HERE
LOOK AT IT
How can submarines hide from something like THIS?? This is just civilian technology, odds are something better is out there. This is the TITANIC, isn't it? It's DEEP AS FUCK and you can tell the image was taken from pretty high up. The Titanic is TWO MILES DOWN and the two halves are almost a half mile apart!!
How can submarines even be justified when technology like this exists? You could probably distinguish a submarine from the bottom with only ONE pass and if you need more, you can network the sonars together and one ship can use two of them or multiple ships can network theirs together.
How can current submarine programs be justified anymore??
The average depth of the ocean is TWO MILES.
Because those scans are so fucking expensive the Titanic is literally the only shit that has been photographed in such remarkable detail.
The Titanic isn't popular because of some shit movie. That's part of it, but the Titanic was a technological marvel of its time, and has been a proving ground for other technological marvels.
>>29114437
Single point scan, narrow scanning cone.
>Oh shit, a boat!
>Just don't let it pass over you.
>>29114437
That composite scan represents almost 5 months of work in sonar passes and then processing. It's also active sonar, which has the same inverse square return threshold to signal detection ratio problem that radar has.
You probably should have bothered to read a book before showing just how ignorant you are in sub ops.
>>29114500
>implying sonar capable buoys can't be networked together and air dropped
>implying submarines trying to be stealthy move fast enough to evade surface ships designed to hunt them
Submarine sonar has the same problems as the sonar used by people hunting them and to evade surface ships will require them to operate blind.
>>29114513
Yes I understand this. But don't you think even with a shitty quick scan, you'd be able to distinguish a SUBMARINE from the ocean floor?
>>29114558
You're missing the point, it's active sonar. Subs have it, they don't use it because it's like shining a flashlight in the dark. You can see, but everyone else knows exactly where you are.
>>29114558
Okay, I'll bite.
The Pacific is 150+ million km2.
You can hide an entire surface fleet in the Pacific and even with the best radar/satellite imagery you wouldn't find that fleet, because you wouldn't know where to look.
The same applies to subs.
>>29114615
Subs use passive sonar for navigation but the drawback is you can't go fast because then the noise fucks up your sonar.
Surface ships hunting submarines have the advantage because they can use active sonar, and even if they are going a little too fast they'll still be able to find the sub and the sub can't outrun it and it can't fire back without definitely exposing its exact location.
I made this thread because our entire doctrine of submarine warfare and tactics needs to be reworked.
They have just gotten too easy to find
>>29114709
There was a thread about how fucking SATELLITES can detect submarine movements.
They leave trails just like everything else, dude.
>>29114728
Did you read what I said?
You need to know where to look for that to work.
Do you understand how big the oceans are?
>>29114714
So how long have you been a Sub captain for?
>>29114728
Read this and get learned, who knows, it might do you some good.
http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-031.htm
>>29114714
fuck off. you arent allowed to make a conclusion like that after being summarily debunked.
submarines were never invisible, and the risk of capture is still negligible from this technology. is there other tech that might support your premise? maybe, but that doesnt allow you to make shitty argumentation and willfully ignore your opponents
saged
>>29114437
because those scans are done from a dedicated boat that is directly above it
this is not a practical thing to do over every inch of the ocean 24/7
I have a question for submarine people that struck me whilst having a righteous shit a few nights ago:
1)
How does the shitter work in a sub
and
2)
When the sub is trying to be as quiet as possible to avoid detection what effect does the shitter have on it? I mean, if I'm getting setting the neighbours dogs off with my toilet adventures wouldn't that cause problems onboard?
>>29114766
>this is not a practical thing to do over every inch of the ocean 24/7
This has already been explained, but OP completely ignored it because he doesn't understand that the ocean is bigger than a swimming pool.
>>29114744
How long have you? And don't pretend like we haven't taught our own troops bad doctrines in the past.
>>29114747
Invalid. My post is about the massive advantage submarine hunters have over submarines. Your post assumes they will be on equal playing fields with the exact same equipment and numbers and prior training about how best to win.
War is a bloodsport but it is very vague and not always fair.
Why the fuck would a submarine hunter use anything other than active sonar? They aren't the ones trying to hide!! Ever watch people play hide and seek? Yea there are crafty fuckers but as a general rule the seekers have the advantage. Now imagine a game of hide and seek where you can't hide. Submarines leave trails behind them just like task forces. Navweaps is only really relevant for antiquated tactics from 50 years ago. It's literal cat and mouse. The cat always has the advantage.
>>29114437
How long did that take to produce?
>>29114794
>have to search entire ocean
>shits easy bruh
>>29114794
You're so dumb, it's incredible.
You need to know where to look. The ocean is big.
>>29114437
The extensive amount of question marks in one questioning statement and the number of question marks in general, not to mention the persistent nature of the questioning, leads me to believe that you are trying way too hard to get a reaction out of anyone you can.
