New Virginia SSNs

[loynokid]

What does everybody think of the new Virginia class attack subs. They seem to be better than the seawolf in design terms, but im not sure if i like the VLS tubes since they are not reloadable. And does anyone know the level of quieting on these subs? :hmm:

[ASWnut101]

I like the Seawolf better. 8 tubes, 50 weapons (or 100 mines). The quietiest nuclear sub in the world. Very fast. Very advanced Sonar.


The Seawolf is quieter than the Virginia. Although the Virginia has the firepower boost of VLS tubes, It is said to be designed for littoral operations and SOF insertions, not for killing the super-quiet SSK's.

[loynokid]

I like the Seawolf better. 8 tubes, 50 weapons (or 100 mines). The quietiest nuclear sub in the world. Very fast. Very advanced Sonar.


The Seawolf is quieter than the Virginia. Although the Virginia has the firepower boost of VLS tubes, It is said to be designed for littoral operations and SOF insertions, not for killing the super-quiet SSK's.

Very true. and thanks for the reply. this is my first thread ever.

[CCIP]

Can you expand a little on 'better design'?

I'm not sure if I follow; I think they're different designs. Certainly I've always been more impressed by Seawolf's reported quieting and performance than Virginia's.

[Bort]

I vote Virginia, because it is better suited to today's missions than the monster Seawolf. Seawolf is in alot of ways the ultimate SSN, but in even more ways it is a dinosaur, built for a mission that ceased to exist before it ever touched the water. I also say it's time for the administration and congress to stop goofing around with this one or two boats a year building plan and crank up production of the Virginas to replace the old 688's and rebuild the Sub force to a reasonable number.:stare:

[loynokid]

Can you expand a little on 'better design'?

I'm not sure if I follow; I think they're different designs. Certainly I've always been more impressed by Seawolf's reported quieting and performance than Virginia's.


Ok, im basing this design thing off of what the navy says. They say that the virginia can acheive seawolf level quieting and from my opinion the new fly by wire sort of thing and the new control center or "control room" design has been over all improved. Also it is newer so i am thinking that the sonar technology is better in this class of sub too.

[ASWnut101]

"what the navy says" is a gross understatement of the boat's real capabilities.:know:


EDIT: Here's some Virginia pics (first) and Seawolf pics (second)

VA concept:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssnva.jpg


VA 3D drawings:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn_charact.jpg


Seawolf:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ssn-21-dvic117.jpg

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ssn21_2.jpg

[Subnuts]

"what the navy says" is a gross understatement of the boat's real capabilities.:know:

Or maybe even a gross overstatement, depending on the your own personal Chicken Little to Alfred E Neumen Ratio. :smug:

[ASWnut101]

Well, seeing how the real sub-skippers won't tell us these things, we can only guess. :D

[loynokid]

"what the navy says" is a gross understatement of the boat's real capabilities.:know:


EDIT: Here's some Virginia pics (first) and Seawolf pics (second)

VA concept:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssnva.jpg


VA 3D drawings:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn_charact.jpg


Seawolf:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ssn-21-dvic117.jpg

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/ssn21_2.jpg

Very true, buts that is where i got my research, remember i am just one person out there, im trying to gather more info about this sub. I really do not know much about it so i am just wondering what everybody else thought of it

[ASWnut101]

you can get alot of info off the F.A.S. website.

[loynokid]

you can get alot of info off the F.A.S. website.

I'll try and go there to dig up some stuff :)

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Probably, when all is considered, the Seawolf has the greater combat coefficients, especially if you make small upgrades to keep the electronic equipment current every now and then. The Virginia was supposed to be much cheaper, but apparently that hasn't happened (it is a little cheaper I think, but not much). In that case, if I were in power, I might as well go for Capability Seawolves and tell them to rework the NSSN into something that really meets its original goal of being cheaper...

To make sure that they do that, I'd threaten them by saying that if they don't make a design that's really smaller and cheaper, I'd go for AIP-diesel subs. That OUGHTA force them to do a good job..

[JSLTIGER]

I gotta go Seawolf on this one...

[geetrue]

I would take either one, but I want to take her for a spin first.

The Virginia is the first of a new class of attack submarine.

