Barracuda SSN Marine Nationale New Submarine

[RubiconNZ]

France Launches Barracuda Nuclear Submarine Program

PARIS --- The French Ministry of Defence has awarded the DCN shipyards group a contract for the development and production of the Barracuda-class nuclear attack submarine. Valued at 7.87 billion euros, the entire Barracuda program covers six boats, but the initial 1.4 billion contract signed yesterday funds the research and development phase and the construction of the lead boat.

Displacing 5,300 tonnes, the new submarines will be twice as large as the Rubis-class boats they will replace, and roughly the same size as the Royal Navy’s Trafalgar-class boats. The Barracuda, fitted with four launch tubes, will be able to carry up to 20 heavy weapons (a combination of heavyweight torpedoes, anti-ship missiles and Scalp naval cruise missiles) and to accommodate a dozen commandos, whose equipment will be carried in a mobile pod attached to the deck, aft of the sail. The boat is designed for operational cruises of up to 70 days.

The Barracuda will be built at DCN’s Cherbourg plant, while its nuclear propulsion unit, derived from that developed for the “Le Terrible” nuclear missile submarine, will be supplied by Areva TA under the prime contractorship of the French atomic energy commission, CEA. Barracuda’s nuclear propulsion offers two significant advantages over previous generations: it will require refuelling once every ten years (instead of every seven years for the Rubis-class), while the enrichment process will use the same nuclear fuel as that used by French nuclear power stations. These innovations will substantially reduce the total cost of ownership of the new boats.

The first Barracuda-class boat is to enter service in 2017, with the others following every two years until 2026, when the sixth and last boat is due to be commissioned.

Link
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/12/22/business/EU_FIN_France_Submarine_Contract.php

My biggest question over this the light armament load only 20 weapons on a 5600 tonne vessel, the Japanes Oyashio's cary the same and they are only 2750 tonnes or so. Why the lack? Even just 4 tubes is low, sure if combined with a VLS then sure but its not.:unknown

 

[EnigmaNZ]

The Rubis only carried 14, same as the much smaller 209. A long duration sub is going to be hampered in wartime by having to return for new loadouts frequenty. The Astute carries 38, the bigger Seawolf 50, I'd want 2 dozen torps, and a dozen spaces for other eg ASuW, TacCM, etc, with a spare space to allow swopouts of intube weapons, in line with Astute and Virginia. Disappointing.

 

[Das Kardinal]

Hello, my two cents on Barracuda's weapon load. Of course more than 20 weapons would be nice, but you know the French saying "le mieux est l'ennemi du bien" (translates roughly as "better is the enemy of good").
I think the emphasis for Barracuda was on improving their discretion and sensor capabilities, bringing them on par with other advanced Western designs (Astute, Virginia, Seawolf) in that respect. This automatically rules out a smallish platform like the Rubis-Amethystes. OTOH, the French budget doesn't have the "stretchiness" of the American one This means that if you don't make any compromise on stealthiness and sensors (and rightly so for a sub) you have to compromise on something else. In Barracuda's case, high automation and a 60 man crew, which has its challenges (stuff like damage control, crew isolation etc...) but is the "way to go" for manpower-strapped western navies anyway. And a reduced weapon loadout which is the main criticism on the new class.
Here's my answer (meaning it's just my idea, I'm just a citizen interested in defense matters, but it makes sense so it must also be in the head of the Powers that be ) : Barracuda may well be the first SSN program designed AFTER the end of the Cold War (I'm not sure about Virginia), for operational requirements relevant to the current (and expected future)world situation, not for the mythical "WW3" between huge NATO and Soviet armies.
Thus, Barracuda's likely targets would be those "rogue states" navies, not mighty fleets numbering tens upons tens of big subs. Though those navies may well operate advanced conventional subs, there just won't be huge numbers of them and a single Barracuda is expected to be able to sink all of them with 20 weapons.
In other words, it's not supposed to play "Sub Quake" à la Tom Clancy's SSN with rows upon rows of hostile boats to shoot.