While I can understand what you are saying about the amount of concealment submarines can actually have, you are still an attention whore neackbeard who will die alone and by the authority John Mosses Browning has vested in me I dub thee 'virgin'
you may rise
>>29114759
Do you even understand my premise?
My premise is a Los Angeles sub costs a billion each, Seawolfs cost three times as much.
If the enemy can crank out innumerable hunter killers for the cost of ONE Seawolf, then all the advantages submarines have are nullified. Even if most don't get sighted and killed, the rest are still inoperable because they would have to expose themselves.
My premise is surface ships would have to counter submarine hunters, which would seriously hinder their usefulness.
And you realize both submarines and surface ships leave trails behind them.
I'm a paranoid bastard and my life is kinda paradoxical.... but perhaps paranoia is justified.
It would not take much to remove most of our navies stealth capabilities dude.
>>29114856
I think you may actually be a little special.
>>29114827
It's a glamour shot, dude. How hard do you think it is to detect a goddamn SUBMARINE by differentiating it from the bottom of the OCEAN? Haven't you heard about MIT students fucking up modern military hardware with a trip to radio shack?
>>29114835
The world is much smaller than you think, and it tends to be very predictable where our submarines are not. It's a simple search for discrepancy and sub hunters do not have the same constraints subs do.
>>29114842
It's a small world after allll lol you can go on Google and see the location of every goat in the United States, dude. What, you think goats are easy to hide?? B-but muh big unfathomable world!!! Even the Japanese task force that attacked Pearl Harbor was afraid of detection, and that was with ancient tech! And they were lead by West Point graduates!!!
>>29114843
1) your right, I'm drunkposting, and attention whoring.
2) I've had sex with way too many girls :/ it does effect you mentally.
>>29114892
We are all special :3
>>29114907
>It's a small world after allll lol you can go on Google and see the location of every goat in the United States, dude. What, you think goats are easy to hide?? B-but muh big unfathomable world!!! Even the Japanese task force that attacked Pearl Harbor was afraid of detection, and that was with ancient tech! And they were lead by West Point graduates!!!
So either retarded or good trolling.
Hmmm
>>29114856
>He thinks the military is going crank out thousands of active sonar ships to go and hunt subs
The sub would out maneuver or just go to one of the many places they could hide. You literally can't cover the ocean. The only time your "plan" would work is in small areas like bays. Which are already pretty much a bad place for a sub to be.
>>29114907
Suppose there's an eighteen wheeler with "HELLO" painted on the top of the trailer.
It is somewhere within the continental United States, and you are to find it. That's not easy, is it?
>captcha asks for commercial trucks
fuck
>>29114907
Do you know what the range is for that type of sonar?
What about power supply?
How much power is available to your drone hunters vs how much power is required to supply the sonar and processing equipment?
>>29114558
>Yes I understand this. But don't you think even with a shitty quick scan, you'd be able to distinguish a SUBMARINE from the ocean floor?
You don't understand. Those scans are at most 100m wide for low resolution. And it takes forever to trawl your scanner along behind your ship. Looking for subs this way is like putting on blinders that only let you see 10 degrees in front of you, being unable to turn your head and then trying to find and swat horse flies in a forest.
They'll see you first and avoid or sting you every single time.
>>29114714
>They have just gotten too easy to find
They are harder to detect and run a weapons track on NOW than they've ever been. WWII ASW was a cakewalk compared to now: back then you just blanked the area with surface sonar and escort carriers with radar/spotter planes equipped with bombs/torpedoes (same with ground based patrol craft). Now? Good fucking luck.
>>29114794
>Why the fuck would a submarine hunter use anything other than active sonar?
Because any modern submarine can detect and launch a pack of AShMs right back at it from 4 times the range it can detect the sub at, dumbass. That's what people are trying to tell you.
>>29114437
>he thinks its a photograph
what a retard
>>29114856
You are ignorant. Incredibly so. But that's ok. Here are some terms to research to get you started on the path to actual knowledge and maybe even some wisdom, while hopefully getting you to shut the fuck up and learn something:
>datum, how subs clear it, and general physics laws for passive sonar detection
>thermocline, and how it affects sound waves and how subs use it to clear datum
>convergence zones and how they affect passive sonar detection, and why this gives submarines a strong advantage over dipping sonars or sonabuoys
>why passive sonar is more effective and less noise-loaded at depth as opposed to close to the surface
>the inverse square law and how it relates to sonar/radar return detection thresholds VS the range at which the emission can be detected and avoided/fired upon
There. Go read a fucking book and stop making these shitty goddamn threads every fucking day.
>>29114778
>1)
That's classified
>2)
it's extremely vulnerable and has a characteristic sound signature
>>29114437
>>29114558
>>29114728
>>29114714
>>29114794
>>29114856
>>29114907
Holy shit, this is leagues better than gliderfag or mechposters.
I haven't been Poe'd this hard in a long-ass time, OP. Either way, from the bottom of my heart, thank-you and kindly fuck off.
