Subs
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
For naval warfare (aka ignore nuclear triad purposes) how do subs fare in modern naval forces?
In other words, what kind of gap is there between ASW and submarines themselves? How much trouble would a carrier group have against some submarines?
>>30508738
depends on the submarine, depends on ships, depends on the sea.
Fairly dated submarines (mid cold war) can be very effective if they can be positioned well with favourable sea conditions.
Even the best submarines will fail to succeed if they end up in a tail chase in unfavourable sea conditions.
broadly speaking submarines are probably the biggest threat to modern surface forces.
Had great success in the Falklands War, effectively making the Argentine navy null void for the duration of the conflict posting sinking of the ARA General Belgrano.
>>30508738
Two types of ships: Subs and targets. I kek'd the first time I heard it. Was in RIMPAC '96. MFW it turned out to be true. Squadron (SUBRON 7) building halls are full of pics from periscopes. so close to an aircraft carrier that you could recognize individual sailors.
>>30508738
Are there submariners in the navy reserve?
>>30511104
>reservists submariners
>mfw
>>30511135
Wasn't homer a Navy reserve nuke?
>>30511104
>>30511135
My pop was a nuke-qualified medical officer in the USN. Served several tours on SSNs. Even after he left the USN to practice medicine as an MD, he was USNR for some years. Not sure when he completely separated, but I feel like it was at least a decade.
So, yes.
If you meant "are there submarines in the reserve fleet", the answer is not really. All those nuke reactors cost way too much to mothball, and most of them need refueling anyway, as that usually determines when they're decommissioned. Most of the 688s (22 of them) are still awaiting disposal through the nuclear vessel disposal/sub recycling program, perhaps some could be returned to service in a few months and serve maybe a deployment or two, but it'd probably cost a lot less to accelerate Virginia class builds for a lot more benefit. If the USN gets bitchslapped so hard that a handful of 688s are necessary to defend the country and we've somehow lost the majority of our 50 SSNs and 4 SSGNs, we're in much deeper shit anyway.
>>30510470
This. They call it the Silent Service for a reason. The USN SSN crews operate like the CIA or NSA - you only really hear about what they do if they've seriously screwed the pooch (gotten caught surveilling a harbor in territorial waters or tapping comm lines, etc) or a few decades have passed (like Craven writing about the early secret squirrel days, things like Operation Ivy Bells).
It's a little different for most other countries, as they have to justify their spending as effective. Part of this is pulling publicity stunts to "sink" a carrier during exercises or what have you. A small number of these are legitimate. Most are either exercises in joint training where the USN gets to operate against dissimilar OPFOR and learn about countering them while the OPFOR gets training evading ASW and the chance at some valuable PR to help boost their own funding at home. Being able to tell the people back home that they have a potent and effective weapon even against a CSG is pretty important to securing funding for SSK/SSN programs.
cont
>>30510470
>>30511410
What you don't see is how often a USN SSN is sitting on their ass with a snapshot in the tubes waiting for any kind of mechanical transient indicating a weapons door is opening, because the USN is very, very shy about how well their own SSNs can detect and track OPFOR vessels. The greatest coups in USN SSN history are invariably the ones no one knew about for many, many years. Things like:
>tailing and building unique and detailed sound profiles on nearly every Soviet sub commissioned within a year
>following most boomers out of the barn and for most of their patrol, especially before the Bastion Strategy was enacted (this is one of the main reasons for the Bastion strategy, in conjunction with missile ranges being sufficient to not be forced to head very far from home)
>highly detailed and meticulous mapping of all strategically relevant sea floors, like Soviet coastlines and the G-I-UK gap with secret squirrel boats and special projects boats like the NR-1
>dozens of highly illegal and dangerous infil/exfil ops on hostile coastlines
>bird dogging Soviet SAGs for possible CSG strikes
>being a large part of the USN's effort to have most of the Soviet Navy localized and identified at all times
>>30511410
>as they have to justify their spending as effective
As in, against the standard set by the USN? I guess that makes sense, even if it seems a little arrogant in analysis.
Obviously the USN has to justify their spending to their government/people as well. I guess it's a delicate dance between revealing capability and proving value.
How long until drone subs?
Older diesel subs are a force to be reckoned with. RCN Victoria class subs are usually successful at infiltrating BCGs during RIMPAC
>>30511104
Submariners who seperate still go to reserves at the end of their contract, but there are no active reservists in the submarine force.
