|
bewbies posted:tbh the navy would probably leap at the chance to do some real world ASW Isn't a fair amount of this area fairly shallow as well? Might prove quite a challenge for the blue water navy to deal with  Jokes aside (and posting as a retired navy sonar operator): Detecting them during towed transit is annoying with sonar for a number of reasons, but quite feasible with airborne assets as these things can't run very deep and the towing line will be obvious. During the terminal run towards shore they will be annoying - but not impossible - to locate with active sonar, though the hulls are fairly small.
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2020 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
Oberndorf posted:I’ve never understood IFF on a functional basis. I know what it’s for and why it’s used, but it seems like it would be really easy to spoof without a whole lot of agony. How do you keep a technological adversary from simply picking up the transmissions you’re broadcasting and repeating them to guard from missiles? There's a ton of cryptographic poo poo that goes on in those systems, so a "playback attack" won't work.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2020 02:29
|
|
|
I'm sure the american engineers will have figured out the catapult by the time the new french CV is built... right? 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
Lou Takki posted:The catapult works quite well now and the only real issues remaining I'm aware of are integration specific. That's good!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2020 15:09
|
|
|
FMguru posted:The other thing about proper carrier operations is that you need a lot of carriers. For every carrier you have cruising distant waters you need to account for carriers transiting to/from that distant station, resting in port, doing training operations, or laid up undergoing major maintenance. Multiply that times all the escort vessels and logistics support ships, and then account for ships that reach end-of-life and have to be retired/scrapped and suddenly you are talking about a commitment of resources that only a superpower could afford. Proper in what context? If you're looking at this from a US naval doctrine standpoint, you're clearly correct. But France is not the US, so their requirements and goals are different. Looking at this from a french perspective, where they want to A) contribute to NATO in a meaningful way (to get a bigger say in what the alliance does) and B) have some independent force projection capabilities, having one proper supercarrier seems like a decent tradeoff for them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 18:30
|
|
|
ArmyGroup303 posted:I think having two carriers would be ideal for France, as they once did with Clemenceau and Foch/São Paulo. Having a CATOBAR carrier available year-round is a vastly powerful thing. Two would be nice, I hope they can find the budget for it. We are definitely headed for more uncertain times ahead, and especially the European NATO countries should wake up and smell the flowers already.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 19:02
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:This is an important, often overlooked part of France and their relationship with NATO. Remember that France famously left NATO in the mid-60s under De Gaulle, and they still maintain government owned arms manufacturers. The French are fiercely independent, and want to retain some level of autonomy just in case poo poo goes completely sideways with their current alliances. Historically, that's not exactly unprecedented. There's also this that led to some interesting reactions from certain heads of state and some upheaval in NATO Blistex posted:See the french Nuclear deterrent which is basically, "gently caress around and find out". This comes to mind  Despite a certain Thales senior sonar engineer stiffing me on a bottle of cognac I won fair and square in a bet, I like the french, and they're doing a lot of things right. Solaris 2.0 posted:I don't know if I would call a nation that ranks top 10 in GDP "poor" but yes, it does seem like they are chasing an empire that they haven't had in over 60 years. The GDP is not exactly a stellar indicator for how wealthy a country actually is. There can be rampant inequality and widespread poverty even if you are in the top 10 of GDP.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2020 22:16
|
|
|
You just need a high-power low-frequency towed variable depth sonar like the Thales CAPTAS to drive a submarine crew absolutely batty. We also had a hilarious phone call from one of our operations officers who was apparently a light sleeper and did not appreciate the long FM-pulses we were testing out when he was trying to sleep Half the CIC was in stitches as our division LT trolled the gently caress out of him on the phone. He was grumpy for days after that 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 18:10
|
|
|
TK-42-1 posted:How much are UUVs used by modern navies? I'd think they would have a lot of utility in minesweeping and passive recon. It'd probably be pretty easy to set them up as mine equivalents that could actively seek targets instead of just static mines, but then again I'm not up to date on modern mines and how they function compared to the WW2 floaters. I know Kongsberg is working on some stuff in that regard, but 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2020 23:55
|
|
|
My personal record is a $8k hotel bill for a month in Singapore.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2020 15:18
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:Not quite Cold War but definitely Cold War adjacent - US dropped the sanction hammer on Turkey for pressing with the S-400. This will end well for everyone involved
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2020 02:17
|
|
|
