Crazy Ivan maneuver in Red Storm Rising

[gf0012-aust]

No reason why they could not do it. But the additional size and cost would not add any significant capabilities in a cost effective manner either, so there is no reason to do it. Optimal size is somewhere smaller than 6000 tons.

Advantages

• The larger volume would allow better streamlining and rafting which could reduce the noise signature.
• A larger bow mounted sonar adds some capability, but the sub’s sustained submerged speed is probably inadequate for a towed array.
• It could carry a few more torpedoes, and probably some vertically launched cruise missiles (similar to late Los Angeles class).
• Submerged cruise speed would also probably be slightly, but not significantly, higher.
• Submerged range could be increased significantly, possibly by 3x to 4x with an AIP system as much of the additional hull volume could be given to AIP fuel storage, supplies, crew, and habitability requirements for sustained missions. (This is probably the only advantage over a hull in the 4000 ton range.)
• There would be space for SEAL type units to be deployed on board.

Disadvantages

• The sub’s draft would nearly double, greatly reducing the ability to operate in the green water zone.
• You will probably have only 1/2 as many hulls, though this will be less of a factor if there is a problem manning that number.

just to add, collins and similarly sized conventionals are already fitted out for the specials

draft is not as critical with contemp weapons systems. If you look at Parche it was significantly larger and managed to breach harbour defences quite frequently.

tech developments such as CBASS and contemp USV/ROV tech had reduced the dependance on absolute draft for the last 7 years...

 

[STURM]

Beside cost factor, is there any other setback with a SSK with 6000++ displacement?

I'm sure you can but why would you? Assuming a pacticular country had a requirement for ocean going or deep water SSKs or in the case of Australia where to reach a potential hot spot, subs would have to travel a considerable distance from home, something similiar in displacement to the Kilo, Upholder or the JMSDF subs would do the job.

As it is, due to shallow waters there are certain areas where subs are required to surface and cannot remain submerged whilst on transit - in a Malaysian context this would include sizeable parts of the Straits of Melaka and East Malaysia waters. Thats one reason why USN SSNs in transit in the Straits of Melaka and on visits to Klang and Singapore have to surface quite a distance before reaching their destination. There are also a number of areas in Malaysian waters where subs are very visible from the air due to shallow and clear waters. Much of the area in which the RMN operates in, with the key exception of the Sulu Sea, is within the continental shelf, and that is why the RMN's Scorpenes, unlike Chile's which operates in deeper waters, have a watertight 'cofferdam' section amidships.

 

[Pendekar]

Yes. The French Rubis-class SSN is a ~2,400 ton nuclear attack sub, while the Collins-class SSG is about 30% larger (displacement).

Now if the question is can a conventional diesel-electric boat be built that is approximately the same size as a large nuclear boat (Los Angeles- or Virginia-class SSN) that is a good question. AFAIK no one has tried. Yet.

-Cheers

Yes you're right. I also heard that because of it's compactness, Rubis suffer some problem in noise supression area.

 

[My2Cents]

just to add, collins and similarly sized conventionals are already fitted out for the specials

I should have said large commando detachments. My bad. :tomato

draft is not as critical with contemp weapons systems. If you look at Parche it was significantly larger and managed to breach harbour defences quite frequently.

tech developments such as CBASS and contemp USV/ROV tech had reduced the dependance on absolute draft for the last 7 years...

Harbors, and particularly their entrances, tend to be considerably deeper than the shallows waters adjacent to them. And did the Parche (SSN-683 I assume) actually penetrate the harbors or just the region around them?

 

[localhost127]

on the subject of harbors and harbor-protection, what defenses currently exist that would be deployed during war-time?

is it possible to deploy active-sonar outside of major naval harbors to detect any enemy submarine attempting to approach? or would this 'give away' the location of defensive subs/platforms/etc., and thus not be utilized.

what about helo/airborne ASW assets? are those commonly stationed at major harbors/ports?

apologies if this is off on tangent,
thank you,

 

[My2Cents]

on the subject of harbors and harbor-protection, what defenses currently exist that would be deployed during war-time?

is it possible to deploy active-sonar outside of major naval harbors to detect any enemy submarine attempting to approach? or would this 'give away' the location of defensive subs/platforms/etc., and thus not be utilized.

what about helo/airborne ASW assets? are those commonly stationed at major harbors/ports?

