|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:It's not much of a caveat since China and North Korea have significant submarine fleets. A contemporary diesel sub is very cheap to produce, way quieter than a nuclear submarine, and can launch torpedoes that are just as deadly as any nuclear sub is capable of. Anybody with enough naval production capacity could produce a significant fleet of diesel subs. They might not have much doctrine or experience, but like the IRA say "we only have to get lucky once." to be fair, the ira never did get lucky. thatcher died of a stroke at age 87 on the other hand, we do have this fantastic picture:  supposedly, a picture of a nimitz-class aircraft carrier taken from a soviet submarine off the US east coast https://www.pbase.com/image/101581592
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 23:19 |
|
|
StashAugustine posted:I think there was one instance of sub vs sub combat in ww2? yes, u-864 vs. was sunk by hms venturer when they were both submerged in 1945 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_submarine_U-864
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:44
|
|
|
Aglet56 posted:to be fair, the ira never did get lucky. thatcher died of a stroke at age 87 tell that to Mountbatten. or what's left of him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 02:45
|
|
|
Justin Tyme posted:Ah, you mean the hydrosonic missiles lol loving imagine the sonic boom caused by a faster-than-sound underwater vessel or missile
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:11
|
|
|
Weka posted:Imagine naming anything after Gerald Ford. would have been funnier if they named the baby carriers after him instead Or tacked on an asterisk
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:18
|
|
|
why are diesel subs so much quieter than nuclear ones
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:19
|
|
|
indigi posted:why are diesel subs so much quieter than nuclear ones diesels run on batteries. they're quiet while they have a charge and loud as hell when they need a charge and actually burn fuel. technology means the batteries are way better than in the 70s or w/e and don't have to go into "loud phase" that often
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:22
|
|
|
indigi posted:why are diesel subs so much quieter than nuclear ones you cannot "turn off" a nuclear reactor. even at the most minimal power level, you still need to keep the machinery running and the water pumping - this means that a nuclear submarine will always generate some level of noise no matter what a diesel-electric submarine, on the other hand, can power itself (for a while) using nothing but stored energy from its batteries, which does not have moving parts. so if you run on batteries and don't do anything else, then there's no sound to be made
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:23
|
|
|
its the bubbles!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:23
|
|
|
it's also why nuke subs make some sense for a US pacific fleet but zero sense for a chinese or north korean or possibly russian navy edit i forgot russian subs sitting under the arctic ice for months at a time; nukes make sense for them too. gonna guess ice movement drowns out any nuclear humming but iunno if sonar can isolate signals. also there's a difference between fleet subs and doomsday subs i say swears online has issued a correction as of 05:39 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:26
|
|
|
Top Gun Reference posted:Anti-torpedo torpedoes were in development for the USN and could have been a game changer if the program wasn't cancelled in 2018 lol. Supercavitating torpedoes would probably zoom right past those countermeasures anyway. The catch with that is, you can possibly develop effective anti-torpedo weapons but there's never gonna be a perfect defense against missiles, and you can fit subs to launch missiles. You could overwhelm a fleet from multiple directions out in the open ocean without them even being aware you're there. China is even developing high maneuver hypersonic missiles right now that would be practically impossible to track for current anti-missile systems.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:38
|
|
|
Chinese nuclear submarines are useful for atleast a couple reasons. There's ballistic missile subs which are a pretty poo poo hot nuclear deterrent. And long range subs are good for commerce raiding and making your enemies spend more on convoy etc protection than you're spending on loving with them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:39
|
|
|
Weka posted:Chinese nuclear submarines are useful for atleast a couple reasons. There's ballistic missile subs which are a pretty poo poo hot nuclear deterrent. And long range subs are good for commerce raiding and making your enemies spend more on convoy etc protection than you're spending on loving with them. yeah sorry i edited that in; nuke subs loaded with end-the-world ICBMs sitting on the ocean floor for months at a time are different than fleet subs for carrier protection and raiding like you said. for fleet subs, china has produced way way more conventional subs just because it makes more sense for their current geographical projection
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:42
