The U.S. Navy has ordered another eight Virginia class SSNs - Page 2

JALU3 · 01-01-09, 09:41 PM

The economy is not as good as before, but it will improve, it's only an amount of time. Furthermore, further construction of military hardware, only fuels the economy more by providing jobs to those hardware manufacturers, which assists those businesses around those areas of production. On top of that, even with the present Administration, the military is still using legacy systems designed in the 60s and 70s and are reaching the end of their service lives, and thus need to be replaced to maintain capability.

As for the types of vessels that make up a good battle fleet . . . that is another debate. I for one believe the greatest reason why the CVBG/CVSG is not as potent as in the past is the reduction of range of the aircraft aboard the vessels. Thus reducing the tactical reach of the group. Furthermore, there has been a deemphesis in the USN regarding ASW capability, and thus detection capabilities have been reduced due to that.

Submerged vessels do have a definite advantage regarding stealth and clandestic abilties. Furthermore, they to can strike land targets, but only for a short duration. Therefore, a navy of only subs is not advisable.

One must remember that the chief job of a Navy is to be able to secure SLOC for commercial and military purposes, and to be able to support amphibious operations, projection of force is only part of the first.

Kapt Z · 01-01-09, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

I'm a sub buff, but in this economy.....why?

You sound almost doomish on your take on the state of our future. You expect this economy to be in this state or worse come several years from now?

-S

Thinking the economy will be back to 'normal' before the next presidential election seems more optimistic than I'm willing to buy into. Seems I don't hear many saying things will get better in less than a year or so as it is. I wouldn't consider that 'doomish' per say, but I do think we do have a long EXPENSIVE road to go. We're going to have to cut funding for a lot of things that will hurt.

Since our present and forseable future conflicts seem to be against guys running around with RPGs and little else a fancy new attack sub seems a trifle misplaced. I would think we face more 9-11s than Dec-7s and the best attack sub in the world would not have stopped those airliners.

Frame57 · 01-01-09, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

I'm a sub buff, but in this economy.....why?

You sound almost doomish on your take on the state of our future. You expect this economy to be in this state or worse come several years from now?

-S

Thinking the economy will be back to 'normal' before the next presidential election seems more optimistic than I'm willing to buy into. Seems I don't hear many saying things will get better in less than a year or so as it is. I wouldn't consider that 'doomish' per say, but I do think we do have a long EXPENSIVE road to go. We're going to have to cut funding for a lot of things that will hurt.

Since our present and forseable future conflicts seem to be against guys running around with RPGs and little else a fancy new attack sub seems a trifle misplaced. I would think we face more 9-11s than Dec-7s and the best attack sub in the world would not have stopped those airliners.

A simple locked cockpit would have done the job...

Zachstar · 01-01-09, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

I'm a sub buff, but in this economy.....why?

Because the carrier is more and more useless. A serious attack using diesels is likely more than enough to bring one down in a serious war. (Look at how close they get when it is not a war)

We need more subs to replace the lost ability of the supers.

If you loose the supercarriers, you loose much more than could ever be compensated by tens of new SSN. An attack sub has no strategic value, it cannot project force as a CVN battlegroup can. The strengh of the us navy is not in its submarine force, but in its 12 supercarriers dislocated throughout the world.

Rubbish!

All a CVN is good for is scaring the hell out of some country that can't afford modern diesels. In a world war you would see them drop like flies just like in WW2 when IJN Carrier after Carrier met torpedoes and lost.

Boast about so called sub tracking abilities they have but the days of the supercarrier are at an end. Drones launching from motherships and submarines are the force multiplier of the future.

Aramike · 01-02-09, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapt Z

I'm a sub buff, but in this economy.....why?

Probably cheaper in the long run to buy new than keep older boats going any longer.

Exactly. Do you all know how expensive it is to refuel a 688? May as well just build another, more advanced boat instead of dropping a ton of money on refueling an obsolete design.

Besides, this helps the economy as it will provide a ton of private jobs.

As for this:

Quote:

Rubbish!

All a CVN is good for is scaring the hell out of some country that can't afford modern diesels. In a world war you would see them drop like flies just like in WW2 when IJN Carrier after Carrier met torpedoes and lost.

Boast about so called sub tracking abilities they have but the days of the supercarrier are at an end. Drones launching from motherships and submarines are the force multiplier of the future.

Actually, this is rubbish. Our ASW capability is immense, as we can not only hunt enemy subs from screening vessels but also using our own boats. A supercarrier can project FAR MORE power from sea onto land than a submarine could really ever hope for.

