1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  

Thoughts on America's Naval subs direction

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by blue4, Jun 28, 2014.


  1. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
  2. DerHoggz

    DerHoggz I like cats :| Banned

    Feb 13, 2009
    Western Pennsylvania
    Do you clean your umbilicus? We need details!
     
    PWRL likes this.
  3. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    I have no details and I'm not sure what an imbilicus is. Just thought it was an interesting article.
     
  4. DerHoggz

    DerHoggz I like cats :| Banned

    Feb 13, 2009
    Western Pennsylvania
  5. It is an interesting article, actually.
    I was told that one of the main reasons for having nuclear subs was for their ability to deploy nuclear weapons wherever, with the ability to stay at sea or underwater for very long periods of time. I would think that diesel would limit that ability. That makes me wonder what they're building the diesel subs to be purposed for. I wonder if it has anything to do with some nations wanting to turn away from nuclear power in wake of Fukashima.
    I have much speculation and little information, but I am interested in this.
     
  6. HeavyDuty

    HeavyDuty Supporting Curmudgeon Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Jun 26, 2000
    Suburban Chicago, IL
    Thread title pity edit.
     
    GregC and Jim Nazium like this.
  7. Definitely

    Definitely Banned

    Footlong subs can't fit in my navel; I usually get the kids' size and put them in lengthwise.

    Then again, I'm Canadian, I don't know about you Americans.
     
    T-Bird likes this.
  8. buldog5151bass

    buldog5151bass Kibble, milkbones, and P Basses. And redheads.

    Oct 22, 2003
    Connecticut
    The main problem with diesel subs was that they had to resurface often, since under water they had to run on batteries. Nuclear subs don't have that limitation. Without more info, no way to comment.
     
  9. fhm555

    fhm555 So FOS my eyes are brown Supporting Member

    Feb 16, 2011
    While I'm no expert on nuclear subs, I did stay at a Holliday Inn last night so here goes.

    What I got from the article was the diesel/electric subs are being used for what in submarine terms would be considered local deployment. From what I know about the nuclear variety they would be capable of going anywhere on the globe without need for refueling, replenishing, or detection.

    When you consider our ballistic sub fleet is the heavy lifter of our nuclear arsenal and by design is capable of dealing a conflict ending blow to any country on the planet with very short notice, I'd say they definitely have their place in our global military strategy.

    With today's technology it is impossible for any surface or air asset to "sneak up" on anything, even stealth fighter planes can be seen and reported by FO's, but with our advanced screw designs and superior sonar capabilities, catching one of our subs slipping into your back yard with enough hell on board to annihilate most any country would still be more dumb luck than operational skill.

    With all the nuclear powered surface ships running around these days, I sometimes wonder what will become of the oceans of the world if we ever get into another shooting match on the scale of WWII.
     
    SasquatchDude, GregC and PWRL like this.
  10. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    That's what I had thought, but according to the article air independent tech can keep a diesel boat down for weeks. As for weapons, no reason why they couldn't carry what is needed.
     
  11. fhm555

    fhm555 So FOS my eyes are brown Supporting Member

    Feb 16, 2011
    Did a little looking and AIP is nothing more than the current term to describe battery power. More specifically it is any non nuclear underwater propulsion system, which in the subs mentioned in the article would be battery powered when submerged.

    In theory, they would be more stealthy by virtue of nuclear subs needing to run electric motors to power circulation and coolant pumps when under way while the electric boat would only have to run coolant pumps, but the elephant in the room no one in the article mentioned was the giant electric motors pushing the AIP boat.

    While I don't doubt modern technology could make AIP boats silent enough to be as stealthy as the atomic boats, when you compare range between refueling, the diesel will pale in comparison to the nuclear boats. If I was looking to thwart diesel subs I'd shadow their tenders, or even better, just sink them. Nuclear boats have no need to be refueled for years so you have to locate the actual sub instead of it's fuel barge.
     
  12. DerHoggz

    DerHoggz I like cats :| Banned

    Feb 13, 2009
    Western Pennsylvania
    Why do you hate fun?
     
  13. DerHoggz

    DerHoggz I like cats :| Banned

    Feb 13, 2009
    Western Pennsylvania
    The key is to get Subway and leave it in the fridge overnight, so the bun can soak up the pound of dressing. Then you blend it to your desired consistency. (I prefer it chunky, but some say a smoother blend is better) This allows for best navel packing.
     
  14. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    But the point would be to use the cheaper diesel boat closer to home. You'd still use nuclear boats for projecting force. I've been in the Navy myself, my wife was stationed on a tender. So I know the advantages nuclear have as far as refueling and such. But when you are within range of the home base, those advantages go away. Especially since there's no Soviet Union anymore who's capable of forcing us to defend their own shores for weeks at a time.
     
  15. fhm555

    fhm555 So FOS my eyes are brown Supporting Member

    Feb 16, 2011
    Shows how little I know about subs. With the quality (and quantity) of our tactical and strategic air capabilities I would not have thought of subs as high on the list of coastal defense outside of our attack boat fleet for sub on sub violence. I just thought as good as we are at detection and tracking even a single sub slipping past our net would be a fluke, much less enough of them to need more attack boats than what we already have.

    Sounds like the current technology AIP boats would be a good choice when it comes time to replace our existing attack boats, but I doubt General Dynamics will give up their nuclear cash cow without one hell of a fight.
     
  16. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    I think they would be a good choice for Special Forces insertion as well. Even if we only replace the few of the new nuke subs that come out with these the money saved is substantial, which could tie into some of our other threads about not having enough money to give our college students the same as other nations.
     
  17. fhm555

    fhm555 So FOS my eyes are brown Supporting Member

    Feb 16, 2011
    As a former minion in the wonderful world of DOD contracting, don't even get me started on the obscene amount of waste, graft and outright theft that defines our defense industry.

    General Dynamics is the personification of institutionalized chicanery and stealing for no other reason than they can. If we did go with AIP boats and let General Dynamics anywhere near the contract, the new boats will wind up costing us more than their atomic predecessors.
     
  18. placedesjardins

    placedesjardins

    May 7, 2012
    I understand that the US has the best fleet of subs in the world. They can be out at sea for a very long time since they are nuclear-powered. But, most of our current enemies don't even have a navy or are near water (Iraq, Afghanistan), so the US wouldn't deploy them even if the US wanted to use them as a weapon for tactical advantage.
    Kind of like the decrease in the number of battleships, I think the same would apply to subs. If there's a Naval officer who can provide the argument for subs, I would be interested in knowing why. Of course, that's probably a need-to-know topic so I'm probably going to disappear pretty soon for asking.
     
  19. blue4

    blue4

    Feb 3, 2013
    St. Louis area
    Subs are more for winning wars against countries with economies and trade, blockading or shutting down shipping. Firing all types of missiles from anywhere with the benefit of being relatively invisible, no surface ship or bases to counterstrike. Special Forces insertion, Artic warfare, anti warship, etc. We need them, just maybe they don't all have to be huge and cost more than Sweden.
     
  20. Bloodhammer

    Bloodhammer Twinkle Twinkle Black Star

    Jul 7, 2009
    Shreveport, Louisiana
    Is anyone else getting flashbacks of Das Boot at the mention of diesel-electric?
     
  21. Definitely

    Definitely Banned

    I prefer a bit of a stiffer stick in my hole, so I like to leave it solid.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.