South Korea eyes French design for indigenous nuclear sub, sources say

defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2018/03/28/south-korea-eyes-french-design-for-indigenous-nuclear-sub-sources-say/

Attached: 7FYWXBF47ZGDBGGUVJP4SIREL4.jpg (1200x871, 141K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada-class_submarine
globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/smx.htm
janes.com/article/74044/dsei-2017-uk-defers-harpoon-retirement
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

America better get in there and say "No"; or else Canada will feel betrayed.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada-class_submarine
>go to "American Opposition" sub header

Fuck off to r•ddit with your shitty memes.

This is an interesting move for ROK. How many nations use nuclear subs?

I don't get why a nuclear attack sub helps counter actual nuclear missiles, but whatever. It is interesting that South Korea wants to join the nuclear sub club. I figure Japan could make their own if they really wanted to. All these treaties are confusing.

There is no treaty preventing Japan from adopting certain military assets. They self imposed restrictions on certain weapons.

Literally what reason could South Korea possibly have? The Yellow Sea is shallow as all hell, they have no reason to operate far away from South Korea since their main threats are obviously North Korea and China. Diesel-electric should really be enough for what they require.

>Literally what reason could South Korea possibly have?
Length of patrols I guess. It doesn't make sense to me. Australia is getting diesel electric versions of the same boat and they probably would benefit from nuclear subs.

I mean it would make sense if those were boomers so that they could actually counter North Korea's nuclear weapons but I don't think North Korea cares about mutual destruction. Not to mention that South Korea should be aware of the fact that the US would strike North Korea in case of a nuclear attack anyways.

Five

>I don't get why a nuclear attack sub helps counter actual nuclear missiles,
It lets you track SSBs and SSBNs across the ocean and sink them at will. A conventional aub will have extremely limited submerged high-speed range, so all an SSBN would have to do is move a bit fast for a while to completely lose the tailing SSK.

Nice design, it looks organic like a dolpĥin or someting.

Should've bought Chinese.

Very stealthy in the Yellow Sea.

jej

Attached: transferir.jpg (225x225, 9K)

Attached: 1446014964312.gif (200x150, 1.84M)

French is pretty much the only option. Russian SSN's are still shit, no one wants Chinese or Indian.

And the US and UK's subs are too good to export.

Maybe Canada shouldn't sign treaties that make themselves cucks?

How are French subs worse than British or American subs? Real question

They have a fraction of the operational experience which limits the drive for development.

Their submarine budget is also tiny compared to that of the UK or US.

plus, much like the germans (with the exeption of AIP) they have generally been behind the curve of R&D, implementing developments that have already been brought in by other nations.

INB4 "muh thales"

Thales produces sonar for the UK that has been designed and built in the UK, is not eligible for export and is based on work done with the US.

>Average Anglo dreamer
They went for French same reason that Russians went for French in Helicopter carriers or technology for their Aircrafts or Tanks

It's because France has the best Naval building experience, and also technology indépendance form the US

No Pierre, they went French because Naval Group replied to the tender.

If you note that neither anglo countries contractors replied to it, because you'd hardly see the two top NATO members offering/building/transferring military equipment to Russia.

>A South Korea-based think tank

stopped reading there

Leaked photo of the proposed design.

Attached: 800px_COLOURBOX4834106.jpg (800x533, 144K)

Because last time I remember the glorious UK technology superior next gen shit destroyer, stopped in the middle of the Arabian sea because the water was too hot for it, or when it broke down again after leaving 2km away from the UK shores, or when you don't have Anti-ship missiles because the US didn't send Harpoon and they will get the French Exocet

Or when the Glorious US latest Freedom class, edgy looking ship engines broke down near Panama, because the sea was too salty, or where they can't be fully armed because they will exceed the weight limit.

Nice technology you got there , nice superiority, very nice

Attached: 1522063642006.jpg (640x853, 63K)

The entire premise of the think tank is based on the idea that North Korea is somehow capable of building SSBN with nuclear weapons, so they want nuclear submarines to look for them all day.

The program director of the Barracuda straight up admitted its only targeting the level of stealth from the Triomphant, ie - Not advancing the stealth to the levels of the US or UK who poured a shit-ton of money into their designs to push ahead.

Barracuda is pretty "simple and safe" as far as SSNs go, albeit with western sonar, which is quite good.