Home port is Groton, Conn my son was born in New London.
I and my family spent three years in Navy housing in Groton.
The Virginia is the best of the best ...


USS Virginia SSN-774
Length 377’
Beam 34’
Displacement 7,835 tons
4 21” tubes
12 vertical tubes
Tomahawk cruise missiles
Mk 48 advanced torpedo’s
Mk 60 captor mines advanced mobile mines
Unmanned Underwater Vehicle’s
132 officer’s and men


Artist rendition of what she might look like under water

http://theworldwideweather.com/PhotoDraw101.jpg

[Lurchi]

What always interested me while comparing the Seawolf with the Virginia:

Does anyone know why they went back to the armament concept of the 688(I), 4 Torpedo Tubes + VLS? Costs?

[Takeda Shingen]

What always interested me while comparing the Seawolf with the Virginia:

Does anyone know why they went back to the armament concept of the 688(I), 4 Torpedo Tubes + VLS? Costs?

This is an increase in available loaded ordnance at any given time. You can have anti-surface/anti-ship missiles loaded and ready to use while keeping your 533 mm tubes reserved for ADCAPs. It all comes down to the new requirements for military platforms engaging multiple targets simultaneously; no different than the F22.

[Takeda Shingen]

To make sure that they do that, I'd threaten them by saying that if they don't make a design that's really smaller and cheaper, I'd go for AIP-diesel subs. That OUGHTA force them to do a good job..

AIP, while very quiet, is still in it's infancy and is not suitable for the long-range projection requirements of the US Navy. Any such threat would, accordingly, be empty.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

AIP, while very quiet, is still in it's infancy and is not suitable for the long-range projection requirements of the US Navy. Any such threat would, accordingly, be empty.
Would it? Right now, many are arguing for a mix of AIPs and nukes for the future sub force as more suitable for the increased littoral work subs have to do. The Submarine Mafia has historically fought against this like mad, but we can probably use this against them.

Remember, the civilians set the requirements, not the Navy. If we force them to strict budgetary limits (per boat) and HOLD THEM TO IT, they'd be forced to either go to AIP subs or build economical SSNs like they promised to build with sodding Virginia back when it was called Centurion.

Either is fine by me, but the United States can only afford so much cost-bloated equipment, no matter how qualitatively superior they may be (see also: F-22). And Virginia was supposed to be the JSF to the Seawolf's F-22.

[Takeda Shingen]

Would it? Right now, many are arguing for a mix of AIPs and nukes for the future sub force as more suitable for the increased littoral work subs have to do. The Submarine Mafia has historically fought against this like mad, but we can probably use this against them.

Remember, the civilians set the requirements, not the Navy. If we force them to strict budgetary limits (per boat) and HOLD THEM TO IT, they'd be forced to either go to AIP subs or build economical SSNs like they promised to build with sodding Virginia back when it was called Centurion.

Either is fine by me, but the United States can only afford so much cost-bloated equipment, no matter how qualitatively superior they may be (see also: F-22). And Virginia was supposed to be the JSF to the Seawolf's F-22.

Wonderful, but AIPs still do not meet the requirements for global force projection. Until the technology develops fully, you won't see AIPs in the service of the USN. Even a simplified view of USN history tells you that the navy has never produced two competitive forms of propulsion at the same time. The so-called 'submarine mafia' has seen to that.

Regarding comparison with the F22: I know. I made that comparison several posts ago.

[Linton]

A brief history of AIP:http://www.navyleague.org/seapower/aip_alternative.htm

[TteFAboB]

Can AIP move subs this big?

[geetrue]

Imagine that just for a moment we were all on a design team for General Dynamics and the US Navy had an extra 1.5 billion dollars in it's secret budget for us to play with ... What kind of submarine could we come up with?

Remember now it takes at least ten (10) years to scratch build a nuclear submarine.

I did this in some leisure time I had back in 1995, you know just on paper and then a friend told me it would take twenty years to complete the project. He busted my bubble and I gave up.

The project? To build a seaplane so big it could take off with two small diesel submarine's and drop them off anywhere in the world in a matter of hours.

What would ya'll suggest?

Perhaps we could stay closer to reality by using present day technology the Seawolf and Virginia have provided.

[Linton]

Geetrue,I think an ekranoplan would have been a better bet than a seaplane.