You can say what you want about 1940s era coms (I served on an Oslo class frigate), but that old analog poo poo just loving worked. Unlike the new digital/server driven crap that contributed to a Nansen class frigate sinking a couple of years ago because it tripped during a collision with an oil tanker and left them with no internal coms for over 2 minutes. Because the drat system had to reboot. No, I'm not bitter, thanks for asking. At least the Nansen class has a Spy 1F radar that works quite well
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2020 04:02
|
|
|
I spent 4 years in the Navy hunting subs, and Taiwan's decision to run SSK's is probably the best possible choice they could have made, considering the oceanography they're dealing with, and how lopsided the force balance is. We've had NATO exercises off the coast of Norway where the SSK's who were defending had to be told to stop, because they kept sinking carriers and landing craft You can go really, really silent in an SSK - hole in the water-level silent. Which, when combined with good underwater navigation, can make you almost impossible to locate, even for first-rate ASW forces. Lithium batteries and advanced AIP systems will do wonders for underwater endurance, it's a whole different ballgame compared to what I'm used to when dealing with older NATO SSK's. As for CO2 scrubbers and all that jazz - it's all about energy management, and with more advanced batteries and AIP systems you have a lot more energy to use for ancillary systems than when you have a couple of big chunks of lead acid at the bottom of the boat.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2020 17:13
|
|
|
SSNs are great for force projection / battlegroup escort duties, SSKs are great for defending coastlines against a foe that has a bigger military force (aka target rich environment for your SSKs). There's a reason why submariners refer to surface warships as targets  E: China's reactions to this will be very telling, and probably quite amusing
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2020 17:19
|
|
|
Lou Takki posted:Clearly not the same thing, and not what I was implying. You don't need the endurance that a nuclear reactor brings if you're not running nuclear deterrent patrols. Their use case is anti surface/anti submarine warfare within a limited bubble around their ports. You want (read: need) nuclear endurance for missions where you have to stay deep for extended periods of time and/or need to transit large distances in a reasonable timeframe, there are a bunch of mission profiles for submarines that cover this that does not include nuclear deterrent patrols.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2020 17:28
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:How does the SSK make its escape after the attack? They're really slow. In CMANO you can send the torp to sneak off in one direction while you sneak in the other before siccing it on the target so that the helis start looking in the wrong place, but in the end they always get me. Classic tactic is to run torps on a dog-leg at low speed while you sneak the other way, but that's no guarantee. That being said, sonar conditions in littoral waters can be very bad, so there's no guarantee that the PLA Navy can even find them after the fact. It's pretty much a given that Taiwan will lose some submarines in an actual shooting war, but there are very good odds that they will have sunk a significant portion of any invasion force in the process, and that threat is big enough that it might force China to reconsider their invasion strategy. E: Binary Badger posted:The only gotcha with lithium batteries is that they really, REALLY don't like being exposed to water; if any does you're talking a massive exothermic reaction.. If I were to hazard a guess: they've found a way to encapsulate the lithium batteries in such a way that the risk is (mostly) mitigated. Keep in mind that lead acid batteries also have safety issues in submarines, especially when exposed to salt water. Wibla fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Dec 20, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2020 17:45
|
|
|
Lou Takki posted:Yes you're absolutely right but this is Taiwan we're talking about here. The performance envelope increase gained from building a nuclear submarine navy is probably not worth the incredible cost. Yeah, there's no point for Taiwan to go for SSNs, they are really expensive heh. evil_bunnY posted:Swim out your torp, dog leg it, and be vewy vewy quiet. Shhh, we're hunting
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2020 21:43
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:The USN had to lease a Swedish submarine to exercise anti-submarine warfare against diesel-electrics back when AIP was new over 20 years ago (HMS Gotland - the boat the USN leased - Wikipedia posted:In 2004, the Swedish government received a request from the United States to lease HSwMS Gotland – Swedish-flagged, commanded and manned, for a duration of one year for use in antisubmarine warfare exercises. The Swedish government granted this request in October 2004, with both navies signing a memorandum of understanding on 21 March 2005. The lease was extended for another 12 months in 2006. In July 2007, HSwMS Gotland departed San Diego for Sweden. Other NATO navies who operate SSK's have a long and proud history of snapping close-up photographs of US carriers whenever they get a bit too close to the coast (and shallow water) I've seen one particularly funny set of photos taken by one of the  Kobben class boats during a NATO exercise in the far north - they had to snap 3 photos to get a complete picture of the carrier  Part of the (sea) story behind those photos is that the CO of the carrier actually got relieved of duty as a result of that exercise, but I have no idea if that actually happened. Sea stories being what they are, it's hard to say...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2020 02:31
