theory question: why no VLS-Stingers on modern subs ?

[kilen]

hey guys,
i am playing on ColdWaters since some months (played also SH4 years ago, but its already old now) and i experimented many situations where i dont undestand why "brains" of naval warfare never thought (or decide) to use short range SAMs to defend modern subs from close air threats ?
not to aim them as original purpose, of course !
their main asset is stealth, we are all agree about that...
but when u have been id, wich happens often in any significant confrontation where opponents have the assets to find u, seems me obvious we need a way to detere air threats to track u from too close or prevent them to guide reinforts on u, etc... (or even just have a way to reply and kill it if its the best solution to survive !)

i insist, its really only for cases where its already too late, when u have been detected already... in these contexts, some variant of a Stinger missile launchable by VLS or classic tubes seems a really usefull/necessary asset to have... no ?
i am intrested by subwarfare since few, i know theory just approximatly, but always fell that as a real lack of weaponery at disposal for a modern-sub...
in practice, cmdr has no way to deal with helos by himself.
and when airplane or helos are specialy equiped to hunt subs, looks like a none-sens imo to think "stealthy behaviors" is enough and must stay always the unique solution to survive...

in theory, Stealth is greatest asset, in practice, its easy to see that kind of theory have lots of limits soon as u need to show your noose to accomplish the mission, no ? really too restrictive imo, its a gift to ennemy anti-sub forces to deny SAMs on a SSN...


...and in my xps in Cold Waters (and am not the only one to think that when i read forums), its often anti-sub planes or helos who are the more threatening opponents, if not the only one able to kill u really !
of course, CW is a game, it is very fun, but still limited about realism on many aspects, etc.
but even like that, link with irl-theory has become obvious very earlier in my playtime.
and then, a kind of "depth-Stinger" should be a good investment for any submarine and a true need in many contexts/scenarios involving detection from ennemy helos...
bcoz, sure its better to not been detected ;
but, in exemple, if u need to destroy a high value convoy escorted by a strong CVs or DDs escort, wich is deploying helos soon as u fired or already patrolling around before ;
chances to stay undetected are very low, and as u are there to sunk these boats, its prio on "stay stealthy" !
so soon or later u will be detected, u cant do nothing against that...
if ennemy ships are still far of ur location, and if torps from helos just above u are the main threat for u to survive, have a Stinger there to neutralize the helo seems the obvious need, no ?

so, i wonder, why admirals/theoricians never chose to include Stingers (or any more advanced short-range SAM, but Stinger seems enough for anti-sub helos & planes i suppose) in arsenals of their sub-fleets ?

or did they... may they tried and found the experiment "not conclusive" or something like that ?
i assume they tried at one moment or an other during cold war, of course, but why they resigned to include them in standard arsenals of subs, since ?
its a lack i trully dont understand, really.
specialy such its easy to do technicaly now,
and could already exist since 80's easally, if they would have these AA defenses for their subs... and no meend to use usual VLS loader, Stingers are much more smaller than Tomahawks for exemple, just need an other smaller AA-VLS beside, nothing more, no need to resign offensive weapons for. (etc)

so, your thoughts ?
and also, may have u good links to share about articles treating of that subject in modern subwarfare ?

thx, cya