STEALTH PHILOSOPHY, REAL SOLUTIONS FROM SWEDEN

John Nilsson2 Kockums AB1 Summary This paper describes the logical chain between - environment and threats in the extreme littorals, - operational aspects including mission effectiveness and survivability - technical solutions based on holistic Full-Stealth approach and composite material. Compared to typical conventional ships, the Visby-like approach gives: - Higher mission effectiveness through 3-6 times better survivability in both defensive and offensive missions. - 25% lower (average annual) Total Ownership Cost Extreme Littorals Environment and threat The Extreme Littorals can be described as follows: Complex environment - Shallow waters, archipelago, temperature and salinity layers makes hiding easy and detection difficult. Heavy sea traffic - Ferries, merchant ships, fishing and pleasure boats A broad spectrum of threats - Anti Ship Missiles, Mines, Torpedoes, Artillery, Swimmers, Small Units. Short distances - Lack of space for defence in depth and for manoeuvring. Short reaction times. With an average water depth of 60-65 m, the Baltic Sea east of Sweden is certainly such an Extreme Littoral environment.
R ange

H ig h

D e p th

Sound velocity

Low

Figure 1.

Illustration of how fragmented salinity and temperature layers complicate performance of underwater sensors in the extreme littorals like the Baltic Sea. (SaabTech).

Kockums stands for leading edge, world-class naval technology - above and below the surface. Kockums designs, builds and maintains submarines and naval surface vessels that incorporate the most advanced stealth technology. Kockums has 1200 employees in Sweden, and is part of the German HDW Group.

Following an M Sc at the Chalmers University of Technology in 1974, Mr Nilsson joined Karlskronavarvet in 1975. He headed the design team at Kockums ABs Surface Vessel Division from 1997-2001, and is now engaged in product development and marketing.

Operational requirements drive the solutions The Baltic Sea is one of many littoral areas found around the world. While the surface and air situations are well understood in such areas, underwater environment and threats are less known. The logical chain between operational requirements and suitable technical solutions is illustrated below.
Wide speed range Monohull configuration

Mulitimission

Large payload Low structural weight Non-corroding structure

Low throughlife cost

Low fuel consumption Proven technology High shock resistance Low signatures Magnetic Underwater/stern exhausts

All-composite structure

High survivability

Electric Infrared Radar Visual Acoustic

Shaping & flatness

Waterjet propulsion

Figure 2.

The logical chain between operational requirement and suitable technical solutions for the Extreme Littorals.

Operational analysis Survivability can be defined as follows:

Survivability = (Susceptibility x Vulnerability) -1 x Recoverability

The operational/tactical advantages of composite and Stealth can be illustrated by the following simplified examples. They are based on a relative comparison between two different philosophies, ie, Full-Stealth and Conventional.

FULL-STEALTH Composite Diesels/gas turbines w underwater/stern exhausts Waterjets

CONCEPT Structure Machinery Propulsion SUSCEPTIBILITY Radar (%) Infrared (%) Hydro-acoustic (%) Magnetic (%) Electric (%) Visual (%) VULNERABILITY Fire (%) Ballistic (%) Blast (%) UNDEX (%)

CONVENTIONAL Steel/aluminium Diesels/gas turbines w funnel/stack Propellers & rudders

Figure 3.

Comparison between typical Conventional and Full-Stealth (Visby-like) ship concepts.

Sensors and weapons, eg, surveillance radar, director, sonar, missiles, are assumed identical. In the Full-Stealth design, however, all deck equipment has been adapted to the Full-Stealth approach. Offensive scenario Compared to the Conventional design, the Full-Stealth ship has typically 99% lower radar signature (m2 RMS value) but similar vulnerability and recoverability. In an offensive (duel) scenario this results in approximately 1/3 the susceptibility, ie, three times higher survivability. In the example below, the Full-Stealth (green/left) ship detects the higher signature of the Conventional (red/right) ship and launches a weapon. The red ship is destroyed just as it detects the green ship.

Figure 4.

Offensive scenario example.

Defensive scenario Compared to a steel ship with similar equipment, a composite ship has typically 90% lower magnetic signature and can withstand twice the Shock Factor in an underwater explosion. Recoverability is similar for composite and steel. The Shock Factor can be defined as:
Shock Factor = Closest distance from ship to charge, (m) x Charge size (kg)-0.5

In a defensive (mine threat) scenario this results in approximately half the susceptibility and twice the vulnerability, ie, four times higher survivability. In the example below, both ships miss detecting the mine using the sonar. The Conventional (red/upper) ship is detected by the mine sensor while the Full-Stealth (green/lower) ship remains undetected.

Figure 5.

Defensive scenario example.