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:it's also why nuke subs make some sense for a US pacific fleet but zero sense for a chinese or north korean or possibly russian navy It's more because nuke subs have basically infinite endurance where the only limitation is literally running out of food and also because nuke subs can go very fast underwater which can mean the difference between escaping a torpedo or acquiring a target.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:46
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:You could overwhelm a fleet from multiple directions out in the open ocean without them even being aware you're there. when I would play Harpoon back in the 90s, the emphasis was that Soviet doctrine for killing a US carrier was to coordinate cruise missiles from Tu-22 Backfire bombers (the AS-4 Kitchen), cruise missiles from guided missile cruisers (SS-N-19 Shipwreck, carried on the Kirov), cruise missiles from submarines (also the Shipwreck, but launched from Oscar-class SSGNs), and wakehoming torpedoes (the Type 65, launched from an SSN like the Akula or the Victor III) this was of course a very complicated act to coordinate, even with zero opposition, because you're trying to get three different weapons systems, launched from four different platforms with very different speeds, all impact at the same Time-On-Target but goddamn was it ever satisfying if you actually pulled it off
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 05:57
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:when I would play Harpoon back in the 90s Brother. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 06:23
|
|
|
Danann posted:It's more because nuke subs have basically infinite endurance where the only limitation is literally running out of food and also because nuke subs can go very fast underwater which can mean the difference between escaping a torpedo or acquiring a target. i didn't actually think about maneuverability in 2022 because i figured everything nowadays was designed like the f35 as a static platform of death
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:25
|
|
|
also i was busy playing herpoon
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:26
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:diesels run on batteries. they're quiet while they have a charge and loud as hell when they need a charge and actually burn fuel. technology means the batteries are way better than in the 70s or w/e and don't have to go into "loud phase" that often Oooooh ok that makes a ton of sense, I was extremely confused as to how nuclear power was so much louder than an ICE, I assumed they had to run constantly. i say swears online posted:sitting on the ocean floor for months at a time god that sounds so loving boring. submariners are really stupid
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:31
|
|
|
i say swears online posted:diesels run on batteries. they're quiet while they have a charge and loud as hell when they need a charge and actually burn fuel. technology means the batteries are way better than in the 70s or w/e and don't have to go into "loud phase" that often yeah until jimmy down in engineering rips rear end on baked beans day so hard it sounds like the breaking of the seventh seal
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:34
|
|
|
I feel like submarines should be mostly autonomous by now. sub drones. seems pretty easy to program a submersible ballistic missile launcher to just hang out in the ocean e: I guess they'd have to be nuclear powered and it would be really stupid to just float nuke plants into enemy territory unmanned. nevermind
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:36
|
|
|
A lot of that speed is about avoiding ASW platforms such as sonar equipped helicopters/smaller escort ships. 1. Most ballistic subs are nuclear because it simply gives them the range and speed to put themselves in position to expend their payload (along with simple endurance). 2. You need some nuclear attack submarines to escort them and other assets as well as take out long range targets 3. Diesel subs are more about area denial and defense, they can be extremely deadly but limited in range. The US doesn’t have diesel subs because it isn’t worried about defense and doesn’t especially concern itself with area denial, but instead has a purely a offensive fleet with some focus on escorting. The Russians and Chinese clearly have fleets more designed for a mix role (the Chinese fleet is obviously more defensive but that is rapidly changing.) The issue for the US is that isn’t fleet is simply old at this point and it is mostly still Cold War area Ohio and Los Angeles class subs. It was fine during the 90s and 2000s but again the Russians and Chinese are rapidly expanding their capabilities. indigi posted:I feel like submarines should be mostly autonomous by now. sub drones. seems pretty easy to program a submersible ballistic missile launcher to just hang out in the ocean The Russians pretty much already did this with autonomous nuclear powered/armed torpedo drones that are basically designed to sit on the seabed outside enemy ports/cities. They still need a “mothership” though. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 07:42 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 07:40
|
|
|
