Nuclear submarines - America's new aircraft carriers? ("The National Interest", USA)
“Nuclear submarines with cruise missiles can be a key element in maintaining America’s naval superiority in the future.”
A new class of nuclear-powered submarines with cruise missiles may become a key element in maintaining America’s naval superiority in the future, in conditions where everything new appears in the world. weaponchallenging the dominance of the US Navy aircraft carriers.
In fact, some analysts believe that submarines with cruise missiles should someday replace aircraft carriers and become the basis of the naval battle power.
With the advent and spread of precision guided weapons such as anti-ship cruise missiles, anti-ship ballistic missiles and modern air defense systems, especially Chinese, pose an increasing threat to American aircraft carriers and their deck aviation as part of the concept of blocking access / blocking the zone (A2 / AD).
Instead of approaching the coast at the initial stage of a major war, naval naval airfields, together with escort ships worth billions of dollars, may be forced to keep thousands of nautical miles from the coast in order to remain inaccessible to attack the enemy. The situation is aggravated even more by the fact that today's deck aviation has an insufficient range, and it does not have the ability to penetrate the enemy’s air defense, which is becoming more and more perfect. Even the delayed adoption of a single Lockheed Martin F-2019C strike fighter in approximately 35 will not solve this problem.
New long-range unmanned aerial vehicles with stealth characteristics can, over time, provide the aircraft carrier with the necessary reach and strike power. But there are people who claim that submarines are a much more effective weapon against such threats. Although potential adversaries such as China are capable of challenging the US in the air, at sea, on land and in space, under the water, the US Navy can act almost with impunity.
"The advantages of our underwater fleet “We allow us to operate within A2 / AD,” said retired first-rank captain Jerry Hendrix, a naval analyst at the Center for a New American Security Research Center. “This is a very powerful weapon that can act with impunity within the space of access / blocking the zone.”
Hendrix claims that ships such as the first four Ohio-type atomic submarines that were modified and now, instead of 24 Trident II D5 ballistic missiles, carry Tomahawk cruise missiles in conventional gear, are one of the most powerful means against the A154 threat / AD. “Countries seeking to create such barriers to access / block the zone take note of these submarines,” says Hendrix.
He argues that during Operation Odyssey. Dawn "against the regime of the now overthrown Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, these submarines showed that they are a powerful weapon. The Florida submarine (SSGN-728) almost single-handedly destroyed the Libyan air defense system, launching approximately 90 Tomahawk cruise missiles.
These submarine missile carriers have such capabilities that Hendrix proposes to stop the construction of new aircraft carriers with a nuclear power plant such as Ford after two such ships have been built, which are currently on the stocks. Navy for the price of one such aircraft carrier can buy a lot of submarines with cruise missiles - after all, one ship without deck aircraft costs almost 13 billion dollars.
Unlike an aircraft carrier, an underwater bomber can approach the enemy’s coast, and then launch its missiles, hitting targets in areas remote from the sea, since its weapons have a range of more than 1 200 nautical miles and can destroy almost everything from air defense and command weapons points, and ending with the objects of enemy infrastructure. “The point is that the three submarine missile carriers have the strike power of the 462 Tomahawk missiles, and there may be new generations of the Tomahawks that will become even more advanced,” says Hendrix.
According to him, now there is an optimal opportunity to increase the fleet of submarines with cruise missiles, since the two remaining Ohio-class SSBNs can be reequipped by equipping with cruise missiles. Now they are undergoing intermediate repair and refueling with nuclear fuel, in connection with which the Navy has a great opportunity to turn these nuclear submarines into ordinary attack submarines.
According to Hendrix, in the future, the naval forces under the Ohio replacement program should buy two submarines at a time to reduce the astronomical cost of the boats. One submarine can be equipped with nuclear ballistic missiles, and the second to build with cruise missiles. Ultimately, Hendrix suggests building eight submarines with cruise missiles and 12 “boomers” as part of the replacement program. “I would build them together to ensure high efficiency, and maybe lower prices,” he says. “With eight submarines with cruise missiles, we will get more 1 100 precision strike weapons.”
However, Hendrix notes that the benefits of submarines with cruise missiles is not only in their missiles. If necessary, they will be able to carry on board various unmanned aerial vehicles and autonomous uninhabited underwater vehicles. Further, pre-prepared satellites can be loaded into these boats in order to launch them into low near-earth orbit in order to replenish the US space group if a part of its forces and assets will be destroyed during the full-scale conflict of the great powers.