As someone else said, they simply haven't the experience as the US/UK

>the eternal baguette

I see Rafalefag is expanding his borders.

>or when you don't have Anti-ship missiles

Except they do? We still have the support contracts for the UK over here in the US, so they're still in service.

> or when it broke down again after leaving 2km away from the UK shores

That'd be why they have only ever missed a single deployment in over a decade of operating the class? Some Bong had a link to details on it some time before.

>US latest Freedom class, edgy looking ship engines broke down near Panama

>Buttmad Frog can't tell the difference between LCS and Zumwalt in the US navy

When you try for anything more than just basic shit, you got to push a bit. Try today, better tomorrow.

Lel, I like your imagination, keep calming yourself with all of these lies

Attached: 3-submarine-1.jpg (500x171, 19K)

so wait a minute

ROK has type 214 which literally is the most quiet sub ever made so far having AIP

and now they want to buy nuclear ones ?

>They went for French same reason that Russians went for French in Helicopter carriers or technology for their Aircrafts or Tanks

Or because they are literally the only people exporting that stuff.

>Because last time I remember the glorious UK technology superior next gen shit destroyer, stopped in the middle of the Arabian sea because the water was too hot for it

A T45 shits on Horizon, it's not even funny. Plus a T45 has never returned to port becasue
propulsion problems, the NG intercooler is a jon issue hyped up by bored tabloids.

>or when it broke down again after leaving 2km away from the UK shores

A bust water pipe that was repaired in less than 24 hours - were they mean to not make use of their home port when it was 2hrs away?

>when you don't have Anti-ship missiles because the US didn't send Harpoon and they will get the French Exocet

We have harpoon, all we've announced is that the current missiles are being retired in 2020.

They will be replaced, but that replacement has not yet been announced because the T31e design competition is still ongoing and T26 wont need the missiles until 2020.

Any Harpoon replacement certainly wont be French. We are dropping SYLVER for everything barring Sea Viper.

We'll pick LRASM in the MK41 cells that can be fitted on T45, the cells that are ebing installed and T26 and the cells that might be installed on T31. This also gives commonality with P8 and F35.

Congratulations, you're literally a RT tier of stupid.

What's your problem, dude? I gave a factual response without any nationalism in it and you reply with some buttupset post?

No anglo country replied to the tender. That's a fact. You can't claim someone is BTFO in a race that they were never in!

>Because last time I remember the glorious UK technology superior next gen shit destroyer,
Derived from a JOINT project on IEP between the US, France and UK.
>stopped in the middle of the Arabian sea because the water was too hot for it
Due to teething issues with new technology, specifically relating the Northrup Grumman intercooler. However, all the Type 45s have enjoyed many successful deployments to the Gulf. Without issue.
>or when it broke down again after leaving 2km away from the UK shores
A broken prop shaft can happen to literally anyone.
>or when you don't have Anti-ship missiles because the US didn't send Harpoon and they will get the French Exocet
At no point will the UK not have AShMs equipped on their ships.
>Or when the Glorious US latest Freedom class, edgy looking ship engines broke down near Panama, because the sea was too salty, or where they can't be fully armed because they will exceed the weight limit.
There's not much one can defend around the LCSs, however they're suffering from the same concept problem as the UK's Type 45s and US's Zumwalts. New technology, new concepts and new designs having teething issues.

Do you want me to say that France can build warships? Yes, they very much can and their track record on successful exports is testament on that.

Attached: 1521357741171.jpg (700x695, 99K)

You sure got me
>Except they do? We still have the support contracts for the UK over here in the US, so they're still in service.

Except that they will no longer be in service starting from this year, and will stay with no anti ship missiles until 2030 if they don't get French

>Buttmad Frog can't tell the difference between LCS and Zumwalt in the US navy

Oh yeah, it was the best ship ever made by you fatties.

Freedom class is also a fucking disaster, literally every ship you have is a disaster, even the Burke class with all of its edgy radars and shit got fucked by some Vietnamese merchant boat

There's nothing wrong with confessing that your naval building experience is much less than teh French

You are not French. You are just baiting.

>I don't get why a nuclear attack sub helps counter actual nuclear missiles
It helps to counter enemy submarines. A SSN can just park outside wonsan and monitor everything coming in and out for months.