In many cases, it will not be known in advance whether a pending situation will develop into a defensive or offensive type of scenario. One outstanding advantage of the composite solution is that it will multiply the survivability in both cases! Conclusion Compared to typical conventional ships, the Visby-like approach gives: Higher mission effectiveness through 3-6 times better survivability in both defensive and offensive missions. In addition, the use of composite instead of steel results in 25% lower (average annual) Total Ownership Cost due to: Non-corroding composite structure reduced hull maintenance & no hull replacement Half the structural weight with composite reduced fuel cost

The composite solution The CFRP-sandwich could be explained as two stiff faces that are separated by a light core material. The core material increases the bending strength and stiffness with only small weight contributions.
Face Core Face Figure 6. The FRP-Sandwich principle. Two stiff faces (handling tension/compression) separated by a light rigid core material (handling shear forces).

In the past 30 years, Kockums has developed and built over 30 vessels in different Fibre Reinforced Plastics (FRP) sandwich concepts. Stealth and extreme weight requirements drove the Visby structural design to full use of Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastics (CFRP).

Stealth solutions and tools

Figure 7.

Radar signature predictions for Visby-like (right) and conventional (left) ships (including weapons, sensors or other deck equipment). Spot signature from low (blue) to high (red) according to Kockums OPTISCAT code.

90 Hot surface (from sun) 135 Plumes 45

Hot surface (from machinery) 180

2000

4000

W/sr @500m @500m

Overall conventional ship

Overall Visby-like ship

225

315

Figure 8.

270 Typical infrared signatures from conventional vs Visby-like ship. (Based on an article in Warship Technology, March 1999).

Figure 9.

Typical results from infrared signature analysis using the NTC/ShipIR code by Davis Engineering. Left: A Visby-like ship, ie, with composite hull, waterjet propulsion and underwater/stern exhausts (Kockums).
Right: A conventional ship (Doug Fraedrich, US Naval Research Laboratory).

Figure 10.

Magnetic signature (x, y, z, total) for a Visby-like ship with composite hull. Result from analysis using the TESLA code developed by Kockums for non-metallic hulls.

Corrosion Related Magnetic signature magnitude

Static Electric signature magnitude

Conventional Conventional ship

Conventional ship Conventional ship with reduction system

Visby-like ship

Distance

Distance

Figure 11.

Typical Corrosion Related Magnetic (CRM) and Static Electric (SE) signatures for a conventional ship and a Visby-like ship of composite with waterjets. Based on an article in Warship Technology, March 1999.

dB rel 40 30 20 10 0 Frequency dominated by propulsion Standard waterjet units (HMS Gteborg) Improved waterjet units (HMS Visby) Controllable-pitch propellers (HMS Stockholm)

Figure 12.

Relative comparison of hydro-acoustic levels at 15 kts between different propulsors on different Swedish Navy ships. (KAMEWA).

Figure 13.

Symbolic illustration of how the visual signature can be reduced by optimised camouflage paint etc.

The Visby class The real thing With the introduction of the Visby corvette, the Swedish Navy will be among the very first navies to operate a real multi-mission capable Stealth ship. The Visby and her oncoming four sister ships will therefore probably be the most potent ships in their size ever built. After successful shipyard sea trials, the first ship was delivered to the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration in June 2002. After further sea trials, remaining Combat Systems are now being installed at the shipyard. The ship will enter operational service in 2005 and all five ships will have entered operational service in the Swedish Navy in 2008.

Figure 14.

HMS Visby.

Other Stealth designs While we now see the Visby corvettes emerge from the shipyard and enter trials, the Swedish Navy, the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration, universities, Kockums and other parties are well into the development of the next generation of Swedish surface ships. The Visby project has also aroused considerable positive international interest. At the beginning, this was focused on technical aspects. Since then, many potential users have become aware of the tactical advantage of the Full-Stealth approach. Based on this, Kockums and its parent company Howaldtswerke Deutsche Werft (HDW) have jointly developed a number of variants with alternative sizes and equipment for the international market. In the United States, Kockums is teamed since September 2002 with Northrop Grumman Ships Systems for different application of the Stealth and composite technologies. The design philosophy includes: Design tools and many solutions derived from HMS Visby. Full-Stealth platform and deck equipment. All-composite structure (hull and superstructure) with optimised geometry, extremely flat surfaces with good reflectivity and good thermal insulation without thermal bridges. Modular layout to simplify design alternatives and splitting of work General arrangement, composite structure and fittings to minimise production cost. Smart hatches and doors. All-diesel machinery with water-cooled exhausts in waterline All-waterjet propulsion Carefully arranged ventilation openings, etc. External wash-down system. Low-emissive camouflage paints.

Figure 15.

The reference HMS Visby, 72 m, 650 t, 40 kn.

Figure 16.

Visby+, 88 m, 1500 t, 33 kn.

Figure 17.

Visby++, 104 m, 2200 t, 33-45 kn.

Figure 18.

Example of possible commonality between naval and coast guard ship platforms.