Both types of naval power have their uses. Every president, when faced with a crisis, has uttered the same question: "where are carriers?".

Enigma · 01-02-09, 03:46 AM

Not to be ignored, is the simple fact that the repetitive diving/surfacing of a submarine causes stress to her hull. Much like the cycles of an airliner. Simply put, after a while, no amount of equipment retrofit can fix an aging sub. She is retired to avoid a hull breach at depth. Not replacing these submarines means the U.S fleet would deplete of active subs rapidly. Not a notion I prefer.

Also, fueling an L.A class costs what, $4Mil?

Aramike · 01-02-09, 05:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enigma

Not to be ignored, is the simple fact that the repetitive diving/surfacing of a submarine causes stress to her hull. Much like the cycles of an airliner. Simply put, after a while, no amount of equipment retrofit can fix an aging sub. She is retired to avoid a hull breach at depth. Not replacing these submarines means the U.S fleet would deplete of active subs rapidly. Not a notion I prefer.

Also, fueling an L.A class costs what, $4Mil?

Closer to $400 million, including the full-overhaul that comes with the refueling. Just getting to the reactor is at least $200 million. You can't just "tank up" a nuclear submarine ... you're talking 15 -24 months off the line to refuel a 688.

Takeda Shingen · 01-02-09, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

Rubbish!

All a CVN is good for is scaring the hell out of some country that can't afford modern diesels. In a world war you would see them drop like flies just like in WW2 when IJN Carrier after Carrier met torpedoes and lost.

Boast about so called sub tracking abilities they have but the days of the supercarrier are at an end. Drones launching from motherships and submarines are the force multiplier of the future.

Perhaps in the distant future, but entire airwings of effective drones are, at best, decades away. They are good for the CAS of special operations forces, especially against unarmored targets, but lack the capabilities and payload options of the traditional fighters and bombers. In short, you cannot achieve air superiority with a Predator, nor can you effectively attack armored and large-scale strategic targets. Thus, as far as one can see, nothing will be replacing the human in the cockpit and the payload that can be carried by conventional aircraft. As such, the carrier will likely remain the centerpiece of the modern battle fleet for a long time to come.

For the record, the IJN lost most of their CVs to enemy aircraft action, not submarines. One of their biggest mistakes was the fact that they did not realize that the age of the battleship had ended. Japan would have been better served had they built more carriers, rather than the impressive yet tactically and strategically antiquated Yamoto and Musashi. I suppose that you could argue the same for the carriers of the modern USN but, again, drone technology is in it's infancy, much like early submarines.

Tchocky · 01-02-09, 07:36 AM

Wasn't the Shinano a converted Yamato-class BB?

I mean, fat lot of good it did them, but they may have seen the writing on the wall. I think the Essex class was the way to go, lots of medium sized carriers working in unison instead of one big basket of eggs.

Takeda Shingen · 01-02-09, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Wasn't the Shinano a converted Yamato-class BB?

I mean, fat lot of good it did them, but they may have seen the writing on thwe wall. I think the Essex class was the way to go, lots of medium sized carriers working in unison instaead of one big basket of eggs.

Yes it was. They did catch on, but by that time, they were so short on building material that it was entirely impractical to continue conversion or start from scratch. So, they were left with the white elephant Musashi, and the infamous Hotel Yamoto.

AntEater · 01-02-09, 07:50 AM

Shinano was a leftover, the japanese attempted to serial produce cheap carriers with the Unryu class.
The Shokakus were the non plus ultra carriers, while the Unryu was a cheap production version, based on the lighter Hiryu with off the shelf parts like cruiser propulsion.
Six Unryus were completed, but none was used as a real fleet carrier.

Re the SSNs, I think the 688s had their day.
From what I heard from our SSK sonarmen, if a 688 stumbles across a NATO SSK, it is usually dead. Question is only wether it can kill the SSK in return.
And since operations against conventional subs are much more likely now, a quieter sub is required.
Especially since the Russians and Chinese are no longer handycapped by lack of electronic computers. Getting yourself a computerized sonar and fire control system today is a matter of ordering the necessary computing power on the market, not of a major espionage action.
Funny is that the "cheap alternative" Virginia class is now more expensive than the Seawolf class!
On the other hand, compared to the LCS or the LPD-17, the Virginia class project is apparently well managed and run by competent engineers.
But I suppose the submarine force has some advantages over the surface navy:
Due to the required high quality and its high secrecy, you can't outsource that much.
So LPD-17 like shoddy workmanship won't happen on a SSN.

geetrue · 01-02-09, 07:33 PM

Here's a list of the LA boats left ... I would use them to protect the homeland myself in case of a sneak attack. It would be harder to invade the USA with a wolf pack of LA class boats in and around our harbors.

