French and British Sonar

LoBlo · 06-23-06, 06:02 PM

I'ld say that all those navies mentioned are probably more or less capable of creating comparable sonar systems. Its probably safe to say that most of their systems are roughly on even par, with minor hedging and optimizations. The actual physics knowledge, mathematical algorithsm, and hardware needed to create those systems possessed by all.

If there are performance differences then they are most likely due to differences in program timelines and development budgets. Countries with smaller fleets have an advantage in that they can oftentimes implement new technology more quickly into their systems simply due to the fact that they have less of a fleet to upgrade. At the same time, altough a larger navy could update its tech, it may choose to hold off on upgrades because of the large number of platforms in service, and may even wait until a new more significant technology improvement has finished development until it fields the systems.

A good example of this is the evolution of Phased Array Radar Technology over the last thirty years: http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/ar...rticle_044.pdf Many of the systems of the next generation european ships are as good or better than the original Aegis system, however, the US will hold off on upgrading its own systems until its ready to deploy its next generation of destroyers currently under development. Each side has temporary moments where its on top of the other.

*IF* a large budget power (i.e. the US) decides that it *MUST* have a superior system then it will bring its large $400+ billion dollar defense budget to bare, fielding the system when its ready. The obvious example of this is the VA and SW sub which has bested most (if not all) of the other subs in the world, but at double and triple the cost (3billion per sub).

All and all, like what has already been said, each side will claim a better system than the other.

06-23-06, 06:02 PM	#11
LoBlo Subsim Diehard Join Date: May 2006 Location: Texas! Posts: 971 Downloads: 78 Uploads: 3	I'ld say that all those navies mentioned are probably more or less capable of creating comparable sonar systems. Its probably safe to say that most of their systems are roughly on even par, with minor hedging and optimizations. The actual physics knowledge, mathematical algorithsm, and hardware needed to create those systems possessed by all. If there are performance differences then they are most likely due to differences in program timelines and development budgets. Countries with smaller fleets have an advantage in that they can oftentimes implement new technology more quickly into their systems simply due to the fact that they have less of a fleet to upgrade. At the same time, altough a larger navy could update its tech, it may choose to hold off on upgrades because of the large number of platforms in service, and may even wait until a new more significant technology improvement has finished development until it fields the systems. A good example of this is the evolution of Phased Array Radar Technology over the last thirty years: http://www.harpoonhq.com/waypoint/ar...rticle_044.pdf Many of the systems of the next generation european ships are as good or better than the original Aegis system, however, the US will hold off on upgrading its own systems until its ready to deploy its next generation of destroyers currently under development. Each side has temporary moments where its on top of the other. IF a large budget power (i.e. the US) decides that it MUST have a superior system then it will bring its large $400+ billion dollar defense budget to bare, fielding the system when its ready. The obvious example of this is the VA and SW sub which has bested most (if not all) of the other subs in the world, but at double and triple the cost (3billion per sub). All and all, like what has already been said, each side will claim a better system than the other. __________________ "Seek not to offend or annoy... only to speak the truth"-a wise man Last edited by LoBlo; 06-23-06 at 06:05 PM.