The answer to all of those is a qualified “yes”. What you use depends on a lot of factors, especially the local hydrography and shipping patterns. :coffee

One thing about harbors though, ships in them cannot move very fast, so they are easy targets for anything that can get inside. Modern heavy weight wire guided torpedoes are RPV's, fairly stealthy at low speeds, and with ranges in excess of 40 km / 24 miles can reach into harbors from subs a good ways out to sea. The torpedoes can also have their regular detonators replaced with or programmed as influence fuses and sink to the bottom as mines after reaching a programmed location, like the harbor mouth. Stopping subs from coming into the harbor is not enough anymore, you cannot even allow them get close. :eek

The most likely defenses start with SOSUS (Sound Surveillance System), a fixed passive listening array, operating in conjunction with shore bases helo/airborne ASW. Next may be some surface ASW built on Coast Guard and other vessels of opportunity (trawlers, tugs, etc.) working the near (<100km) defense. Finally you have regular Navy ASW assets even farther out. Conventional submarines might be used, but could be more of a distraction to the rest of the forces than an asset.

Minefields are another possibility in a prolonged conflict. Heavy influence mines that could sink a ship/sub can be used to bar areas, or if under remote control from shore to control access. Small moored contact mines that are little more than noise makers (an underwater version of a trip flare) to trigger alerts in the SOSUS system for very stealth subs, and can even be placed in the shipping lanes at depths below which ships could trigger them to catch submerged submarines.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Harbors, and particularly their entrances, tend to be considerably deeper than the shallows waters adjacent to them. And did the Parche (SSN-683 I assume) actually penetrate the harbors or just the region around them?

parche penetrated harbours to "pier side" capabilities...

the capability to do what Parche or NR-1 could do is something that is substantially within the remit of extant USV and ROV systems.

big subs, big tubes = opportunity launch of big USV and ROV systems at range

 

[StevoJH]

Now if the question is can a conventional diesel-electric boat be built that is approximately the same size as a large nuclear boat (Los Angeles- or Virginia-class SSN) that is a good question. AFAIK no one has tried. Yet.

-Cheers

There were a few large Diesel-Electric submersible cruisers built in the 1920's ,30's and 40's I believe.

Check out the Surcouf & the Japanese I-54.

 

[STURM]

on the subject of harbors and harbor-protection, what defenses currently exist that would be deployed during war-time?

I forgot it's name but there was a Swedish company a few years ago that was marketing a harbour defence system to provide early warning of subs and divers atttempting to gain entry into a harbour/base.

I'm not sure if the Swedes still operate land based torpedo tubes as part of a coastal defence newtwork.

 

[Todjaeger]

There were a few large Diesel-Electric submersible cruisers built in the 1920's ,30's and 40's I believe.

Check out the Surcouf & the Japanese I-54.

Double checking the info I have, the IJN I-400-class aircraft carrying submarines displace ~5,200 tons surfaced with a length of ~120 m. This had been the largest class of submarines built up until some of the SSBN's started getting launched in the 1960's

Now a Los Angeles-class SSN displace over 6,000 tons surfaced, but are 'only' ~110 m in length. A Virginia-class SSN meanwhile displaces ~7,900 tons (not sure if this is surfaced or dived displacement) and has a length of 115 m. As can be seen, the displacement of moderned nuclear subs are greater than even the largest WWII conventionals, if not the exterior physical dimensions.

Worth noting that in WWII there were a number of long-ranged 'fleet' submarines in use, especially in the Pacific. Having said that, they were generally smaller/lower displacement than their modern equivalents.

-Cheers

 

[Twinblade]

Double checking the info I have, the IJN I-400-class aircraft carrying submarines displace ~5,200 tons surfaced with a length of ~120 m. This had been the largest class of submarines built up until some of the SSBN's started getting launched in the 1960's

Isn't it the sub which was supposed to carry light sea planes for attack on mainland US ?

 

[Todjaeger]

Isn't it the sub which was supposed to carry light sea planes for attack on mainland US ?

The I-400 IIRC was a able to carry one (perhaps two) fighter-bombers on floats. Nowhere near enough to actually launch an attack on the mainland US, since max cap for stores was one or two bombs. At least, not in a conventional sense. I do recall reading about possible plans to use the aircraft to drop rats (yes, I do mean the rodents) onto west coast cities. Had that actually occurred, there was significant potential for loss of US life since the rats were part of the Japanese biowafare research, specifically into bubonic plague.