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

Well,
I understand that you are a bit disappointed about the number of weapons carried by our new SSN, I personnaly find too that 20 weapons is a bit light.
However, considering current threats, 20 weapons are enough to do the job.
And we have a very strict budget that does not allow the purchase of huge quantities of high-tech weapons. On the barracuda, stealth, detection, automation are the emphasized point, together with weapon reliability.

The "commando capability" is another welcomed thing, because we lost it with the decomission of our SSKs, though it was still possible with the Rubis class, it is more difficult to deploy them.

 

[Francois]

Do you know the odds when a submarine has gone to a mission and has used 20 torps?
ASW is not a shoot-them-up.
20 are far enough.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Do you know the odds when a submarine has gone to a mission and has used 20 torps?
ASW is not a shoot-them-up.
20 are far enough.

I suppose it depends on the ease of reloads, suppose they are on ops in the Indian ocean, they have a weapons load of 8 torpedo's, 6 Cruise missiles and 6 ASM's, its not quite as much when its broken down, 20 torps are a heck of a lot and more than enough for sure.

however I suppose that they have been operating with the 20 for years now and decided that is enough, they must of swapped the extra space for commandos, I suppose there is the possibility of UUV's as well given a 2016 date.

 

[harryriedl]

is there any reson why french subs are so much smaller than other nuke boats.

they seem half the size of UK US boats

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

Yes there is a reason...
Cost reduction!

But it might not be true about our SSBN.

 

[Rich]

is there any reson why french subs are so much smaller than other nuke boats.

they seem half the size of UK US boats

Nations build, arm, or buy boats based on projected contingencies. While the French dont operate quite and capable diesels they do build and export them which puts them in a good position to develop a nuke boat that can go into shallow water after them. Does the size of the new barracudas, and older Amethystes, reflect that? Probably! Lets face it, the chances are far greater the French will get into a shooting war against a 3rd world adversary then they will against a 1st world submarine navy.

The weapons load of the new boat will also reflect that reality. Im a little surprise the French dont also operate diesels with AIP. No doubt national pride is part of the answer but a half dozen of their own Scorpenes would augment their nuke boat navy nicely. One cant help but notice how closely their nuke and diesel programs have paralleled each other thru the years.

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

Im a little surprise the French dont also operate diesels with AIP.

Because it is not worthy. Our Marine cannot bear the cost augmentation of upkeeping a fleet of SSKs, and basically we need units that are able to escort our CVN and SSBN, that travel half of the planet to gather intelligence and deploy commandos on rogue states...
Only nuke boats can do all of the mentionned missions without replenishment.

And we suffer of the lack of people. It is a real problem nowadays for us to recruit people in our navy, people with the skill requirements to be submariners especially.

 

[Big-E]

Because it is not worthy. Our Marine cannot bear the cost augmentation of upkeeping a fleet of SSKs, and basically we need units that are able to escort our CVN and SSBN, that travel half of the planet to gather intelligence and deploy commandos on rogue states...
Only nuke boats can do all of the mentionned missions without replenishment.

And we suffer of the lack of people. It is a real problem nowadays for us to recruit people in our navy, people with the skill requirements to be submariners especially.

Does France maintain any sub tenders? It's always nice to get some fresh food in the middle of a patrol.

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

Does France maintain any sub tenders? It's always nice to get some fresh food in the middle of a patrol.

No I don't think we still have this type of ship, but I'm not sure...
I'll check that.

 

[Rich]

Because it is not worthy. Our Marine cannot bear the cost augmentation of upkeeping a fleet of SSKs, and basically we need units that are able to escort our CVN and SSBN, that travel half of the planet to gather intelligence and deploy commandos on rogue states...
Only nuke boats can do all of the mentionned missions without replenishment.

And we suffer of the lack of people. It is a real problem nowadays for us to recruit people in our navy, people with the skill requirements to be submariners especially.