[Kapitan]

Seawolf is constructed of HY-100 grade steel the virginia is constructed with HY-80 standard steel meaning the seawolf can dive deeper the steel is stronger.

Seawolf is the more advanced and quieter of the two but in terms of weapons the SSN-774 takes it with the VLS tubes.

Americans make advanced but dull looking submarines its only realy now they have started to change the look.

[Kapitan]

Also becareful what you find on the internet people like fas.org dont always post correct information and if its about in service or active submarines you can bet your life its not correct.

[loynokid]

Also becareful what you find on the internet people like fas.org dont always post correct information and if its about in service or active submarines you can bet your life its not correct.


Thanks for the tips on the internet. compliments as always

[Kapitan]

The good thing about fas.org is they take in to account the parameters and specification of a certain unit then put all that into a calculation then spit out a rough idea of what the ship or submarine can do.

They state the project 941 akula (typhoon) is the following:

Displacement
23,200-24,500 tons Surfaced
33,800-48,000 tons Submerged
Maximum diving depth
500 meters


Now i do know that the typhoon has diffrent maximum diving depth here its very clear to me that fas.org got it wrong, the true depth is in the order of 330 meters to 450meters in and around that area.

Thats just an example but dont ask about american submarines not that up to date with them at all infact theres one heck of alot i dont know about them.

But i will say this though.

Even if they lack the speed and diving depths of the russians they are still far superior boats and i personaly think that the odds of a russian sinking an american would be around 3 to 1.

[fatty]

What would ya'll suggest?

An interesting question, geetrue.

I think "multi-mission at a bargain" would be the name of the game; something able to operate in coastal regions, deploying SEALs and launching salvos of land-attack cruise missiles, but also able to tangle in blue water with the naval powers of tomorrow. Nuclear propulsion is a must, for the obvious reasons already stated here. The Virginia comes very close to fitting this role but is still pretty frigging expensive, currently moreso than the Seawolf.

It's difficult for us to imagine how to make these things cheaper. There aren't many details available about what kind of gadgets go into building modern submarines, so it's hard to say "oh, xyz system is kind of superfluous, let's nix that and save $10 million." .

IMHO a good place to start would be to use cheaper/thinner hull materials to build smaller boats while sacrificing max. depth.

[geetrue]

Without bragging (that's a no, no) I was privilege to privileged information that the Russians in the 1970's could not match our quality of supplying spare parts for our FBM submarines ...

We had parts everywhere, hidden behind the tubes, under the deck, in the overhead, hidden in every compartment, wrapped in paper, sealed in little plastic bags, guarded by our own onboard supplyman, his only job was to inventroy, catalog and resupply our MM's with the 100's of o rings they went through every patrol. I saw the inventory on IBM style paper, complete list were available before we left, all had to be made up somewhere that had a computer, but I don't remember seeing a computer on board in those days.

Logistic's makes America number one ...

So that people like me and my Chief sonarman from the old school could say, such and such part was broken and replace it just to see if that was the one ... You know ala tube tester at the local drug store.

Oh we were bad, uh? But real sonar tech's wing it ... lol

[geetrue]

Geetrue,I think an ekranoplan would have been a better bet than a seaplane.

What was that? Is a ekranoplan like the Russian sea dragon that got 10' off the water?

I also thought of perhaps an LSD with two little nasty stingray diiesel submarines wandering the oceans of the world, ready to release their precious cargo in time of conflict.

It's difficult for us to imagine how to make these things cheaper. There aren't many details available about what kind of gadgets go into building modern submarines, so it's hard to say "oh, xyz system is kind of superfluous, let's nix that and save $10 million." .

What about smaller submarines with half the crew and change crews like the FBM submarines use to do and still do that is.

This is where we could have more superority than the Russians ... in the men themselves, although I have never met a Russian salior ... I would like to someday.

[Kapitan]

Spare parts can be put any where alot of parts for russian subs go in the sail the big bits anyway, its O rings galore on some boats and everywhere you turn theres some part for some thing some where not to mention food cramed in every nook and cranny.

[ASWnut101]

Thats just an example but dont ask about american submarines not that up to date with them at all infact theres one heck of alot i dont know about them.

