norwegians respond to russian naval activity

[kilo]

I was not trying to suggest that tha ula was still loud. Just that it once had noise problems with some of it's machinery, and I was just providing my source.

 

[Rossiman]

I was not trying to suggest that tha ula was still loud. Just that it once had noise problems with some of it's machinery, and I was just providing my source.

I know, but Janes Warships and The Encyclopedia of Warships talk about the Ula.

 

[Rossiman]

Noted, thanks. I still don't have the PM he promised either.

Maybe you should go read my clarification first http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6521
2nd page and you can read it. Also i am trying to find the link, it was before they started upgrading there subs. I am trying to dig through sources hold on. I keep my word, i will find it for you.

 

[Awang se]

Diesel-electric boat are known to be very quiet when run on battery. even the old boat, like Oberon Class, a 1960's era diesel sub, still manage to present a significant threat to the super-advance navy.

 

[kilo]

That's what i am getting at. Versus 21st century subs it is outclassed. What does the upgrade include, and what are they upgrading?

Even if the Ula is outclassed by 21st century subs(which is debatable). which of Russia's subs are 21st century designs?

 

[alexsa]

I have read that book. Also have seen information on the Ula on Globalsecurity.org and Armytechnology.com The Ula is a loud sub period, there is no denying that.

Hmm, here is the entire quote from global security:

<H2>Ula (Type P 6071)

The Ula is a Norwegian diesel electric submarine. The boats were constructed during 1989-1992 by Thyssen Nordseewerke in Emden Germany. In the Norwegian Navy six boats are currently operational: KNM ULA S300, KNM UTSIRA S301,KNM UTSTEIN S302, KNM UTVÆR S 303, KNM UTHAUG S304, KNM UREDD S305. The Ula class began a series of upgrades in 2006. By 2008, Norway's fleet will have new sonars, periscopes, communications equipment, and electronic warfare systems. With these additions, the Ula will remain in service until 2020.

</H2>Cannot see any reference to the fact they are a noisy boat. Not that I put too much store in Wikipedia but here is their comment in regards to noise

The Ula class submarines are among the most silent and manoeuverable submarines in the world. This, in combination with the relatively small size, makes them difficult to detect from surface vessels and ideal for operations in coastal areas. During the annual NATO Joint Winter exercise in 2004, the HNoMS Utvær had to be disqualified from the exercise because it kept the entire landing operation at bay. [5] The Ula class submarines are regarded as both the most effective and cost-effective weapons in the RNoN.

Army Technology has nothing on the Ula (nor would I expect it to) nor does Naval Technology. So this leaves the Encyclopedia of Warships, which I admit I have not read, but as Kilo indicated he was referring to 'past problems'. It probably also the Collins class had a noise issues as well given the past contraversy but this is not a fact in the current context either.

This leaves your inside source. Details please.

 

[Rossiman]

Even if the Ula is outclassed by 21st century subs(which is debatable). which of Russia's subs are 21st century designs?

The Russian Siera II/Akula II is alright, compared to American subs i doubt if its all that great. I don't know if they are considered 5th Generation, maybe 4 1/2 lol.

 

[kilo]

The Russian Siera II is alright, compared to American subs i doubt if its all that great.

The last of the Sierra II was completed in 1993.

 

[kato]

Versus 21st century subs it is outclassed.

There aren't exactly many of those around... for the ones i named up there - there are only 6 Type 212A, 3 Dolphins, 7 upgraded Type 209s, 3 Gotlands. Scorpenes will probably range the same, but there aren't many of those around either.

And all the operators of those are allies. A Ula isn't going up against a 212A or a Gotland, it's going up against 636s (Improved Kilos) and in the future 677s (Ladas). With the Improved Kilos being around the same age as an Ula, both in design and production.

As for the upgrade, the line-up in 2005 was:
- new sonars
- new periscope system
- combat system upgrade (incl. Link 11)
- EW system upgrade

All subs already had a refit a bit earlier (2003-2005), during which some other modifications, especially machinery and hull, were made.