>>30512151
As there's no real means of LPI high-bandwidth communication with objects below periscope depth (trailing a surfaced object with LOS on a comms platform), probably not for a long, long time.
There's just not much upside in long-range patrol drone subs. To make them viable just from an endurance standpoint for the USN (several thousand miles to patrol areas usually), they'd need to be nuclear. And no one is putting a reactor on an unmanned platform.
Furthermore, for missions beyond minesweeping and wire-guided recon from an SSN or SSGN, they're just not that useful. Without constant positive control, they can't really gather sonar data any more efficiently than a SOSUS grid in choke points, they won't have the processing to follow contacts and remain undetected in blue water and they cannot prosecute threats in any real way.
>>30512185
>Older diesel subs are a force to be reckoned with. RCN Victoria class subs are usually successful at infiltrating BCGs during RIMPAC
They can be very effective, but only if they get very lucky in a warshot scenario. They can't tail chase a SAG or CSG. They're not fast enough. They have to get good intel, and then get lucky on their position, shut down and wait. The only way this really happens is if you've got enough diesel boats to form a static net in a choke point or across an expected route, and then pray you get customers before your boats have to start snorkeling to recharge batteries or kick on louder AIP machinery.
>>30512218
>but there are no active reservists in the submarine force.
Unless they get called up for a big show, as happened during Vietnam, for instance.
>>30512247
>They have to get good intel, and then get lucky on their position, shut down and wait. The only way this really happens is if you've got enough diesel boats to form a static net in a choke point or across an expected route, and then pray you get customers before your boats have to start snorkeling to recharge batteries or kick on louder AIP machinery.
This. Diesel/AIP boats can also be very effective in littoral waters where the noise floor is a lot higher and can mask periodic snorkeling.
For the most part, Diesel/AIP subs should be considered more like an intelligent minefield, rather than a hunter/killer asset. They're very dangerous to run across unawares, but the fight generally has to come to them.
SSN tactics are obviously quite a bit different.
I love how /k/ can shitpost all day every day about SF, aircraft, ships and tanks, but the second people start talking about subs it gets real quiet.
Tells me the USN poicy of keeping sub ops under their hat and ONI COINTEL is actually doing a kickass job.
>>30511410
>It's a little different for most other countries, as they have to justify their spending as effective. Part of this is pulling publicity stunts to "sink" a carrier during exercises or what have you. A small number of these are legitimate
If true then this is a logical explanation at least.
One thing that never seems to be mentioned along with those periscope photos is how many times, if any, the sub was 'sunk' attempting to sink the carrier.
I recently got off deployment and we did some cool ass shit. Makes me proud it was a successful mission.
Got my fish too, that's also awesome.
Modern Diesel-electric subs are pretty deadly to modern warfare, especially ones with AIP systems. Only truly modern and experienced blue water navies like the US could deal with them.
Israel for instance has 6 subs in service and according to the 5th Fleet commander last year could sink the entire Egyptian navy in a series of hours, despite Egypt having a much larger surface fleet than Israel does.
>>30513421
>Got my fish too, that's also awesome.
Grats, man. I know it feels nice not to get called nub anymore. Be proud of those fish.
>>30513301
>One thing that never seems to be mentioned along with those periscope photos is how many times, if any, the sub was 'sunk' attempting to sink the carrier.
Goes back to the whole USN being very close mouthed about our own SSN capabilities. Part of this is to protect SSBNs, as they share many design concepts and systems with SSNs, but the other part is to give enemy intel as little as possible at all times.
>>30513474
>Israel for instance has 6 subs in service and according to the 5th Fleet commander last year could sink the entire Egyptian navy in a series of hours, despite Egypt having a much larger surface fleet than Israel does.
And that's the perfect hammer for that nail: enclosed, relatively shallow waters in the Med, very little shoreline to patrol compared to the US, Russia or China and patrol routes pretty much directly offshore. All existential threats are more or less right next door, so it's barely a stroll to wander over and facefuck their harbors and shipping. No endurance necessary beyond a reasonable patrol time.
There's no reason for a country like Israel or really anyone on the Med to buy anything but DE/AIP boats, unless they're protecting interests outside the Med.