So they could be right, and you wouldn't know?...:cool:

But i will say this though.

Even if they lack the speed and diving depths of the russians they are still far superior boats and i personaly think that the odds of a russian sinking an american would be around 3 to 1.


Huh? you say the American's are better but then you said that the odds of a Russian sinking one of us is 3-1? I don't understand.:doh:

[Kapitan]

No what i said was 3 russians to take 1 american hence the odds being 3 to 1

Also i can say with 99.9% they are not correct only the people who work on them build them know thier true capibilitys afterall its not good to broadcast to your opponants true things.

[fatty]

What was that? Is a ekranoplan like the Russian sea dragon that got 10' off the water?

The Caspian Sea Monster, yep!

What about smaller submarines with half the crew and change crews like the FBM submarines use to do and still do that is.

Yes, something like this would work too. My concern would be how small we could go before compromising effectiveness. The talk of externally mounted weapons sounds fun, it would free up space occupied by VLS tubes.

This is where we could have more superority than the Russians ... in the men themselves

And IMHO where the U.S. has always been superior to the Russians; man for man, professional forces perform better than conscripted ones.

[ASWnut101]

Oh, guess the poor grammar got to me. Sorry.



And if they are not correct, how do you know the Russian ship's capeabilities, might I ask?

[geetrue]

Oh, guess the poor grammar got to me. Sorry.



And if they are not correct, how do you know the Russian ship's capeabilities, might I ask?

Somebody knew who told somebody else, who told somebody else, who told Jane's Fightiing Ships, who told us on a need to know secret level ... not top secret, but need to know level ... sonar had that level.

You would be surprised what intelligence gathers can do in a bar for example or with the right looking gal ... where do you think all those spy story writers got their best material? This is has been going on for quite sometime you know.

I can tell you one thing (I wasn't there though) there are pictures of Russian ships taken under water of their props to see how many blades they're were and some of the ships were underway ... :up:

Oh, I see you were talking to Kapitan ... I talk too much anyway. Yes, Kapitan how you know so much, spill the beans ...

P.S. We had so much food we walked on top of the cases of canned food on the USS Salmon.

[ASWnut101]

P.S. We had so much food we walked on top of the cases of canned food on the USS Salmon.


:rotfl: You've already said that soooo many times!!:lol:

[moose1am]

This sounds like the guys in the Navy before Pearl Harbor who said that the Battle Ships were supreme.

If you wait for a war to find out that your weapons are not as good as your opponents it's too lake .

AIP subs are proving their superiority in the recent Tests performed with the sub load to the US Navy for testing.

A combination of Nuclear and AIP propultion would be the ideal thing. Long range and super quiet go well together. The German's use this during WWII to great effect for a while. Long range diesel engines and super quiet electric propultion. Now add to that super quiet electric propultion the ablity to go for days instead of hours and you have a winner in todays ocean environement.



Wonderful, but AIPs still do not meet the requirements for global force projection. Until the technology develops fully, you won't see AIPs in the service of the USN. Even a simplified view of USN history tells you that the navy has never produced two competitive forms of propulsion at the same time. The so-called 'submarine mafia' has seen to that.

Regarding comparison with the F22: I know. I made that comparison several posts ago.[/QUOTE]

[Bort]

I favor a mix of Virgina Class and AIP submarines. The AIP subs will allow the Navy to bring its submarine force levels back to an acceptable number without breaking the bank, as well as providing a submarine that may well be more useful in shallow littoral areas. AIP submarines could relieve alot of personnel issues that the Nuclear Submarine force has, specifically in recruiting and retaining Nuclear trained officers and enlisted men. I would be more than willing to accept the loss of some surface combatants, particularly the Perry class frigates of questionable utility that have had their missile systems removed, in order to pay for mixed propulsion attack submarine force level of at least 70 submarines. When it comes to naval warfare, submarines are far more useful than surface ships in eliminating enemy vessels and as a whole give more bang for the buck. Why not?:know:

Also, the nuclear submariners "union" should stop viewing diesel boats as a threat that cannot be alowed in any form in the Navy. With ever rising costs and skeptical politicians, Diesels may be the only way to save the Submarine force from future irrelevance.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

And IMHO where the U.S. has always been superior to the Russians; man for man, professional forces perform better than conscripted ones.
Well, while I'm sure that the US Navy's average submariner proficiency is superior to the Russian (unless there's something badly wrong with my worldview), but this explanation is not valid for the submarine force, where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional (michmen and officers) in the newer boats.