Another alternate plan to a long-ranged and likely one-way strike against the Panama Canal, in an effort to make it more difficult for the US to reinforce the Pacific theatre.

Realistically though, with just three subs and one or two aircraft per sub, there is not much that could have been accomplished without resorting to banned weaponry.

-Cheers

 

[gf0012-aust]

I forgot it's name but there was a Swedish company a few years ago that was marketing a harbour defence system to provide early warning of subs and divers atttempting to gain entry into a harbour/base.

I'm not sure if the Swedes still operate land based torpedo tubes as part of a coastal defence newtwork.

the technology was around well before 2000. one of the reasons why some countries were arcing up was that China was arguing hat they needed to protect the Beijing Olympics from acts of terrorism and were able to seek exemption from some of the european countries on dual use technology. they danced around the Tiananmen embargoes on weapons tech transfer by invoking CT issues. Cute by half

eg underwater array technology to detect divers in harbours was sold to them by a scottish company in 2000.

the "selling the rope" expression springs back to mind.

 

[My2Cents]

parche penetrated harbours to "pier side" capabilities...

If they could park the Parche at a pier, while submerged enough to avoid visual detection, that was one DEEP pier side.

 

[My2Cents]

I'm not sure if the Swedes still operate land based torpedo tubes as part of a coastal defence newtwork.

I wonder if they still have the anti-ship torpedo that they designed to be launched from fishing boats?

 

[gf0012-aust]

If they could park the Parche at a pier, while submerged enough to avoid visual detection, that was one DEEP pier side.

she's the most awarded ship in USN history, citations from here to eternity...

I suspect that the majority of her missions will never see the light of day..

a remarkable sub, and a most remarkable series of crews.

its a big crown for Jimmy Carter to try and wear...

 

[EXSSBN2005]

Parche had alot of modifications to her systems, a friend from nuke school was stationed on her and was telling me some of the weird stuff they had over lunch at the base galley, multiple msw intakes was the one that sticks into my head atm along with some other stuff that I'm not going to say and he didn't tell me alot of it. I never got a tour but they weren't in port at the same time we were all that much. On large displacement conventionals, WW2 Germany had their supply subs called milchkuh, pretty large for the time but still an enample of ingenuity using a sub to refuel while at sea (/diverting conversation from modern to historical tactics/ stratigies) [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Type_XIV_submarine"]German Type XIV submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[t68]

If the allies had not got their hands on an enigma cipher machine how different the outcomes could have potentially been, most of the milk cows were brought down because of this. The first couple of milk cows were sunk by sheer luck from the Royal Navy and turning the tide on U boat operations.

http://rmhh.co.uk/files/Slaughter of the Milk Cows.pdf

 

[peterAustralia]

A bit off topic, here is some open source information on the Barra Sonobuoy, technology now at least 30 years old

http://www.engineeringicons.org.au/...-sonobuoy-system/ImagesVideosAudio/design.pdf

what it shows to me, is that if you want to located an object in the water, it helps if you have your sensors spaced out a lot, this gives better angular resolution.

Although it is not discussed, I would be certain that there would be arrays of hydophones off navy bases as a way of keeping an ear out for unwelcome company. Would seem a cost effective way of keeping the inner realm secure. I would imagine that there are also arrays at certain choke points, or places of high strategic value, like the persian gulf, red sea, Kuril Islands, straights of Hormus, entracnce to the black sea. etc etc

 

[gf0012-aust]

Although it is not discussed, I would be certain that there would be arrays of hydophones off navy bases as a way of keeping an ear out for unwelcome company. Would seem a cost effective way of keeping the inner realm secure. I would imagine that there are also arrays at certain choke points, or places of high strategic value, like the persian gulf, red sea, Kuril Islands, straights of Hormus, entracnce to the black sea. etc etc

attend any UDT event and you see companies box flogging harbour and critical point sensor systems

thats why everyone was pi$$ed off at the scots for selling to the chinese under the guise of anti-terrorism dual use anti-diver and sea bed sensor systems

it is talked about in industry and by those involved etc... its just not "daily mail" common