>Except that they will no longer be in service starting from this year, and will stay with no anti ship missiles until 2030 if they don't get French


imagine trying to discuss naval matters when being this uninformed.

T'es jaloux de notre technologie supérieure, sale Anglo

>tfw nobody wants your submarine because it's not offering non-nuclear version
seriously if you look at the recent submarine sales french and germans are dominating, followed by russia and china; japan, only recently entered the market due to their law.
It's a simple economics 'Demand determines everything', the only reason why brit submarines are either not offered nor selling is because they have no market niche.

Remember that time they were going to sell that carrier to Russia?

Or that both the UK and US are bound to each other by technology sharing agreements that neither cannot break.

>thinks having an X tail makes it advanced.

France has hit a dead end with reactor design. they can't produce a modern, powerful and quiet reactor. So they are doing what the Soviets did with alfa and just use an outdated design at higher and higher pressure to make up for the poor efficiency.

Of Submarines built in the west during the last 20 years, i'd be safe in saying French SSN's are by far the loudest.

They aren't even at 688 or Trafalgar tier.

Attached: Astute with SBS dock.jpg (1600x1018, 306K)

At this point, Canada is less valuable or appreciated as an ally than the ROK, despite their people genuinely despising and looking down on Americans due to cultural differences and ingratitude

That is just how worthless Canada is

Astute is not for sale, Neither is Virginia. For the exact same reason, F22 was not for sale.

They are bespoke systems at the pinnacle of technology as it stands.

to make and export system you'd basically need to build a new sub.
It's not just reactors, systems, sensors and weapons. It's how they are laid out, how they are shaped, everything from door hinges to the suspended floors is secret.

Non-nuclear submarines are a technological dead end for anyone not defending brown water.

There is simply not the power to have the sensors required for modern ASW work.

And even if they are fed data externally, they don't have the speed to make tactical use of that information while at sea.

>X ludder
>pump-jet
it's virtually the same system as nuclear subs except it has LiB instead of reactor

>aren't even considering american subs
Lol. Why is american equipment such garbage?

Unlike Jap and Aussie cucks whose homosexual people hate nuclear (which is why they're going to be stuck with SSKs despite the clear strategic need by both countries for long endurance subs), the dogeaters have ambitions to be a major power like the French in terms of nuclear energy.

Attached: 1 6BVrJh-xzxokbue01A9KqQ.jpg (700x466, 80K)

Source: your ass

Wtf is this loud reactor shit you're talking about, can you give some sources on this you little shitposter?

>France has hit a dead end with reactor design
Have you heard of the SMX class?

Attached: smx-25.jpg (1600x1200, 177K)

why spend time considering something that nobody will sell you?

The RN has had pump jets since 1974.

X tails are nothing special and only make real sense for brown water operations.

Theres no downside in having them though so now that most new subs are fly by wire, theres no reason not to have it.

Go read some books on submarine warfare.

Blind mans bluff, hunter killers, I cant be bothered finding you page numbers and farnkly you're not worth the effort.

>SMX class

>The famous French shipbuilding group DCNS is currently working on the development of seven SMX models from SMX-21 to SMX-27. DCNS' entire SMX line consists of vapourware concepts - basically "what could we do" studies.

globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/smx.htm

>Except that they will no longer be in service starting from this year

So now you're changing your story proving that you didn't know shit last time and are hastily googling everything?

And you're STILL wrong by the way, the 2018 retirement was cancelled.

janes.com/article/74044/dsei-2017-uk-defers-harpoon-retirement

They're not even going to make a decision until 2020 now.

>with no anti ship missiles until 2030 if they don't get French

Wrong again. FC/ASW is an MBDA joint UK/French missile, not "buying French".

>Oh yeah, it was the best ship ever made by you fatties.

So you're trying to talk shit about the US navy as though you know what you're meaning, despite you not even able to tell the difference between the LCS and our destroyers? Do you realize how ridiculous you look?

>There's nothing wrong with confessing that your naval building experience is much less than teh French

US - Building nuke subs since 1952, 206 built in total.
UK - Building nuke subs since 1959, 31 built in total.

And then...

France - Building nuke subs since 1971, only 16 ever built.

Well you're better experienced than the Indians, I suppose.