It's difficult for us to imagine how to make these things cheaper. There aren't many details available about what kind of gadgets go into building modern submarines, so it's hard to say "oh, xyz system is kind of superfluous, let's nix that and save $10 million."

The important thing IMO is STRICT budget control. Congress is soft, and so American equipment keep overrunning their planned cost (by over a hundred percent). Congress concedes, the project overruns the new budget. Congress concedes...

What is really needed is a hard line system - the Navy wants something, they make a budget. They can include a REASONABLE safety margin (20%, not 200%) to account for inflation and a few accidents. If approved, exactly that many dollars are allocated.

Even if the sub is as complete as many of the nearly complete Soviet products that got choked off by the end of the Cold War, it is frozen when the money falls to zero. No extra infusions of money. Just take the hulk and scrap it, so as to remove the temptation.

If the US were Russia, I'd have suggested firing the Chief Designer and the admirals involved, but this is an American scenario so I can't do that.

More likely, if they budget the way they do now, the sub would barely have started the lay-down process when the money runs out. The Navy can take the plans home, then.

This will:
1) Force the Navy to make realistic budgets. At least then Congress and the American people will know the true cost up front. This eliminates ploys on giving the cost in "instalments" so people feel like spitting out the money just to complete it.
2) Force the Navy to take a hard line on economizing every stage of the production, taking real efficiency measures ... etc.

Then America might just have reasonably priced subs.

[geetrue]

And IMHO where the U.S. has always been superior to the Russians; man for man, professional forces perform better than conscripted ones.

Well, while I'm sure that the US Navy's average submariner proficiency is superior to the Russian (unless there's something badly wrong with my worldview), but this explanation is not valid for the submarine force, where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional (michmen and officers) in the newer boats.


Whooe! What do they call you for a short name ... Kazuaki Shimazaki II?

[fatty]

...where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional...

Which is still not 100%. In a "newer boat" like the Project 677, which according to Haze Gray has a crew of 37, you'd have 8-11 men who really (http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6591-16.cfm) don't (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6411336,00.html) want to be there.

On a side note, I am impressed by the Russian boats' low crew compliment. Akula-IIs appear to have a third of the crew that a 688 does! What kind of automation is at work there? :hmm:

Then America might just have reasonably priced subs.

Great idea. I am not sure about the U.S., but here in Canada we have companies that submit bids and compete for projects whenever there's a ship to be overhauled or built. Is it the same in the U.S.? If so, how do you think implementing a strict budget would affect these competitions?

[moose1am]

Ask not what your goverment can do for you, ask what you can do for your goverment!


I favor a mix of Virgina Class and AIP submarines. The AIP subs will allow the Navy to bring its submarine force levels back to an acceptable number without breaking the bank, as well as providing a submarine that may well be more useful in shallow littoral areas. AIP submarines could relieve alot of personnel issues that the Nuclear Submarine force has, specifically in recruiting and retaining Nuclear trained officers and enlisted men. I would be more than willing to accept the loss of some surface combatants, particularly the Perry class frigates of questionable utility that have had their missile systems removed, in order to pay for mixed propulsion attack submarine force level of at least 70 submarines. When it comes to naval warfare, submarines are far more useful than surface ships in eliminating enemy vessels and as a whole give more bang for the buck. Why not?:know:

Also, the nuclear submariners "union" should stop viewing diesel boats as a threat that cannot be alowed in any form in the Navy. With ever rising costs and skeptical politicians, Diesels may be the only way to save the Submarine force from future irrelevance.

[Kapitan]

...where the Russians are something like 70-80% professional...

Which is still not 100%. In a "newer boat" like the Project 677, which according to Haze Gray has a crew of 37, you'd have 8-11 men who really (http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6591-16.cfm) don't (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6411336,00.html) want to be there.

On a side note, I am impressed by the Russian boats' low crew compliment. Akula-IIs appear to have a third of the crew that a 688 does! What kind of automation is at work there? :hmm:

Then America might just have reasonably priced subs.

