Find the Missing Submarine
Find the Missing Submarine: Focusing on North Korea’s Nuclear Threats and the Importance of Anti-Submarine Warfare
Introduction
Modern art performance by Italian artist Sven Sachsalber - Finding a needle in a haystack
In Korea, there is a saying, “Searching for a needle in a sand dune,” akin to the English phrase, “Looking for a needle in a haystack.” Both expressions illustrate the daunting task of finding something nearly impossible. The striking similarity in these expressions from different cultures highlights a common understanding of the absurdity in pursuing such tasks.
In our daily lives, situations often arise that feel as hopeless as these proverbial searches. Imagine you’ve had a heavy night of drinking, and upon waking, you realize you’ve overslept and are late for work. Your car keys are nowhere to be found, and you can’t recall where you left them. How do you find them? Or consider a more serious scenario: you’ve taken your child to a crowded amusement park, and in the throng of people, you lose their hand. How would you go about finding your child?
Tasks that seem nearly impossible don’t only occur in everyday life but also on a societal and national scale, particularly in warfare. For instance, search and rescue (SAR) operations are crucial for locating and saving individuals lost in mountains or at sea. These operations span diverse environments, including urban settings, battlefields, air, and sea. If you recall the Sewol Ferry disaster, you’ll understand the vital importance of swift and effective responses. For the U.S. Coast Guard, SAR missions are among the oldest and most critical duties they perform.
Recently, North Korea has been developing submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), capable of carrying intercontinental ballistic missiles. These pose a threat not only to South Korea but also to allied territories, including the United States. The fact that these missiles can be launched from hidden submarines makes the situation even more dire. Searching for and preemptively neutralizing a submarine in the vast ocean is truly a “needle in a haystack” situation. However, history shows that such desperate situations have been overcome before. Let’s explore these cases and consider the potential for future search operations.
1. Introduction
(1) The 2022 Defense White Paper
According to South Korea’s 2022 Defense White Paper, preparations are underway to counter the escalating nuclear missile threats posed by North Korea, particularly concerning the five major defense tasks. In response, South Korea is enhancing surveillance and reconnaissance assets in collaboration with the U.S. and Japan, focusing on pre- and post-launch strategies. However, ongoing conflicts, such as the Ukraine-Israel and Russia-Ukraine wars, have lowered the nuclear threshold and diminished the significance of denuclearization. North Korea continues to advance its SLBM and submarine technologies, shifting from a minimal deterrence strategy to a limited deterrence strategy, heightening the threat level. Experts warn that South Korea could be held “nuclear hostage,” suffering various socio-economic and cultural impacts.
South Korea’s military is preparing to counter these threats through the Kill Chain, KAMD, and KMPR three-axis systems. The Kill Chain and KAMD aim to showcase a “denial deterrence” strategy by preemptively tracking and neutralizing nuclear missiles. The KMPR warns of massive retaliatory strikes in response to North Korean nuclear attacks, a “punitive deterrence” strategy. However, North Korea is focusing on developing submarines and SLBM technologies with high stealth and survivability. Can the three-axis system effectively counter the more threatening SLBM?
(2) Specifications of North Korea’s Submarines and Nuclear Missiles
North Korea has advanced its submarine technology through reverse engineering and assistance from major allies like Russia and China. Historically, this development has progressed from the Whiskey-class to the Romeo-class, the Shark-class, and the Yugo-class. However, all of these are small diesel submarines, noisy and too small to carry lightweight SLBMs. North Korea’s SLBMs are mainly deployed on the Sinpo-class submarines or possibly on nuclear-powered submarines currently under development. (North Korea’s missile miniaturization technology is believed to be world-class.) It is reported that North Korea is fully committed to advancing its submarine and nuclear missile technologies.
The currently developed nuclear missiles are estimated to have a range of 15,000 km, potentially threatening not only South Korea but also parts of the U.S. mainland. The ballistic nature of these missiles, coupled with their high speed and low radar cross-section (RCS), makes detection extremely difficult. By 2017, North Korea successfully tested the underwater launch of an SLBM and has since operationalized it.
(3) The Importance of Anti-Submarine Warfare
SLBMs pose a significant threat not only to the Korean Peninsula but to all nations globally. Therefore, to counter SLBMs, it is crucial to effectively use surveillance and reconnaissance assets to establish pre- and post-launch readiness. Anti-submarine warfare (ASW) typically involves using submarines, destroyers, and patrol aircraft, and is structured in seven stages: detection, classification, identification, tracking, command, decision, and response. To counter the continental powers of North Korea, China, and Russia, the maritime powers of South Korea, the U.S., and Japan have formed an alliance. Since 2016, joint exercises have been conducted to counter ASW. To address the shortage of reconnaissance assets, the South Korean military is focusing on developing next-generation destroyers and submarines while also showing interest in future-oriented technologies like unmanned underwater vehicles.