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:There's also that delightful part of Red Storm Rising where the Norwegian SSK captain goes loving mental when he realizes he's meeting the guy who saved his life by distracting a Soviet surface group and helped him sink the Kirov.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2020 02:43
|
|
|
Using MPA's in the Taiwan strait requires nominal aerial superiority, but ASW helicopter ops are easier to pull off closer to friendly surface combatants. As for MAD, let's not go there
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2020 05:13
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Is there any merit to US getting back into diesel subs, or is it doctrinally pointless coupled with the already present manpower shortage? Probably pointless...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2020 22:30
|
|
|
Eh, at least other NATO countries are still working on surface to surface missile tech, some of which is very promising. I'm more worried about the state of the Navy in general with regard to training and maintenance.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2020 04:17
|
|
|
Op tempo has been too high, training is sub par and maintenence is being deferred + delayed by yard issues. Its not a pretty sight. Sadly its not isolated to the USN, e.g. the Norwegian frigate that committed seppuku on an oil tanker a couple of years ago. I'm going to effortpost my analysis of the unclassified reports when they are finally published in full
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2020 04:32
|
|
|
Doesn't help to have state of the art equipment if you can't use it properly because of bad training, e.g. USN surface-based ASW 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2020 04:45
|
|
|
genericuser posted:Would love to read this. I’ve read the transcripts of the radio comms and they were pretty That cheeky gently caress on the bridge on Ingstad gave me instant flashbacks to dealing with fresh LT's straight out of the naval academy. Snarky little shits who think they know it all and have no idea of the potential consequences of their ignorance. It also speaks volumes of how loving incompetent the navigation teachers are. If someone calls you up on the radio at zero dark thirty saying something is wrong, what do you do regardless of what you think of it? SLOW. THE. gently caress. DOWN. AND. INVESTIGATE. This is literally the first rule I learned. Or the 0th rule. See something odd? slow down. Get conflicting information from a radio call and your own radar and navigation systems? slow down. Managed to sail yourself into a situation where you have a bad gut feeling? SLOW DOWN. It's a lot better to hit something at 5 knots vs hitting it at 17 or 25. But no, can't have that. No point in slowing down a bit and re-assessing the situation using all available navigational aids like radar and mark 1 eyeballs (we had night vision equipment on the bridge, too). Just keep on trucking, blow the guy on the radio off with a "we've got it under control " and crash a $1.3 billion dollar frigate into an oil tanker at 17 knots.I get irrationally angry about this, because we should be better than this. Crashing into civilian traffic used to be a thing we teased the Americans about, but now we don't even have that 
Wibla fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Dec 23, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:What's up with the class of ships Ingstad belonged to, it's half as heavy as an Arleigh Burke, same range-ish, but the AB has 90-96 VLS tubes and the HI has eight VLS tubes and eight ASMs. Where does all that tonnage go? Tonnage and volume has a funny relationship. The Nansen-class runs quad-packed ESSMs in the VLS, giving 32 ESSM missiles, while the Burkes has a more diverse missile payload - but they are still woefully under-armed. At least the ASM's are state of the art NSM Vahakyla posted:In to the Hjeltefjord fjord. loving oof
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2020 21:32
|
|
|
tangy yet delightful posted:Cold War/Air Power: Posting at the bottom of Hjeltefjord Mods, mods!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The entire point is to be bringing a lot of stuff backdown, the point of infrastructure is not to move cargo only one way. People and fabricated goods go out, resources come down. So this is completely irrelevant until we start asteroid mining
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2020 21:26
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Gotta start from somewhere, its a part of a sustained push as a long term societal goal to exploiting space. Sure, but you're putting the cart in front of the horse. Skyhook? Meh. Let's get some actual industrial infrastructure into space first, and get some raw resource harvesting going. SpaceX Starship will be more relevant for that in the near term than building a Skyhook.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2020 21:37
|
|
|
Tias posted:Ftfy Ah, this again...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2020 11:10
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:It wasn't developed by a US company, maybe? The US is generally pretty loathe to buy anything not from Lockmart/Raytheon/etc. Kongsberg had to enter a partnership with Raytheon to get any meaningful traction selling their new cruise missile, so yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Nobody's still identifying sonar contacts with earphones. I have never operated a sonar console but I am certain you would classify them based on an FFT output and a bunch of reference cards even on hardware from decades ago. I'd bet on newer hardware the computer does that for you. Auto tracking is a crapshoot even with modern active sonar. There's a lot of development going on in the field though, but it's more related to sensor fusion and passive tracking. Also I dare you to find an SSK from an ASW frigate in a Norwegian fjord without putting your headphones on.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2021 00:58