True but those aren't the only missions your boats are tasked with. France also has local responsibilities, as well as interests in the Med, Persian Gulf, and other good SSK water. And its true that while a SSN can go forever the crew cant. Which means replenishment must always be available, especially since your SSNs are not that much bigger then your SSKs.

Dont get me wrong I admire the French nuke boat program, and the amount of national will it reflects. And no doubt both programs benefit from each other. But also I cant, offhand, think of any other country that has sustained both a diesel and nuke program and NOT used both in its own navy.

Then again I think America should have sustained a diesel program as well. There is plenty of water we may fight in that may be tight for a 9,000 ton, billion $$, behemoth. And while we have 12 carriers only 3 or 4 are forward deployed at any one time so shadowing a carrier is hardly a single reason for maintaining a 5 SSN to 1 Carrier navy, "a % the French Navy also has with their 6 SSNs and 1 carrier".

As to "getting good people"? We have a saying here that "money talks and BS walks". Better salaries attract good people.

During the Cold War our all nuke 50+ SSN boat navy made sense ,but lately Ive been starting to wonder with the proliferation of very capable diesels throughout the 3rd world.

 

[Dr Phobus]

I must agree to resolve any personal issues, especially in the day of very hi tech weapon systems. The navy's need to pay, educate and ensure a standard of living whilse on borad ship too the best of there abilities.

As for the RN nuke fleet, does it also face the same problems the French do, traditionally we have had interests in the med, a rather shallow peace of water for a 7800T Asute. Seeing a few AIP's would have been nice. Still, few navies seem to want the mix.

 

[Francois]

You have to understand that:
1- France has not the mil-budget of the US Navy.
2- France has territories on every ocean of the world.

The submarines primary missions are:
1- ASW protection of the deterrence asset while in transit in or to ports.
2- ASW protection for the amphib/carrier group(s).

Secondary roles are various specops and other misc missions.

An AIP sub would only answer to the secondary roles, hence not that effetive, as there are no way they can fulfill the primary roles.

PRs and BCRs have the capability to support submarines at sea.

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

As to "getting good people"? We have a saying here that "money talks and BS walks". Better salaries attract good people.

I may have made a bad explanation about this. The formation is costly, moreover in order to exploit entirely the capacities of a sub, you need 2 crews, it is costly too.
And concerning the money, that is not true in France, the Marine offers good salaries and a sustainable employ, however less and less people are attracted. That 's a true plague.

Until 1999, we had SSKs... but with the end of coldwar, the coastal defence role they had became not worthy to keep them in service.

 

[contedicavour]

The Barracudas are pretty good cost-effective platforms with excellent cruise missiles (Scalp Naval - some people say up to 1000 km range... though for sure > 400km), good ASMs (SM39), mediocre F17P torpedoes (lower range and speed than German, British, Italian and US equivalents). France really needs a modern torpedo with speeds of up to 50kn and max ranges of >40 km ...

What is sad is that France does not escape the general trend of strong reductions in total sub numbers (it used to have 4 Agosta SSK and 6 SSN ...) though no nation has escaped this submarine numbers' reductions (except South Korea and potentially India is the Scorpene arrive before the T209s or the older Kilos are retired).

cheers

 

[Das Kardinal]

I read somewhere (in DSI I think) that there is a Future Torpille Lourde program to replace our current outdated torpedoes. Couldn't find much on the net about it though. Most logical way would be to build on Mu-90 technology.

 

[contedicavour]

I read somewhere (in DSI I think) that there is a Future Torpille Lourde program to replace our current outdated torpedoes. Couldn't find much on the net about it though. Most logical way would be to build on Mu-90 technology.

Interesting, thanks. It's strange that Italy and France have cooperated so much on MU-90 and sonar systems but are proceeding separately on heavy torpedoes. Finmeccanica's WASS division is marketing the Blackshark which is closer to the Germans' DM2A4.
Any news on this "future torpille lourde" would be welcome !

A+

cheers

 

[DoC_FouALieR]

The new torpedo will be undoubtely the Blachshark.

F17 are going to be decommissioned by 2008.