Ozzy couldn't have said it better. Thats what I've been trying to say all along. Whichever country has the most cash and enough brains and experience, will come out on top. Right now the U.S. has brains experience and most importantly billions and billions of dollars for R&D. I'm also sure the U.S. shares this tech. with NATO allies like the U.K. France and others if they want it. But really, its OK the F-22 is half a generation ahead of the Eurofighter, why its about TWICE as much $. Same thing with about every other piece of American defense equippment, it costs alot more $ to get.
Nuclear Subs
- Thread starter Jade
- Start date
I agree with you partially. I agree that submarines will certainly be the things that destroy our world. HOWEVER, I'm sure they have ways of knowing which country fired what missiles. But again SSBN's will oneday destroy us all if there is a war.
Thank you for understading. Sorry, I didn't see this comment before I posted my second arguement but I'll stop now for sure.f-22 - dont go there with this guy, it is not worth it.
I deleted it though.
Back to Submarines, thnx for understanding.
Last edited:
jaffo4011, thank you for standing up for me. I appreciate it.
I will stop posting comments against mic of orion now.
Thnx for support+understanding once again.
Will do. I wont argue anymore.
DoC_FouALieR
New Member
Scorpene are a generation ahead of Agosta 90B, moreover Scorpene has AIP, that make it a more capable sub than the Agosta in all realms.
I would tempered this statement. I agree that USN is a generation ahead in passive sonar capability, but when it comes to active sonar, France's VDS technology is often stated to be a generation ahead.
It is often said that during joint exercises, the USN wants the French ASW ships to turn off their VDS because of their efficiency in detecting subs...
I've always had one huge question about nuclear subs.
The Seawolf class carries 50 weapons to Virginia's 38. The Seawolf is faster than Virginia. Yet people say the Virginia is more advanced than the seawolf. Which do you think is better. The faster, deadlier seawolf or the less deadly slower and more advanced Virginia.
Thnx.
The Seawolf class carries 50 weapons to Virginia's 38. The Seawolf is faster than Virginia. Yet people say the Virginia is more advanced than the seawolf. Which do you think is better. The faster, deadlier seawolf or the less deadly slower and more advanced Virginia.
Thnx.
Seawolf is to be fair a product of the Cold War - indeed I guess it was the last western SSN specifically designed to hunt and destroy Soviet subs.
Designed from the outset to restore and enhance the USN's acoustic advantage over a rapidly developing Soviet SSN fleet, the Seawolf program was blessed with massive funding and incorporated a lot of new technology. For instance, they were the first operational US SSN class to incorporate pumpjet propulsion. With sustained combat with the Soviet fleet in mind, a large magazine was fitted as standard.
They certainly weren't designed with littoral warfare in mind like the Virginia. The last Seawolf built, SSN-23 USS Carter had major modifications to give it a littoral capability, but the expense of Seawolf could no longer be justified. Seawolf is a hunter-killer, plain and simple and it without doubt does the job incredibly well.
The end of the Cold War meant that there was no longer a need for such a capable yet mission-specific platform like Seawolf. Virginia's design accepts the new need for a boat that could perform multi-role missions - especially supporting special forces and intelligence gathering. Given the lack of an enemy SSN threat, a large weapons magazine like that of Seawolf was a secondary consideration.
I think on a pure numbers versus development cost basis, Seawolf can still be judged more expensive than Virginia.
In conclusion, they simply were designed for different roles in an ever-changing world - yet without doubt both fantastic submarines.
Instead of comparing and contrasting Astute vs. Virginia etc. we should be looking at comparing potential adversaries. After all there is no way the UK and US will go head-to head!!!
If we look at both sub designs (Astute / Virginia) and expected life-cycle of 25 years, and assuming they benefit from ongoing technology inserts / upgrades, what other existing or up and coming nuclear or conventional subs are now or in the future capable of taking them on?
Future boat designs operated by the following countries for example:
Russia
China
Pakistan (Assuming a total melt-down and ‘Talibanization’ of the country)
Iran
If we look at both sub designs (Astute / Virginia) and expected life-cycle of 25 years, and assuming they benefit from ongoing technology inserts / upgrades, what other existing or up and coming nuclear or conventional subs are now or in the future capable of taking them on?
Future boat designs operated by the following countries for example:
Russia
China
Pakistan (Assuming a total melt-down and ‘Talibanization’ of the country)
Iran
The Chinese PLAN type 636 improved Kilo will be probobly the first and toughest adversary the Virginias will come up against. Also the new AIP Russian sub. (I forgot its name) Iran still has the old Kilos and the U.S. want fight Pakistan because now they are our "ally"
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
Sorry I thought it said something else. In that case Pakistan wouldn't be able to aquire submarines from the U.S., Germany,France,Spain,Italy and all the other Western nations. They would have to get their submarines from a country that doesn't care if your run by the Taliban. (don't know who would sell submarines in that case)
As for their current submarines, they would be the easiest of all. They only have a few Agosta 90Bs. No real threat at all.
So what they built a few Agosta 90Bs. They would need money WHICH THEY DO NOT HAVE to continue developing good submarines.
And their crews, whoever came up with the idea that the personall on Pakistan's submarines are good?
DoC_FouALieR
New Member
And the idea that they are not good? They've been trained by the French, that was part of the Agosta deal.