines, you're going to need tanks, subs and bombers. In the end, all that happens is we make them better while trying to figure out better ways to counter the enemy's.
In 1982, Royal Navy sank a 12,000 ton light cruiser using two WW2 torpedoes fired from a nuclear powered hunter killer submarine. The captain had more sophisticated weaponry on board but went with proven technology. Left unchecked, that cruiser would have crippled the British naval task force.
“They” also said fixed trench positions were obsolete and relegated to pictures of WW1, and then… If life does exist elsewhere in the universe, it would really be interesting to compare our path in weapons development against a dozen other planetary races. I suspect at some point a society reaches peak capability to destroy each other and just incrementally improves on that. I think we, as a species, hit that in August 1945. That, or we’re the only race/species that destroys their own, which would also be an interesting data point.
@@Dave5843-d9mthe Belgrano could only hurt the British fleet if it was allowed to get within gun range roughly 20km which is well outranked by anti ship missiles at the time
@@jameson1239Belgrano’s escorts had the highly effective Exocet anti ship missiles and could have called in support from the Argentine airforce….. at distance the Belgrano group were dangerous and up close even more so.
Perun, another outstanding presentation. Thank you Sir for your most informative analysis. As a former Sailor myself, I was a 'Target', however, the Australian Submariners also referred to as as 'Skimers'. "Bubble-heads" were commonly referred to as the Scuba-Divers.
@PerunAU, not sure if you missed it, during your shpiel (51:10) a subsurface nuclear drone offers the advantage of being a first strike weapon, with significant difficulty in establishing countermeasures and retaliatory action. The problem of the air and space-borne fleet has always been the observable nature of the system, and the threat of system defence and escalatory retaliation. This system comes from a disruptive nuclear doctrine, and the system is fully capable of threatening 40% of the world’s population and no small number of world capitals and major cities including Tokyo, New York, Washington, Hong Kong, Shanghai, London, Sydney, etc. If you were to build a weapon system under the assumption you’d actually use it, thus might be the only way to go, because of all the technical challenges. Unfortunately, surprise nuclear explosions with no ballistic warning or other explanation tends to narrow down the options to only a few things, and you’d better hope the terrorist cover story pays off.