Great idea. I am not sure about the U.S., but here in Canada we have companies that submit bids and compete for projects whenever there's a ship to be overhauled or built. Is it the same in the U.S.? If so, how do you think implementing a strict budget would affect these competitions?








Well the russian subs for starters rely heavily on alot of automation however its well known western submarines are always over crewed ie they have 7 blokes doing the job 3 can do.

Automation only realy came to light in 1969 with the al'fa that was the first true russian automated monster, alot of its gadgets were fully automated.

Please dont knock the russian systems simply beceause if they had the american sonar screens then they would have the advantage and also filtering systems.

The range of the russian sonar systems on the akula I improved and akula II acctualy exceade in detection range compaired to the 688i, but the disadvantage comes with the screen the information is displayed on which cuts its detection range by about 1/3.

The issue has been addressed now and gepard and vepr both have waterfall display systems on board, there are plans in the works to refit the systems on the improved akulas also the newer SSBN's and SSGN'S and new builds the project 677 has a water fall display also.

i dont know how effective the display system is but i dont think its quite to the level of the american system yet.

[Kapitan]

The akulas are similar size to the 688i and have similar displacement to the seawolf, about 62 men crew the submarine although a skelton crew of just 34 could crew it if needed.

Reason why they have so little crew is because they dont use the wests crew system of everyones got a boss bar the captain, ie theres 4 people looking after one moniter and 3 people looking after the shaft ect ect, its one mans job but they are all trained to do it if needed.

personaly why do you need three people to do the same job at the same time ? ones enough and when it goes wrong they can just ask a few others to join in.

When kursk went down she was over crewed 118 a SSGN like that of the russian navy can be crewed by a minimum of 97 people the standard sea going crew would be 107 but this was an exercise so they put a few extra weps techs on, although the Oscar II's can carry upto 180 people if pushed (130 comftably) theres just no need to do it its funds mainly.

[Kapitan]

Yet another thing:

The russians are trained by the british and its known world wide that we the british have the best submarine training regieme in the world countries such as india australia america pakistan south aftrica germany france poland russia italy greece all send thier potential captains through the perisher, and some of the crews also go through basic here in the UK.

[geetrue]

Yet another thing:

The russians are trained by the british and its known world wide that we the british have the best submarine training regieme in the world countries such as india australia america pakistan south aftrica germany france poland russia italy greece all send thier potential captains through the perisher, and some of the crews also go through basic here in the UK.

Sorry, Kapitan ... you have a lot of knowledge for someone I have never met, but your love for your country just got in the way of the truth. No way will I believe that the Russians are trained by the British ... unless you mean their spys relay information to the motherland of course.

I respect you otherwise however if that helps.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Which is still not 100%. In a "newer boat" like the Project 677, which according to Haze Gray has a crew of 37, you'd have 8-11 men who really (http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6591-16.cfm) don't (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6411336,00.html) want to be there.

Your first link doesn't work.

Your second link is about dedovschina, which I'd presume to be less serious in an operating sub. Officers can close their eyes in the Army regarding the ongoings in their barracks at night, but on a warship, it is harder to pretend not to see.

In any case, the enlisted are (looking at Kursk's crew list) turbine operators, cooks and steering signalmen. Doubt they would seriously affect combat efficiency. In any case, enough enlisted do like the Navy enough to become michmen (there are more michmen than conscripts in modern Russian subs).

Great idea. I am not sure about the U.S., but here in Canada we have companies that submit bids and compete for projects whenever there's a ship to be overhauled or built. Is it the same in the U.S.? If so, how do you think implementing a strict budget would affect these competitions?

They just eliminated the last competition between Electric Boat and Newport News by forcing them to each build half of a Virginia.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Please dont knock the russian systems simply beceause if they had the american sonar screens then they would have the advantage and also filtering systems.

The range of the russian sonar systems on the akula I improved and akula II acctualy exceade in detection range compaired to the 688i, but the disadvantage comes with the screen the information is displayed on which cuts its detection range by about 1/3.

Wow, this must be the crappiest way to lose I ever heard of. Spend billions of rubles to fight the superior American electronic industry, finally manage to build a system with superior raw characteristics, and then lose because they refuse to change from SSAZ?