indigi posted:I feel like submarines should be mostly autonomous by now. sub drones. seems pretty easy to program a submersible ballistic missile launcher to just hang out in the ocean one way to think about diesel-electrics is that they're basically very intelligent sea mines: they're a black hole of sound sitting at the bottom of the ocean running on batteries, but as soon as they shoot at something they're going to be detected, and they don't have the speed to be able to evade any kind of determined ASW force, so you can treat them as a one-shot weapon against a high-value target but we're not quite yet at the point where you can turn this into an automated process - communication through water is limited enough that you can't reliably pilot a "sea drone submarine" remotely, and if you sacrifice remote control in exchange for more indiscriminate firing you might as well just go all the way to using sea mines, which are much cheaper that way
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:00
|
|
|
Now that my sixer is up, does anyone have any info on how long a nuke SLBM sub can stay deployed, in general terms? They're limited to food and water on board since they have nuke gens, but how many supplies can a boomer take on board?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:07
|
|
|
wonder what happens in ten years when a swarm of drones the size of a cup of coffee can take out an entire bio-identified officer crew
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:09
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Now that my sixer is up, does anyone have any info on how long a nuke SLBM sub can stay deployed, in general terms? They're limited to food and water on board since they have nuke gens, but how many supplies can a boomer take on board? Ohio-class SSBNs go on 70 to 90-day patrols, so at least that long
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:12
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:one way to think about diesel-electrics is that they're basically very intelligent sea mines: they're a black hole of sound sitting at the bottom of the ocean running on batteries, but as soon as they shoot at something they're going to be detected, and they don't have the speed to be able to evade any kind of determined ASW force, so you can treat them as a one-shot weapon against a high-value target this is a very interesting perspective on diesel-electric subs
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 08:36
|
|
|
What the gently caress is going to happen with Russia/Ukraine. Are we going to have WW3 or what, this shits been going on too long
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 09:21
|
|
|
Ramrod Hotshot posted:What the gently caress is going to happen with Russia/Ukraine. Are we going to have WW3 or what, this shits been going on too long Russia will annex a small part of eastern Ukraine in a quick military incursion to get a proper land route to Crimea. US and EU will impose some economical sanctions and NATO will do nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 09:29
|
|
|
Aglet56 posted:yes, u-864 vs. was sunk by hms venturer when they were both submerged in 1945 USS Corvina was sunk by the Japanese sub I-176 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Corvina The Japanese had so little success with their submarine program that I did a double-take when I saw that on the list of sinkings by IJN subs, especially because of how rare submarine-submarine combat was in WW2.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 09:46
|
|
|
more from "About Face": (of course, the M1 Abrams is named after Creighton Abrams) _   _  the Kahn being referred to here is Dr. Herman Kahn, one of the elders of RAND Corporation and the basis for the eponymous Dr. Strangelove in that Stanley Kubrick film of the same name
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 10:03
|
|
|
BoldFace posted:Russia will annex a small part of eastern Ukraine in a quick military incursion to get a proper land route to Crimea. US and EU will impose some economical sanctions and NATO will do nothing. Russia doesn't need a "proper land route" to Crimea since they already have the Kerch Bridge. What you're talking about would mean taking the entire coastline of Azov, which Russia doesn't have any claim to. It's one thing to annex Crimea and defend the breakaway republics, but it's another thing to outright annex historical Ukrainian territory. It'd also over expose Russian lines to a counterattack and make it too easy to cut off the highway - which means they'd have to take everything up to the Dnieper river. Which is also something the "Russia is invading any day now" people actually believe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 12:07
|
|
|
I thought Crimea had been having water shortages and securing a land route would help there. Not that I'm suggesting it will happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 12:38
|
|
|
Weka posted:I thought Crimea had been having water shortages and securing a land route would help there. Not that I'm suggesting it will happen. Crimea has been having water shortages because Ukraine drastically cut the amount of water sent to Crimea through the North Crimean Canal which draws water from a reservoir on the Dniepr. That means that, again, nothing short of taking all of eastern Ukraine as far as the Dniepr would solve that problem, and I don't think Russia is at all likely to go through with an invasion on that scale.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 17:17
|
|
|
If Russia wants to import pure Ukrainian water, they should try sitting in the negotiation table.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 17:27
