SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
07-18-17, 01:21 PM | #91 | |
Bosun
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Germany
Posts: 61
Downloads: 65
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
|
|
07-18-17, 02:42 PM | #92 |
Ocean Warrior
|
I do not wish to spoil all the fun
__________________
Grumpy as always. |
07-18-17, 02:44 PM | #93 |
Sub Test Pilot
|
As far as im led to believe Alfa was meant to be a sort of interceptor submarine here is a boat with a huge power out put from a powerful reactor in a small light wieght hull with minimal crew the idea being they would dart out of port and chase down any enemy submarines.
But please do answer the questions you raise leads to endless possibilities
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/ |
07-18-17, 04:01 PM | #94 | |
Watch
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
For example - soviet subs in the game several times make suicide dive when running from me. --------- Atrina - is no group action. Subs spread over Atlantic with absolut different goal. ----- sorry bad english |
|
07-18-17, 04:29 PM | #95 | |
Ocean Warrior
|
Quote:
The original concept indeed was to create an interceptor submarine with minimal displacement (titanium hull, automation) and maximum speed (high energy density) as a part of the system (with fixed sensors, ships and C3ISR submarines) to combat then short ranged SLBM platforms. As such stealth was not the chief concern, speed (both in transit and in combat), manueverability were. However due to the growth of the SLBM range the original requirement for Alfa dissappeared, the C3ISR submarine project, after several iterations made birth.... to Akula class (Akula class was originally developed as a subset of that project, the project itself was never completed into metal but desighn elements went into Akula and 4th gen desighns ie Yasen).
__________________
Grumpy as always. |
|
07-18-17, 05:02 PM | #96 |
Swabbie
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 14
Downloads: 2
Uploads: 0
|
Wow. I'll go back to the beginning.
Russian doctrine of active use was to go active at detection of US sub because the assumption was that the US sub already had them. Getting a quick range is not a bad thing at that point. Randomly going active in the middle of the ocean? Probably not. There was a case of a Russian sub tracking one of our ssbn's for an extended time using active, and there were countermeasure methods put in place to prevent it in the future. US doctrine was the first sub to go active was the first sub to die. It's a laser beam to your location. US sub battle was assumed to be either very close combat where you find an enemy ship close aboard or a long range approach where they find you only when you shoot. I highly doubt that Russian doctrine was anything close to it. Go active, match bearing rate if you have one, shoot. On the titanium thing, a significant part of this is that titanium has a finite fatigue life. With steel, you can design so that you can stress it infinitely and it never fails. Titanium does not have this point, so each stress of the hull lessens its life. US subsafe procedures are to go to test depth basically every time out. Those titanium subs wouldn't last doing that. Same principle applies to soviet titanium fighters. There are many on the market at the airframe hour limit for the fatigue reason. |
07-18-17, 06:17 PM | #97 |
Ocean Warrior
|
Peacetime/wartime difference.
Ie when was the first time Soviet crews were authorised to use self propelled imitators? How did it affect NATO ASW efforts? The thing is, US never had a need to develop titanium hull construction, because requirements to dive extra deep (~1000m+ dive depth in case of Mike and various special purpose hulls) or to cut down on displacement (Alfas, Sierras, Kedr-T) were not there, nor was there MIC inertia to warrant further titanium manufacture (Kedr-T, to lesser extend Sierras). Overall titanium's problem is not fatigue but it's price and how hard it is to use (machining, welding, etc).
__________________
Grumpy as always. Last edited by ikalugin; 07-18-17 at 06:30 PM. |
07-18-17, 11:04 PM | #98 | |
Samurai Navy
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 567
Downloads: 210
Uploads: 1
|
Quote:
But getting back on topic... |
|
07-19-17, 12:47 AM | #99 |
Swabbie
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 14
Downloads: 2
Uploads: 0
|
You are right, Jack. Not sure why I had that in my mind.
Bad gouge. |
07-19-17, 11:25 AM | #100 | ||
A-ganger
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 80
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
Quote:
At least, assuming I've been given good gouge myself.
__________________
STS1(SS) USN (Ret) : 1997 - 2017 USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727 BLUE) USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765) IMF PACNORWEST USS ALASKA (SSBN-732 GOLD) USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731 GOLD) NAVAL OCEAN PROCESSING FACILITY, WHIDBEY ISLAND USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734 GOLD) |
||
07-19-17, 03:17 PM | #101 |
Ocean Warrior
|
Alfas were never deep divers to begin with.
Now the special purpose hulls (ie Paltus) are an another story.
__________________
Grumpy as always. |
07-20-17, 12:47 AM | #102 |
Captain
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: AZ & DC
Posts: 487
Downloads: 48
Uploads: 0
|
I understood 0nly one Paltus (Northern Fleet)
??? |
07-20-17, 04:58 AM | #103 |
Ocean Warrior
|
We operate several titanium special purpose submarines. Paltus was used as an example, some open sources state 4 in service.
The running joke is that if this keeps up GUGI would have more assets than the Navy.
__________________
Grumpy as always. Last edited by ikalugin; 07-20-17 at 05:07 AM. |
05-12-20, 06:06 AM | #104 | |
Samurai Navy
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Italy
Posts: 554
Downloads: 82
Uploads: 2
|
Quote:
Iteresting lecture here: https://www.cia.gov/library/center-f...r-mystery.html (Sorry, I know I'm replying to a very old post, but the link contains very interesting info about the weldings of titanium and a fascinating story about it). |
|
05-12-20, 06:24 AM | #105 |
Electrician's Mate
|
The reason we (the West) never built one it not because we couldn't, it was because there was no reason to, tactically, and because we did not have access to enough titanium.
As I have said here before, having the ability to dive deep is of very limited value. Generally, based on 90% of the water in the world you are going to evade an incoming weapon shallow. Being able to go really fast has some uses, mainly for weapon evasion, but due to the Alpha's radiated noise levels at anything above 10kts, it just makes it easier to track. Back in the last 80's, the US Navy put a five bladed screw on the USS Groton. She did 41kts, but was noisy as hell. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|