As submarine and SLBM technologies become more advanced, the importance of ASW continues to rise. Moreover, from a command and control perspective, it is necessary to overhaul existing doctrines to ensure the effective use of collected information for more efficient operations. However, merely increasing the scale of reconnaissance assets or collecting vast amounts of information is risky. We must consider how to make effective decisions based on these assets and information. Leveraging advanced technologies from the Fourth Industrial Revolution within the U.S. C4ISR (Command, Control, Communication, Computer, Intelligence, Surveillance, & Reconnaissance) framework will be crucial.
2. Main Body
(1) Koopman’s U-Boat Search Operations during World War II
Koopman, a leading scientist of his time, established “Search Theory” to locate German U-boats during World War II. This research laid the foundation for modern Operations Research, a field that supports efficient decision-making through mathematical techniques, primarily involving statistics and mathematical modeling. Koopman’s theory focused on stationary targets and established three primary types of search theories.
(2) The 1966 Palomares Search Operation
During the Cold War, the U.S. carried out the Chrome Dome operation, where B-52 strategic bombers carrying four hydrogen bombs flew over the Arctic Ocean 24 hours a day. During one of these missions, a refueling mishap caused an explosion, resulting in the loss of the bombs. While three bombs were quickly recovered, one remained missing, prompting a search operation. The project was led by Craven, a civilian scientist with the Navy, with assistance from Daniel Wagner and his assistant Henry Richardson. However, the operation’s success was limited, ultimately leading to the discovery of the damaged bomb in a Spanish tomato field.
(3) The 1968 USS Scorpion Search Operation
During the Cold War, while working on a deep-sea submarine system project, the U.S. Navy’s submarine USS Scorpion disappeared. Henry Richardson and Lawrence D. Stone were brought in to solve the problem using the Monte Carlo Sampling method and ocean current analysis, developed during the Manhattan Project. Lawrence D. Stone later established the “Optimal Search Theory.”
(4) The 1976 Collision between US Voge and Soviet K-22
Nicholson, who would later become the U.S. Navy’s Mediterranean Commander, requested Henry Richardson’s help in an ASW operation to search for and detect Soviet submarines in the Mediterranean. Using techniques developed from past cases, Richardson created a program that updated data in real-time using computers. The operation, conducted by the USS Voge, successfully detected and tracked a Soviet K-22 submarine. Unable to outrun the destroyer, the submarine collided with the USS Voge and was captured.
(5) The 2009 Air France Flight AFF447 Search Operation
In 2009, Air France Flight AFF447, en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, went missing. Metron Inc., founded by Lawrence D. Stone, was tasked with conducting the search operation. They developed a technique by consulting experts, constructing various scenario sets, and updating probabilities based on the weight of each scenario. The search results were then used to support decision-making by operation personnel.
(6) The U.S. Coast Guard’s Automated Search and Rescue Program in 2013
When people or assets are lost near the coast, finding and rescuing them quickly is a top priority for the U.S. Coast Guard. An automated program called CASP was proposed by Discenza and later developed into the SAROPS program in 2013, which incorporates real-time ocean current data. This program is known for its high performance, typically locating missing persons within 12 hours, no matter how vast the search area. By combining pre-existing information with ocean currents, the program proposes optimal search strategies.
3. Conclusion
As North Korea continues to advance its SLBM technology and develop submarines with high stealth and survivability, not only South Korea but the entire world is under the stress of being “nuclear hostages.” South Korea is striving to overcome this crisis through its three-axis system and joint operations with the U.S. and Japan. However, practical solutions and advanced technologies are crucial for effectively overcoming these threats.
Anti-submarine warfare is akin to “finding a needle in a haystack.” However, the efforts made thus far, the information to be gathered in the future, and the key intelligence assets collected through allied forces will be instrumental in developing crucial technologies. The possibility has been proven through past world wars, the Cold War, and modern history. Preliminary research suggests that responding to SLBM-equipped submarines in ASW may not be as impossible as it seems.
Optimal search technology is more about supporting effective decision-making from a command and control perspective than solving practical problems. Given the few cases where machine learning, IoT, and AI have been integrated into these systems, securing these technologies could enable us to address significant threats in future warfare.
Comments