>tfw russians are still maintaining kilos and even brining them up to the further levels and so does the chinese.
you've seen too much spy movies, being secret isn't always the best choice since almost every industry runs with money, commercial sales is important as well.
US is not offering F-22 because they went out of production long time ago, instead they're offering JSF, so fair enough.

>If the S5W-derived reactors used in the
first French ballistic missile submarines are excluded,
all French nuclear propulsion systems are based on the
CAS-48 reactor originally designed for the Rubis class
submarines. The severe constraints under which this
system was designed have resulted in a power train that
is noisy, inefficient and expensive to maintain. A
Canadian technical evaluation of the system was highly
critical of safety aspects of this design.

globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/smx.htm

Go fuck yourself. french submarine reactors to this day are based on early 1970's design.

>this is what Americans belive
They don't want your equipment because it's garbage. Russian subs can detect them from the moment they leave port, and american subs are such garbage they can't detect Russian ones when they shadow them on literally every deployment. Kek

You do realize that the best nuclear technology is the French one, right?
Go ask any nuclear engineer, he'll tell you that the French method is the safest and most advanced

Thats not a hard thing to beat. American subs are garbage, just like their planes.

>US is not offering F-22 because they went out of production long time ago

There was an export ban. had there not been a ban plenty of nations would have ordered them and the production lines would still be open to this day and F15, would not.

>you've seen too much spy movies, being secret isn't always the best choice since almost every industry runs with money, commercial sales is important as well.

I have no idea what point your trying to make.

>tfw russians are still maintaining kilos and even brining them up to the further levels and so does the chinese.

The Russians and Chinese depend on numbers, they only way they can afford to do this is by having the majority of their subs being SSK's.

the "updates" are also nothing to write home about. every class of subs in service for a decade or more had received new sensors and computers periodically. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that Russian and Chinese sensor updates in 2017 make the subs on par with anything the west has made in the last 10 years.

>you've seen too much spy movies, being secret isn't always the best choice since almost every industry runs with money, commercial sales is important as well.

Yeah no. They've both had lots of projects never for sale. SSNs are EXTREMELY potent cornerstones of sea denial and power, we'd probably rather sell the fucking B-2 Bombers than we would the Virginias.

>US is not offering F-22 because they went out of production long time ago,

It was never for sale even when in production, so thats bullshit.

> instead they're offering JSF, so fair enough.

Because its a JOINT Strike Fighter. We did the majority of the development, but so many countries were involved with it that its already so widespread it might as well be sold. It was designed with export in mind.

Civilian reactors =/= Naval reactors

Thresher.jpg

>Ignores every single point that proved him completely wrong and doesn't address his child-level knowledge getting BTFO about how he can't tell the difference between LCS and Zumwalt and tried to claim two different things that were both wrong
>Makes random MUH claim instead

Thresher used the same type of reactor that the French asked the US to borrow for Redoutable.

other than that i'm not sure what your point is because S5W is not a civilian reactor design.

Civilian reactors and completely different to naval ones, you couldn't make one work on a sub even if you tried to - but why would you even want one.

>The RN has had pump jets since 1974
I forgot to mention why pump-jet was not so popular with traditional submarines, although pump-jet has advantages in noise control and speed its poor energy efficiency has always been the main reason it being neglected, that's why DCNS is offering it alongside with LiB instead if traditional AIP, it's not as quite as similiar to the performance of nuclear subs but still a huge leap amongst non-nuclear subs.

Same as saying civilian cargo planes engines =/= military cargo planes engines

Don't cocksuck your self too much, it's just that you're so retarded it's not worth my time, but the nuclear thing was too much

ITT frog got assmad that people rightly consider french subs inferior to UK ones.

He then proceeds to sperg out both on and off topic with incorrect opinions.

After being BTFO on all fronts by facts he will probably go to bed in a sweaty rage as he struggles to come to terms with his inferiority.

@37355090
>Same as saying civilian cargo planes engines =/= military cargo planes engines

Attached: 1517351889716.jpg (500x459, 62K)

British submarine reactors are based on a 1960's design, what's your point?

Stop trying to act like you know the noise levels of current nuke subs you fucking mong

ITT Anglos being assmad because every navy in the world asks for French naval technology, and not them.
The solution was to create imaginary situations where the Anglo naval tech is too advanced that other countries can't get it

>Same as saying civilian cargo planes engines =/= military cargo planes engines

oh wow, you're actully retarded? You should genuinely go and do some research about the size, weight, complexity and power requirements of a civilian power plant compared to a marine one. They are not even remotely similar.

go read a book.