Anyone that played with DW for a few days quickly appreciates that sensitivity difference. What took the Russians so long? They just never thought of waterfalls until they read it in Red Storm Rising?

[ASWnut101]

They just eliminated the last competition between Electric Boat and Newport News by forcing them to each build half of a Virginia.


Not really. We've still got Bath Iron Works in Maine (I think that's where it is) and the Ingalls Yard in New Orleans, Louisiana.


EDIT: oops, I just saw that you were talking only about Electric Boat and Newport News

[fatty]

Sorry, here is a cache (http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:-ccrdexiggUJ:www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6591-16.cfm+http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6591-16.cfm&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=opera) of the first link.

In the second, the last paragraph is what I wanted to draw your attention to:
All Russian men between the ages of 18 and 27 are required by law to serve in the 1.2 million-member military, but only about 9 percent typically are drafted. The rest avoid the feared conscription by signing up for college, being excused for health reasons - often falsified - or simply paying bribes.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

In the second, the last paragraph is what I wanted to draw your attention to:

All Russian men between the ages of 18 and 27 are required by law to serve in the 1.2 million-member military, but only about 9 percent typically are drafted. The rest avoid the feared conscription by signing up for college, being excused for health reasons - often falsified - or simply paying bribes.

As I understand it, they are mostly afraid of joining the Army, which is the pits - crap food, senior conscripts taking your food, forcing you to steal for them ... etc. You'd notice there are not that many praporschiks in the Army - maybe 1 or 2 per company AFAIK.

I wouldn't do away with conscription if I were the Russians, at least not yet. They just don't have the hard cash to do so. Instead of trying to professionalize regiment by regiment, the Navy's de facto move of professionalizing the NCO leadership is probably more appropriate for Russia.

If I must use conscript sergeants, give them a year instead of six months of training, then extend their service by six months. They'd have learnt more, and with a full year under their belt they'd join the ranks as a "senior" member, so they'd be better able to maintain control.

But better to just work on making more praporshchiks, enough so that there's at least 1 per platoon.

[geetrue]

I hope you two (fatty & Kazuaki Shimazaki II) understand that the Russian submarine force is treated vastly different than the regular military. Just as our own US submarine forces get higher pay and other preffered treats, so do our counterparts.

Not only do they get higher pay, but the dependants themselves get better housing and preffered treatment in the military.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

I hope you two (fatty & Kazuaki Shimazaki II) understand that the Russian submarine force is treated vastly different than the regular military. Just as our own US submarine forces get higher pay and other preffered treats, so do our counterparts.

Not only do they get higher pay, but the dependants themselves get better housing and preffered treatment in the military.
I understand that. That's why I'm "isolating" his story to the Army. But the Navy does have its own problems - every so often you hear a guy stealing the palladium from his sub hoping to sell it.

I'm aware in Soviet times, they got special sub pay (15% more, then 25% over that for nuke sub). I'm not sure what they are getting now.

As for the better housing part, they are probably getting the better half of what housing is available, but against that they are living in such places as Gazhievo and Vidaeyvo or worse, Petropavlovsk. I must say I can't see even the best house being too cozy there.

BTW, the US submarine force is not "our" to me. I know sometimes my posts might read that way, but I'm no American.

Yet another thing:

The russians are trained by the british and its known world wide that we the british have the best submarine training regieme in the world countries such as india australia america pakistan south aftrica germany france poland russia italy greece all send thier potential captains through the perisher, and some of the crews also go through basic here in the UK.
Sorry, Kapitan ... you have a lot of knowledge for someone I have never met, but your love for your country just got in the way of the truth. No way will I believe that the Russians are trained by the British ... unless you mean their spys relay information to the motherland of course.

I respect you otherwise however if that helps.

1) Kapitan is nominally British AFAIK. He just has a Russian grandfather.

2) I wouldn't put it past the Russians in the post Cold War era to have sent one or two of their Captains to Perisher in the name of international cooperation. However, it would not be the majority - using the occasional participant in another nation's training problem is not a good measure.

3) In some ways, the Russian Navy is closer to the British Navy than the US Navy - for example their emphasis on specializations.