As Norway has an option for DM2A4 (from DM2A3 contract), and the system has been integration-tested highly successfully by now, i'd suspect they'll be taking up that option too sometime in the next few years.

Upgrades are supposed to take until 2008 for all six subs.

 

[Rossiman]

This is the thing, i am no navy professional. Though i have sworn i read articles on it being noisy, I will try to find them.

 

[Rossiman]

There aren't exactly many of those around... for the ones i named up there - there are only 6 Type 212A, 3 Dolphins, 7 upgraded Type 209s, 3 Gotlands. Scorpenes will probably range the same, but there aren't many of those around either.

And all the operators of those are allies. A Ula isn't going up against a 212A or a Gotland, it's going up against 636s (Improved Kilos) and in the future 677s (Ladas). With the Improved Kilos being around the same age as an Ula, both in design and production.

As for the upgrade, the line-up in 2005 was:
- new sonars
- new periscope system
- combat system upgrade (incl. Link 11)
- EW system upgrade

All subs already had a refit a bit earlier (2003-2005), during which some other modifications, especially machinery and hull, were made.

As Norway has an option for DM2A4 (from DM2A3 contract), and the system has been integration-tested highly successfully by now, i'd suspect they'll be taking up that option too sometime in the next few years.

Upgrades are supposed to take until 2008 for all six subs.

Does the engine and machinery have rubber noise dampeners/like most of the American subs?

 

[kato]

Does the engine and machinery have rubber noise dampeners/like most of the American subs?

Uhh... i'd suspect so? Isn't that like... standard? Either buffer it directly, or otherwise disconnect it from the hull.

 

[kilo]

This is the thing, i am no navy professional. Though i have sworn i read articles on it being noisy, I will try to find them.

They were noisy, but that is no longer the case

 

[alexsa]

This is the thing, i am no navy professional. Though i have sworn i read articles on it being noisy, I will try to find them.

This appears to be a waste of time but "I have read articles" is very different to:

And i know for a fact that it is loud, first hand accounts have told me that.

Are you saying now you have no first ahnd accounts. BTW by rubber noise damping I assume you mean anechoic tiles.

 

[Rossiman]

They were noisy, but that is no longer the case

That's what i am talking about. Do you know where to find this info.

 

[XaNDeR]

The last of the Sierra II was completed in 1993.

The last of the " NON IMPROVED " Los Angeles class was completed in 1985.

Whats your point?

USA and NATO country's are all considered the most modern tehnologicaly advanced country's all in all , yet most of their equipment is from 80's or 90's or even less , there is something called upgrading old equipment to new standards.

Now I didn't do this to compare LA to Sierra II of course not , but I did do this too proove a point that your wrong , year of commisioning doesn't matter about any equipment's quality or performance.

 

[gf0012-aust]

That's what i am talking about. Do you know where to find this info.

You need to start doing some of your own research before asking some of your questions. I am getting complaints by some members that you appear to be "frivolous posting" across the boards.

I realise that you are new here, but after 57 posts you should have got the hang of things by now.

Do not respond to this post and please take note.

 

[kilo]

My source on the noise issues was The Encyclopedia of Warships like I have already said.

Now can we get on to discussing the Ulas against the Russian subs in the Barents sea. The reason this post was started.

 

[alexsa]

That's what i am talking about. Do you know where to find this info.

This is a waste of time. To summarise, first you claim the Ula is a poor boat with poor systems, alright crew and is noisey "no denying it".

To claim to have first hand information to support this.

You quote references to support it, but they don't

And now you are asking for information to support you argument. Statements such as the one you made are interesting if they are support by some sort of fact or considered argument. You don't appear to be capable of providing that and whats more your knowledge of the technology appears very limited.

 

[alexsa]

You need to start doing some of your own research before asking some of your questions. I am getting complaints by some members that you appear to be "frivolous posting" across the boards.

I realise that you are new here, but after 57 posts you should have got the hang of things by now.

Do not respond to this post and please take note.

Sorry GF my last post must have crossed your or I would have restrained myself. I quite agree with Kilo that this needs to get back to the topic.