>>30513522
>>30513421
would you guys recommend being a nupoc?
for surface or subs?
>>30512255
Like I said the only submariners who are reserves are former active duty inactive ready reserve. There aren't any of the practice-on-weekends types like there are in the surface fleet.
>>30513560
I'm just enlisted and I have heard from Submarine Nuke Officers that it's some bullshit.
One officer who was in just for a few years telling me, (little third class at the time) that he wants to get out as soon as he can and 'he couldn't do it anymore, too much bullshit.'
Officers sucking the captains dick in the wardroom, it's funny to hear and watch, but would I want to do that shit? Nah, give it to some poor shitass.
>>30513802
Well I'm sure the second part applies to every officer to some degree.
I know the pay is really good and I'd like to get a masters while on shore duty down the line. But everyone does say that the work is unforgiving and nukes are unappreciated. Not to mention the life on subs itself must be tough with lower oxygen and cramped conditions
>>30513301
Oh yes, a lot of those RIMPAC exercises people keep citing come with a lot of caveats. Carriers are artificially constrained to a small geographic area making them easier to find. Restrictions on the full use of ASW assets are usually put in place both for secrecy and in order to simulate less advanced opponents.
>>30513421
At any point did you maintain a 20 degree down angle for an extended period of time?
>>30513421
>July
>End of deployment
Newport News?
>>30514947
Is this a meme
>>30508738
A modern submarine lying still on the bottom of the ocean is EXTREMELY hard to hear over passive arrays. There's a reason why the LCS's towed sonar array has a neat feature. It's called Continuous Active Sonar. Basically, you can just keep it on active constantly. Good luck trying to hide from that. Now, the problem is that its position is given away, but hey, if someone tries to shoot at the LCS, it might very well be able to outrun the torpedo, and if not it could probably run fast enough to keep the torpedo from hitting until it runs out of fuel.
>>30510470
>Two types of ships: Subs and targets.
Subs aren't ships though.
>>30515487
Might be a reference to a "jam dive drill", a common training exercise involving simulated failure of the diving plane hydraulics. Since diving planes are significantly denser than water, a loss of hydraulic pressure causes them to move down, which pushes the submarine into a steep dive.
>>30517075
It's a specific type of thing you may have to do on deployment in certain parts of the world in order to avoid being horribly killed. There's no other reason you'd drive around for like that without there being something horribly wrong with the ship.
I guess you didn't do it.
>>30517075
hydraulics? really? not a screw jack? huh. intredadasting.
>>30508885
>Even the best submarines will fail to succeed if they end up in a tail chase in unfavourable sea conditions.
China has an impressive superior indigenous super torpedo called Type 53. It is wake homing which means it is a tail chase torpedo and can operate under Sea State 7. US ships cannot operate above Sea State 6 and are sitting ducks especially the carriers.
>>30517432
Poe's Law in full effect, ladies and shitbags.
>>30517483
>google Poe's Law
Words
Too many words
>>30517518
In short, it means heavy sarcasm in written form/online is indistinguishable from actual fanaticism/delusion.
>>30517249
Literally everything that moves is hydraulics. The final straw in the decision to decomission the miami after the fire was damage to the hydraulic piping there's so much piping in the forward compartent alone and its so heavily embeded that the work would have cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
So they decided to cannibalize the entire ship instead.
>>30517549
Now that's easier to understand.
>>30514336
This. RIMPAC is a fucking joke of an excersice. It's geared entirely for O5's up, and used to build relations between countries. It's a flag waving excersice.
>>30517432
>yfw when you're scrubbing the stern of poop and you see this
>>30517234
I think your thinking of a crash dive. A jam dive is completely unintentional, due to failure of the hydraulics.
>>30516800
You're right. We call them boats. But they are technically a warship.
>>30522198
I was talking about the particular maintaining a continuous down angle on purpose thing.
I know what a jam dive is, it's pretty much the worst ships control casualty that exists, but they're actually really rare. But you get a 25 degree jam dive during a depth change every single trip to the trainer and if you're really lucky you're an overinstruct and your UI does it wrong and you find yourself rapidly exceeding test depth and the COB is there and starts yelling at everyone and tells your UI that hes going to kill everyone.
>>30513421
>>30515005
Better not be. You stuck my ass in the sandbox for another month. Although I heard your ENG got a fucking slamming thats why feet got drug