The US Navy is planning to build new Virginia-type attack submarines, which will have four additional launch shafts for cruise missiles. Hendrix supports the idea of building such boats, but only for the reason that it is too late to stop this program. A modified Virginia Block V strike submarine will be a useful addition to the version of submarine missile carriers that can be built as part of the Ohio replacement program. But with smaller launchers, such a boat is not suitable for new missiles with longer range and combat load, which can be installed on larger submarines.
Former US Navy submarine officer Bryan Clark (Bryan Clark), who works as an analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments), agrees with Hendrix that submarines may be the best option during modern warfare. “I agree, against the Chinese A2 / AD complex, underwater systems, reconnaissance-impact UAVs and long-range attack and survivor UAVs during the war are the best means of striking and fighting enemy surface ships,” he says.
However, Clark notes that the submarines have their drawbacks. “In general, the deficiencies of submarines include limited control of the situation, low speed, and the lack of means of self-defense. Therefore, in the case of detection or attack, they will try to evade and avoid confrontation, - says Clark. - Our attack submarines in this regard are very vulnerable, and in addition, it is an expensive technique that requires large investments. Therefore, our commanders will give preference to evading hostilities in order to strike later. ”
In addition, although Chinese anti-submarine warfare weapons do not produce any special impression, the PLA Navy is still able to conduct stubborn military operations near its shores. "The PLA Navy has quite modest capabilities to conduct anti-submarine defense, but I would not dismiss the ability of the Chinese armed forces to conduct an effective anti-submarine campaign in their coastal waters," Clark says. “One of the advantages that anti-submarine defense forces possess is that they just have to prevent submarines from taking up their positions in order to effectively accomplish the tasks assigned. Destroy the enemy's submarines is not necessary. The PLA can cope with this task using detection devices installed on the seabed, active sonar stations and rockets, whose torpedoes and depth charges are their warhead. ”
This means that without help even a submarine will be difficult to act near the Chinese territorial waters. “If the PLA Navy can obstruct and interfere with our boat’s operations within 200-300 nautical miles from its coast, we will not be able to effectively fight enemy surface ships and strike at important targets,” Clark says. - And this means that we need other forces and means to operate under the water near the Chinese coast. And in this case, we will need unmanned submarines - large, with a long duration, as well as small ones launched from submarines. In addition, we will need impact underwater tools and sensor systems. ”
But although submarines are extremely effective in the course of modern warfare, their stealthiness and the duration of autonomous navigation may force the enemy to escalate the conflict. "The increase in underwater combat power in wartime increases the effectiveness of the armed forces as a whole, but there may be unforeseen consequences that increase the likelihood of a war, because China, with its adventurism and propensity to force others into retaliation, will be seriously challenged," said a former naval officer. Bryan McGrath, director of the Navy consulting firm FerryBridge Group. “Rapid progress in this direction seems inappropriate.”
According to McGrath, submarines are unable to demonstrate strength, because friendly countries, like the enemy, simply do not see a noticeable US naval presence. “An important part of our strategy is to demonstrate loyalty to allies and friends, assuring them of our presence and deterring the enemy through visible combat power,” said McGrath. “And submarines simply cannot do this convincingly.”
In order to contain Chinese assertiveness and prevent Chinese aggression, the US needs "a daily and visible presence, supported by a demonstration of combat power," Clark says. For this we need lower class forces, such as coastal defense ships and amphibious assault carriers. “In peacetime, demonstration and the“ presence ”of such lower class ships are advisable ... to show China and our allies with partners that we are in place and ready to act,” Clark notes. - If a conflict begins, our forces will be in its very center. This can be called a provocative moment, but no matter what names we use, these forces demonstrate American determination, and they will force the United States to react in the event of an attack on them, even if indirectly. ”
Hendrix acknowledges the concern of the American allies, who claim that the submarines simply do not create the sensation of a noticeable American presence. “I was directly told by representatives of foreign countries that submarines do not create the impression of a visible American presence,” he says. Hendrix agrees that the US Navy needs an optimal combination of different types of ships. This means that the fleet must purchase more frigates and simple destroyers. “We need a visible presence,” he says.
According to Hendrix, some may argue with this, noting that a small American ship does not seem like a formidable and effective restraining force. But if a potential adversary begins to carry out harassing actions against such a ship, submarines always have the opportunity to demonstrate that they are hiding in the depths of the sea waters. Moreover, if a smart adversary guesses that something terrible and dangerous is hiding under the waves, a submarine with cruise missiles can cause him to sweat in speculations, since he will not know exactly where she is, and this will create an additional element of deterrence. “People are made to worry about what they don’t know,” Hendrix notes.
Information