|
|
|
My dad's father was career navy and apparently regarding the whole thing told him that "he wouldn't go" so this thing really doesn't surprise me that much. It's really shocking just the generational gap. I wonder why it was? Younger guys way too hopped up on their own bravado or trying to follow in their parents footsteps?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 20:22
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Russia doesn't need a "proper land route" to Crimea since they already have the Kerch Bridge. What you're talking about would mean taking the entire coastline of Azov, which Russia doesn't have any claim to. It's one thing to annex Crimea and defend the breakaway republics, but it's another thing to outright annex historical Ukrainian territory. It'd also over expose Russian lines to a counterattack and make it too easy to cut off the highway - which means they'd have to take everything up to the Dnieper river. Which is also something the "Russia is invading any day now" people actually believe. Kerch bridge is a huge stationary target that can be taken out with an air attack, isn't good for transporting bulk materiel and troops, and takes a long and winding route that slows everything down. It's terrible compared to an actual land bridge. It is far more strategically advantageous to Russia to have that land bridge to Crimea because otherwise Crimea is only accessible via sea or through Kerch, which again, is a big huge stationary target that cripples Russia's ability to operate in the Black Sea. Taking a strip of the Azov coast will solve that issue and give Russia better regional power projection against any nation with a Black Sea coastline, namely Turkey. Putin wouldn't care about historical territory or whatever, an invading military force by definition does not give a poo poo about territorial integrity because..well..that should be obvious. Edit: also funny that you bring up historical Ukrainian territory on the Azov coast yet when it comes to even bigger chunks of historical Ukrainian territory that Russia has no justified claim to, you're acknowledging "...and defend the breakaway republics" as if Luhansk and Donetsk wouldn't be immediately annexed into Russian Federation just like Crimea was. HonorableTB has issued a correction as of 21:36 on Jan 21, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Edit: also funny that you bring up historical Ukrainian territory on the Azov coast yet when it comes to even bigger chunks of historical Ukrainian territory that Russia has no justified claim to, you're acknowledging "...and defend the breakaway republics" as if Luhansk and Donetsk wouldn't be immediately annexed into Russian Federation just like Crimea was. lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
HonorableTB posted:Kerch bridge is a huge stationary target that can be taken out with an air attack, isn't good for transporting bulk materiel and troops, and takes a long and winding route that slows everything down. It's terrible compared to an actual land bridge. It is far more strategically advantageous to Russia to have that land bridge to Crimea because otherwise Crimea is only accessible via sea or through Kerch, which again, is a big huge stationary target that cripples Russia's ability to operate in the Black Sea. Taking a strip of the Azov coast will solve that issue and give Russia better regional power projection against any nation with a Black Sea coastline, namely Turkey. Putin wouldn't care about historical territory or whatever, an invading military force by definition does not give a poo poo about territorial integrity because..well..that should be obvious. Putin would care about historic Ukrainian territory because there are certain lines that Russia doesn't want to cross if it wants to achieve its international relations goals. You can't draw down from taking everything east of the Dnieper river. The way things are now perfectly suits Russia because they only have to control compliant territories. That whole situation gets hosed up if they suddenly have to start occupying unruly Ukrainians while in an active state of war with Kiev. Negotiations could only be restarted by a return to status quo ante. Russia taking more territory from Ukraine could only be a last resort under the assumption that diplomacy is a complete dead end.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2022 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 23:19 |
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Putin would care about historic Ukrainian territory because there are certain lines that Russia doesn't want to cross if it wants to achieve its international relations goals. You can't draw down from taking everything east of the Dnieper river. The way things are now perfectly suits Russia because they only have to control compliant territories. That whole situation gets hosed up if they suddenly have to start occupying unruly Ukrainians while in an active state of war with Kiev. Negotiations could only be restarted by a return to status quo ante. There is no diplomacy that can reach a dead end because there has been no good faith diplomatic effort by putin, only issuing impossible demands while an army is on the border ready to invade. That's not diplomacy. That's armed extortion on a nation-state scale.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2022 01:32
|
|