SSN-688 Los Angeles

SSN-690 Philadelphia
SSN-691 Memphis

SSN-698 Bremerton
SSN-699 Jacksonville
SSN-700 Dallas
SSN-701 La Jolla

SSN-705 City of Corpus Christi
SSN-706 AlbuquerqueSSN-708 Minneapolis-St. Paul scheduled for decomissioning June 09

SSN-710 Augusta
SSN-711 San Francisco still in service after accident

SSN-713 Houston
SSN-714 Norfolk
SSN-715 Buffalo

SSN-717 Olympia
SSN-718 Honolulu
SSN-719 Providence
SSN-720 Pittsburgh
SSN-721 Chicago
SSN-722 Key West
SSN-723 Oklahoma City
SSN-724 Louisville
SSN-725 Helena

SSN-750 Newport News
SSN-751 San Juan
SSN-752 Pasadena
SSN-753 Albany
SSN-754 Topeka
SSN-755 Miami
SSN-756 Scranton
SSN-757 Alexandria
SSN-758 Asheville
SSN-759 Jefferson City
SSN-760 Annapolis
SSN-761 Springfield
SSN-762 Columbus
SSN-763 Santa Fe
SSN-764 Boise
SSN-765 Montpelier
SSN-766 Charlotte
SSN-767 Hampton
SSN-768 Hartford
SSN-769 Toledo
SSN-770 Tucson
SSN-771 Columbia
SSN-772 Greeneville
SSN-773 Cheyenne Comissioned Sept 97

August · 01-02-09, 08:59 PM

One of my best buddies is a plank owner for the Norfolk. I'll have to let him know his boat is still patrolling the seas.

PeriscopeDepth · 01-03-09, 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zachstar

All a CVN is good for is scaring the hell out of some country that can't afford modern diesels. In a world war you would see them drop like flies just like in WW2 when IJN Carrier after Carrier met torpedoes and lost.

Boast about so called sub tracking abilities they have but the days of the supercarrier are at an end. Drones launching from motherships and submarines are the force multiplier of the future.

Not true. While diesels are worthy opponents, they'd have to get lucky or be stuck in a choke point to catch a CVN. They are intelligent minefields, not invincible carrier assassins.

PD

PeriscopeDepth · 01-03-09, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

They are good for the CAS of special operations forces, especially against unarmored targets, but lack the capabilities and payload options of the traditional fighters and bombers. In short, you cannot achieve air superiority with a Predator, nor can you effectively attack armored and large-scale strategic targets. Thus, as far as one can see, nothing will be replacing the human in the cockpit and the payload that can be carried by conventional aircraft. .

No. X-47B carries the same A2G payload of a VLO'd F-35. With more than double the radius. At approximately 1/4 of the purchase cost, and MUCH reduced operational upkeep costs (no burning jet fuel to train "the man in the loop" for basic flight competency, night flight competency, tactical competency etc.).

And why are drones so far away? What do you think the Tomahawk missile is? The only difference is the drone has to come back and land. And can then be reused. Tomahawks have been used for precision strike Day 1/Raid 1 targets for ~20 years now. I wonder what would happen if they gave a UCAV program a budget 1/20th the size of F-35's.

PD

01-01-09, 09:41 PM	#16
JALU3 Grey Wolf Join Date: May 2007 Location: 11SMS 98896 10565 Posts: 756 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	The economy is not as good as before, but it will improve, it's only an amount of time. Furthermore, further construction of military hardware, only fuels the economy more by providing jobs to those hardware manufacturers, which assists those businesses around those areas of production. On top of that, even with the present Administration, the military is still using legacy systems designed in the 60s and 70s and are reaching the end of their service lives, and thus need to be replaced to maintain capability. As for the types of vessels that make up a good battle fleet . . . that is another debate. I for one believe the greatest reason why the CVBG/CVSG is not as potent as in the past is the reduction of range of the aircraft aboard the vessels. Thus reducing the tactical reach of the group. Furthermore, there has been a deemphesis in the USN regarding ASW capability, and thus detection capabilities have been reduced due to that. Submerged vessels do have a definite advantage regarding stealth and clandestic abilties. Furthermore, they to can strike land targets, but only for a short duration. Therefore, a navy of only subs is not advisable. One must remember that the chief job of a Navy is to be able to secure SLOC for commercial and military purposes, and to be able to support amphibious operations, projection of force is only part of the first. __________________ "The Federation needs men like you, doctor. Men of conscience. Men of principle. Men who can sleep at night... You're also the reason Section Thirty-one exists -- someone has to protect men like you from a universe that doesn't share your sense of right and wrong." -Sloan, Section Thirty-One