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:Hell it doesn't even work on radios. I've listened to shortwave as a hobby since I was a teenager and got my ham radio license like 5-6? years ago and have not once used a radio ranging from $30 pocket radios to several hundred/thousand dollar transceivers that will find stuff in scan mode on HF. Exactly. Active systems have more appropriate signal analysis (especially radar), but trying to use active sonar in a noisy and nasty sound environment like littoral waters, you absolutely need to keep those headphones on, because you can often pick up things on audio that the computer just won't. I've tracked SSKs on audio only a few times, where the echo just barely merged with the underwater topography "behind" (acoustically) the submarine. It's a very odd sound where you get two overlapping FM echoes, but one was slightly firmer than the other. Hard to describe precisely (and many years after the fact).The SSK skipper took it personally when we teased them for not having the guts to go closer to the underwater hillside they were trying to hide next to Now, there's a ton of work being done for passive sonar analysis, but that's more the domain of submarines with towed arrays and permanent hydrophone installations. Generally shipboard electronics lag significantly behind the bleeding edge, simply because sonar systems are an integrated part of the weapons/sensor suite and you typically only upgrade them significantly during midlife upgrades or bigger refits. I won't comment on software updates, though. I'm sure there are some Thales and Raytheon engineers furiously fapping over the idea of running sonar analysis neural networks on GPU cores.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2021 12:48
|
|
|
I remember being asked to point one of the ESSM telemetry antennas at the missile during CSSQT in 2007 and then the wind blew from the wrong angle or something, so the missile exhaust blew over the helo deck we were standing on. We of course had no PPE because no one told us we'd need that Cue a Lockheed Martin engineer running out on deck yelling "GET IN HERE, THAT poo poo IS TOXIC" Good times in the Navy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2021 17:44
|
|
|
Guest2553 posted:DOD released most of a S/NF indo-pacific strategy document drafted by the NSC and endorsed by dipshit from 2018, a good couple of decades before it was supposed to become declassified. It's centered around alliance building with Good Korea/Japan/Australia and India ( Do you happen to have a link to that document?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2021 14:32
|
|
Pakistan) to isolate China. As far as conventional mil capes go, the strategy involves
|
karoshi posted:He does have a point about civilian infrastructure being increasingly of Chinese origin. All Huawei base stations in a geographical area getting their you-re-a-brick-now command over the air (or worse, from a satellite, like some base stations use for clock sync) is the aforementioned MAD scenario. Also some ISP networks are very homogeneous. Not a terminal problem for military doomsday comms, but losing internet and cell might affect an economy. Sperglord posted:This is the bigger issue. China is becoming the default telecommunications hardware provider for a decent section of the world. That gives them diplomatic blackmail against potential host nations and that same cell infrastructure can be used to launch cyber attacks against any nearby systems. See also: Chinese neo-colonialism in Africa, strongman tactics in SEA/Indian ocean, industrial and government/military IT breaches on a massive scale. You don't have to be a Mensa-member to understand where this is going, but there's precious little actually being done about these things, and by the time we get of our asses to do something, it'll probably be too late. Ironically the pandemic and the current shipping upheavals resulting from it might be a good catalyst to start weaning us off manufacturing all the things in China and the surrounding areas At least a lot of ISP's in the west are now tossing out Huawei, as they should have done years ago. Relevant: https://twitter.com/ErrataRob/status/1227339011909472260
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2021 09:28
|
|
|
When I proposed to blacklist any (Norwegian) Huawei employees from holding a security clearance or working with (critical) infrastructure for 5-10 years after leaving Huawei's branch, it was deemed "excessive" by people I know in the field
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2021 14:47
|
|
|
Warning: Navy perspective. We had an LT in comms that was 6'9" and 290 lbs. He was under orders to stay away from the lower decks if poo poo hit the fan, if possible, because we'd have problems hauling him up the ladders The submariners tried to recruit me once when I was out biking on base - on account of me being a not too tall (5'9") and not too skinny (220 lbs) sonar operator  . The engineer I talked to told me point blank that "it helps to have some extra padding, and if you're much taller than 6' the bunks get uncomfortable".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2021 15:58
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:We had a Supply Petty Officer who was of those same dimensions. Being in Supply, he controlled berthing spaces, so his rack was a top rack with an extension on it for his feet. His rack was literally 2' longer than any other rack on the boat. That's a clever solution married but discreet posted:That really sounds like they were just hitting on you <insert navy jokes here>
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2021 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 01:37 |
|
|
Pro tip: don't buy naval vessels from Navantia. Just don't.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2021 23:55
|
|