You got ass blasted, rebbit boi

I'm talking about the technology used and the advancement you dweeb, it's like arguing with a bunch of Forrest Gumps

My point is that american't subs are hot garbage, and the belong on the bottom of the sea

>create imaginary situations

Like thinking, power stations are the same as nuclear reactors?

Also why haven't you addressed this source by a third party that explicitly proves you wrong? Respond to the proof of stop wasting our time, you're just humiliating yourself and losing credibility, there are few enough frogs on Jow Forums to identify you in the future.

Remember that "anti-ice" modern US submarine that got stuck in ice... Twice !

Attached: US-submarine-got-stuck-in-the-ice-of-the-Arctic-video.jpg (3000x1993, 551K)

American equipment is awful.
Why do mutts even try?

>I'm talking about the technology used and the advancement you dweeb, it's like arguing with a bunch of Forrest Gumps

And please explain how advancements in squeezing every drop of heat out of a heat exchanger connected to a reactor working at maximum output translate to making a tiny reactor produce a small enough amount of heat for it to run passively, silently while still having the ability to bring more power online hundreds of times faster than the other reactor type?

Pretty much the only thing they have in common is that they use nuclear fusion.

If it was easy to translate then the french wouldnt be designing and building subs with 1970's reactors would they? And they would have used under powered submarine reactors in an aircraft carrier that need fueled every 10 minutes.

Aw, we made him so upset he's resorted to throwing bad insults. pathetic.

>t. Mutt posting from the bottom of the sea

They're like comparing the Rafale to the F-22/35 or the Charles De Gaulle to a Nimitz. They're "inferior" products only in comparison to their Anglo-American counterparts and they still can literally swim circles around their non-western competitors, which makes them absolute overkill for anyone not looking to engage Russia or China as a peer state.

ok, buddy. whatever makes you sleep at night, i guess

tfw you asked an honest question but some autist had to come up and sperg out
Thanks for the answers though guys

Hey i can sleep perfectly fine, knowing that Russian subs are always behind every American ship and sub, ready to end their worthless lives and send them to the bottom of the sea, and Americans fans do shit about it because they can't even find container ships, let alone superior Russian subs.

You're welcome buddy

Attached: HMS Trenchant BTFO USS Whale.jpg (1072x427, 57K)

>amerimutts in charge of anything
Hahahaha

>tfw you realise Oil slicks are manlets

>knowing that Russian subs are always behind every American ship and sub

Good lord, how ignorant can you get?

Attached: Alrosa pumpjet shroud.jpg (990x750, 265K)

It's the SOK that are tall

Attached: qatar-640x480.jpg (640x480, 52K)

Yet it clearly doesn't work worth a shit.

I dont think its worth it but heres a (you) anyway

Story behind pic?

I fucking misread that post and thought it meant the opposite, there are many contrarian opinions here but yours wasn't one of them. Time to step away for a while.

Attached: LA and northampton.jpg (1600x1034, 206K)

Not much of a story.

1960's sub lost in an exercise to a 1990's sub.

The brit sub was able to get under the US sub and take photos undetected.

Here's a UK Swiftsure taking photos of Kirov's propellers

Attached: HMS Swiftsure, 1977, Kirov Propeller.jpg (960x539, 62K)

>Here's a UK Swiftsure taking photos of Kirov's propellers
how will the russians ever recover?

The Bongs sure love to play with their subs.

Reminds me of that story of them straight up stealing a Russian sonar right off the fucking ship.

>1960's sub lost in an exercise to a 1990's sub.
wow its fucking nothing

sorry was your pride getting hurt?

even with a 30 year difference, you should be able to hear a submarine 100m away from you.

The US sub was outplayed for sure, despite it's disadvantage.

probably the reason why USS Whale was retired less than a year after.

might have had something to do with it being 30 year old as well

The most advanced towed array the russians had ever built and we sent one of older submarines to go and sail up to it, cut it off, and the Russians thought it'd just fallen off.

you're not good at reading are you? i addressed this.

take your wounded pride elsewhere.

>why can't a sub relying on equipment from the cold war detect something from the digital age?
Hurrr