Submarine Tactics

[Francois]

I read that the Kilo's are equipped with AA missiles, presumably to shoot down choppers searching. Seems like an interesting capability - how come no such system is used on western subs?

Because it is a little anti-doctrine for a sub to use AAMs.
This being said, the strella mounted on the Kilos are just manpads, in the sail.
So the sub has to surface and have a guy ready in the sail to shoot.
During this time, it is a sitting duck...

Doesn't the effiiciency of a sub largely depend on its crew? How do countries like Russia, China, Iran, India and Pakistan stack up in terms of training of their submarine force?

Exactly, depends a lot on its crew.
Crew, systems, platform... it is a whole lot.
Russia are lacking because of lack of funds. During cold war, they mainly used conscripts in their subs (except management, of course), and it is not very good.
The others are missing training time, training with other navies, lack of funds, and lots of problems due to poor maintenance and all.

 

[Awang se]

I read that the Kilo's are equipped with AA missiles, presumably to shoot down choppers searching. Seems like an interesting capability - how come no such system is used on western subs?

in order to launch a SAM, the sub need to at least to surface part of it sail. but it's not like the sub can go from 300 feet to surface in a blink of an eye. it is a slow approach to the surface. usually when the sub reach the depth of 100 feet, it is almost likely that the aircraft have already acquire the sub visualy, provided they don't already track the sub. at 60 feet, the sub already found itself on the receiving end of an ASW torp. either they go back to the depth and evade the torp, or they can keep ascending and hope they can shoot back at the plane before the torp get them first.

 

[Awang se]

I didn't say broadband, I referred to a flank array system allowing broader capability

in deep ocean, i prefer towed array for long range tonal detection. it's much more sensitive and less troubled by the flow noise on ship body. Flank array is good but only at very low speed (i think the best speed is around 3 knots). higher then 5 knots, the array is quite useless.

 

[gf0012-aust]

in order to launch a SAM, the sub need to at least to surface part of it sail. but it's not like the sub can go from 300 feet to surface in a blink of an eye. it is a slow approach to the surface. usually when the sub reach the depth of 100 feet, it is almost likely that the aircraft have already acquire the sub visualy, provided they don't already track the sub. at 60 feet, the sub already found itself on the receiving end of an ASW torp. either they go back to the depth and evade the torp, or they can keep ascending and hope they can shoot back at the plane before the torp get them first.

No, not necessarily true. The new SAM's are able to launched underwater. They can either be forced out under pressure or swim out in specialised sabot.

 

[Francois]

No, not necessarily true. The new SAM's are able to launched underwater. They can either be forced out under pressure or swim out in specialised sabot.

But, Gary, he was refering to the Kilo's Grails missiles, in the casing in the sail.
Last I heard about them, was said they do not go to sea with them anyway.

 

[gf0012-aust]

But, Gary, he was refering to the Kilo's Grails missiles, in the casing in the sail.
Last I heard about them, was said they do not go to sea with them anyway.

my bad, I misread Awang-se's post and thought he was referring to subs in general using SAMs.

I was under the distinct impression that the majority of large subs carried a short SAM component of MANPADs. (not ideal, but better than zilch!)

A semi-surface sail launch isn't exactly the best way to go about your business - I think it died in the bum as a useful idea some time ago, although there are indications that the Chinese are trying to resurrect the idea again.

 

[Francois]

my bad, I misread Awang-se's post and thought he was referring to subs in general using SAMs.

I was under the distinct impression that the majority of large subs carried a short SAM component of MANPADs. (not ideal, but better than zilch!).

From my personal experience, they may be carried, but it is a really sledom occurence. On spec ops or if the sub has to make some portcall in a "red" listed place.

A semi-surface sail launch isn't exactly the best way to go about your business - I think it died in the bum as a useful idea some time ago, although there are indications that the Chinese are trying to resurrect the idea again.

Yes, I heard that too. Hence my topic about having an S-300 in a Xia on another forum (at least it would be useful at something, uh?).
I don't like useless assets!

 

[Nautilus]

I believe the Germans are looking at developing a AAM which can be launched while submerged for the U212 follow on class.

I wonder how such a missile would aquire its target given that the precise location of a chopper can't be determined from underwater unless it is dipping its sonar. If it simply locks onto the first heatsource (if it can even find one) then there is the danger of shooting down a neutral or allied plane/chopper.

 

[Francois]

I believe the Germans are looking at developing a AAM which can be launched while submerged for the U212 follow on class.