[SmokinTep]

I work on US Submarine for a living and have been on both Seawolf and Virginia. Comparing the two is no contest. Seawolf and Connecticut were designed to be the ultimate sub hunter. Seawolf played a little game with a couple of 688's. The 688's were trying to track her. Seawolf was actually about 5000 yds from these 2 boats and they could not pick her up. Travelling at flank speed on Seawolf is totally different than a 688. On the Seawolf, you hear nothing, the 688 groans to go that fast.
I have been on Virginia a couple of times. She is very modern, not sure I like the automated Steering and Diving controls, but time will tell. She is deffinately designed for Seals as the escape trunks are very different than a 688.
Glad they went back to the vertical launch tubes. The Torpedo Room on Seawolf is actually 2 decks, 8 tubes and is a hydraulic leaking mess especially if you are on the lower level. Seawolf is just about the same width as a SSBN.
Shame is that Seawolf and Connecticut, both slated to move to Bremerton/Bangor Washington may become nothing but parts boats for the USS Jimmy Carter SSN-23

[Kapitan]

Since 1996 some 86 russian captains of 1st rank only have completed the perisher of that only 26 acctualy passed it. (offical russian figures)

In recent months we have found thanks to navy news (UK) that russian naval rating have begun to start training in our facilitys (linton lesrae should be able to tell you the exact same thing).

And its my stepfather who is russian and im born in britain but have a duel citizen ship.

[geetrue]

Excuse me for false thoughts then Kaptain ... anyone who loves submarines is okay with me. I have been on two British submarines ... One was diesel and the other one was a boomer.

The boomer was very clean, she tied up next to us in Flordia at Cape Kennedy and while standing topside watch I was able to speak to the other enlisted man about his life and times onboard. He indicated that USN sailors were paid more and that the British were more gung ho than we were, but that he really liked his job.

I went onboard after my watch and it was very spacious in the missile compartment ... compared to our's. The diesel boat was having a rum call when I went aboard, but believe me they do not share their rations.

But back to the best Navy in the world, the good ole USA and the Seawolf and Virginia class boats. I sure would like to meet you SmokinTep ...

Thank you for your observations, boy no telling who your going to meet in here, uh.

I respect the men who build and maintain submarines as much as I do the ones who sail them. I'm sure Electric Boat will listen to the men that have to live and fight for a living, to improve the design in peace time is not as hurried as war, but after the next war we might not have a shipyard left to come home to.

We use to feel pretty smug living on boomers till one day back in 1968 we figured out that we had about 15 minutes left before Russia could back track any missile launch and fire a nuclear war head our way. So subcompac came up with a plan to launch 6 or 7 missiles, one minute apart and boogie down the road to launch the rest. We could only do about 25kts top speed on the USS Ethan Allen surfaced or submerged (fully loaded) and we were so noisy even a deaf sonarman could pick us up at that speed.

I don't know about the Russians, but a nuclear warhead on a subroc or Mk45 wire guided torpedo can wipe out anything within fifty miles. If I were young enough to to do it all over again I would go for the Seawolf and dream of beaching her when we ran out of food, cause she's never going to get caught.

[DanCanovas]

i've enjoyed reading this thread

[Kapitan]

Everything has weakness some where in time the seawolf will show hers, (probably when she is decomissioned).

Like the alfa for example a very good boat fast deep diving but sonar capibility is crud not to mention the fact they are deaf above 8 knots, and dont have a towed array so again detection range is limited.

Seawolf i can only immagine that her weakness could be something to do with the engineering side of things but thats my view and wont be found out for another 50 years.

Seawolf is a very good boat best in the world for a nuke i will say that much.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Since 1996 some 86 russian captains of 1st rank only have completed the perisher of that only 26 acctualy passed it. (offical russian figures)

Wow this is hard to believe. Even the United States only sends 1 to every year's Perisher AFAIK. The Russians average ~8?

And this is not really very flattering if true. IIRC, the normal pass rate of Perisher is ~75%, and generally taken by officers 1-2 ranks lower. This is more like a 20% pass rate, which suggests problems in preparation. Of course, the lack of sea time in the Russian Navy could have something to do with it.

[Kapitan]

The russian version if you can call it that isnt very good infact you only show what you know realy on the job and if you have a rich family, if you havea rich family most officers will buy the ranks below captain and then progress from there.