01-02-09, 03:46 AM	#21
Enigma The Old Man Join Date: May 2005 Location: At comms depth, obviously. Posts: 1,476 Downloads: 7 Uploads: 0	Not to be ignored, is the simple fact that the repetitive diving/surfacing of a submarine causes stress to her hull. Much like the cycles of an airliner. Simply put, after a while, no amount of equipment retrofit can fix an aging sub. She is retired to avoid a hull breach at depth. Not replacing these submarines means the U.S fleet would deplete of active subs rapidly. Not a notion I prefer. Also, fueling an L.A class costs what, $4Mil? __________________ "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it." -Mark Twain

01-02-09, 07:36 AM	#24
Tchocky Navy Seal Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,874 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Wasn't the Shinano a converted Yamato-class BB? I mean, fat lot of good it did them, but they may have seen the writing on the wall. I think the Essex class was the way to go, lots of medium sized carriers working in unison instead of one big basket of eggs. __________________ [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] Last edited by Tchocky; 01-02-09 at 07:42 AM.

01-02-09, 07:50 AM	#26
AntEater Grey Wolf Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Germany Posts: 936 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Shinano was a leftover, the japanese attempted to serial produce cheap carriers with the Unryu class. The Shokakus were the non plus ultra carriers, while the Unryu was a cheap production version, based on the lighter Hiryu with off the shelf parts like cruiser propulsion. Six Unryus were completed, but none was used as a real fleet carrier. Re the SSNs, I think the 688s had their day. From what I heard from our SSK sonarmen, if a 688 stumbles across a NATO SSK, it is usually dead. Question is only wether it can kill the SSK in return. And since operations against conventional subs are much more likely now, a quieter sub is required. Especially since the Russians and Chinese are no longer handycapped by lack of electronic computers. Getting yourself a computerized sonar and fire control system today is a matter of ordering the necessary computing power on the market, not of a major espionage action. Funny is that the "cheap alternative" Virginia class is now more expensive than the Seawolf class! On the other hand, compared to the LCS or the LPD-17, the Virginia class project is apparently well managed and run by competent engineers. But I suppose the submarine force has some advantages over the surface navy: Due to the required high quality and its high secrecy, you can't outsource that much. So LPD-17 like shoddy workmanship won't happen on a SSN. __________________ Last edited by AntEater; 01-02-09 at 07:56 AM.

01-02-09, 07:33 PM	#27
geetrue Cold War Boomer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Walla Walla Posts: 2,837 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Here's a list of the LA boats left ... I would use them to protect the homeland myself in case of a sneak attack. It would be harder to invade the USA with a wolf pack of LA class boats in and around our harbors. SSN-688 Los Angeles SSN-690 Philadelphia SSN-691 Memphis SSN-698 Bremerton SSN-699 Jacksonville SSN-700 Dallas SSN-701 La Jolla SSN-705 City of Corpus Christi SSN-706 AlbuquerqueSSN-708 Minneapolis-St. Paul scheduled for decomissioning June 09 SSN-710 Augusta SSN-711 San Francisco still in service after accident SSN-713 Houston SSN-714 Norfolk SSN-715 Buffalo SSN-717 Olympia SSN-718 Honolulu SSN-719 Providence SSN-720 Pittsburgh SSN-721 Chicago SSN-722 Key West SSN-723 Oklahoma City SSN-724 Louisville SSN-725 Helena SSN-750 Newport News SSN-751 San Juan SSN-752 Pasadena SSN-753 Albany SSN-754 Topeka SSN-755 Miami SSN-756 Scranton SSN-757 Alexandria SSN-758 Asheville SSN-759 Jefferson City SSN-760 Annapolis SSN-761 Springfield SSN-762 Columbus SSN-763 Santa Fe SSN-764 Boise SSN-765 Montpelier SSN-766 Charlotte SSN-767 Hampton SSN-768 Hartford SSN-769 Toledo SSN-770 Tucson SSN-771 Columbia SSN-772 Greeneville SSN-773 Cheyenne Comissioned Sept 97 __________________

01-02-09, 08:59 PM	#28
August Wayfaring Stranger Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 22,687 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	One of my best buddies is a plank owner for the Norfolk. I'll have to let him know his boat is still patrolling the seas. __________________ Flanked by life and the funeral pyre. Putting on a show for you to see.