Everybody has one system to show (just go on DCN, HDW sites, you will see).
Now, sonme concept are presently taken at sea, but it is not available to public knowledge.

I wonder how such a missile would aquire its target given that the precise location of a chopper can't be determined from underwater unless it is dipping its sonar. If it simply locks onto the first heatsource (if it can even find one) then there is the danger of shooting down a neutral or allied plane/chopper.

You can not find this kind of information online or in mass-media, Naut.
This being said, the physics down on earth (and underwater) are the same for us all, so...

 

[Pendekar]

the targeting system is the problem here. i assume the trageting system (radar, laser...) can be mast mounted on submarine sail. and that mean going to periscope depth, a pleasant approach in peacetime, but a suicidal undertaking with the ASW aircraft buzing above.

 

[Francois]

Reason why you don't need to surface anymore.
Acquisition is done by other means. There are restrictions on the depth, but it is not that close to surface.

 

[Awang se]

there's plenty of techniques to acquire a target for sub launch AAM whithout going to periscope depth, and the targeting system doesn't have to be on the launch platform. modern AAM don't require a lock before launch, they just need cuing and they'll acquire the target after they break out of water.

 

[Nautilus]

That doesn't address the risk of shooting down a friendly or neutral who is simply passing by in the same area.

Targetting system not on the sub? Kinda only leaves satellites. In my understanding subs need to float a transponder to the surfact to communicate with satellites which kinda negates the whole purpose of a stealthy missile launch from deep below.

If there were surface assets nearby able to track a hostile anti-sub chopper than there wouldn't be much point shooting the missile from the sub.

 

[gf0012-aust]

That doesn't address the risk of shooting down a friendly or neutral who is simply passing by in the same area.

Targetting system not on the sub? Kinda only leaves satellites. In my understanding subs need to float a transponder to the surfact to communicate with satellites which kinda negates the whole purpose of a stealthy missile launch from deep below.

If there were surface assets nearby able to track a hostile anti-sub chopper than there wouldn't be much point shooting the missile from the sub.

There are systems that have been trialled in things such as Silent Hammer. You're not going to find much info on the internet though.

there's also (in the case of the USN) using technology solutions provided by ForceNET etc...

 

[Awang se]

In my understanding subs need to float a transponder to the surfact to communicate with satellites

well, a stealthy design laser comm buoy with wire connection to the sub. i have formulated several method on how to use it, but it's rather complicated to explain it in here. but i can tell you the transmission time is minimal and by the time the canister goes to the surface, the sub can cut the wire and clear datum. besides, laser transmission is narrow and directional and the chance for enemy ESM to pickup the transmission is very small.

 

[Francois]

well, a stealthy design laser comm buoy with wire connection to the sub. i have formulated several method on how to use it, but it's rather complicated to explain it in here. but i can tell you the transmission time is minimal and by the time the canister goes to the surface, the sub can cut the wire and clear datum. besides, laser transmission is narrow and directional and the chance for enemy ESM to pickup the transmission is very small.

Why not a laser to shoot down the plane from 350ft below !!
It will only be a last chance weapon, because it is anti-doctrine of submarine assets.
Already, the launch of cruise missiles are not really loved by submariners, as they are being pointed at by the long smoke trail...
When you know they sometime can't hear a fishing boat just above...

 

[Nautilus]

There are systems that have been trialled in things such as Silent Hammer. You're not going to find much info on the internet though.

there's also (in the case of the USN) using technology solutions provided by ForceNET etc...

So tell us about it - what is Silent Hammer and ForceNET?

Francois... I don't think lasers penetrate water very well. Plus the chopper isn't necessarily directly over the sub but could be 8km away dipping its sonar.

 

[Francois]

Francois... I don't think lasers penetrate water very well. Plus the chopper isn't necessarily directly over the sub but could be 8km away dipping its sonar.

I was sarcastic, Naut...
Blue-green lasers are still SF.

 

[umair]

Thank you guys for reminding me why I gave up researching on submarines(too much info to digest, the thread gave me intellectual gas)!
Aircraft all the way.
On a more serious note, how good were those missile torps developed by the Soviets for their sub fleets? I don't remember the designations but they were a whole family, one I recall was called the Stallion.

 

[Elite Brain]

Anyone know the diving depth of the Collins class? That is one fine piece of machinery . Was Lockheed Martin upgrading the weapons systems for the Aussies? i forget.