![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Engineer
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 218
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
I said conventional
![]() Although I don't really think any AIP system can be classified as a truly "conventional" mean of propulsion, no more than a backup nuclear reactor. With France, Russia, China, Germany, Italy and Sweden adopting AIP technology, conventional submarines are a dieing breed. The last truly conventional submarine is probably the German built, Israeli operated, Dolphin class. It's another offspring of the little know TR1700 submarine. The TR1700 was truly impressive when it was launched in the late '70s. With a huge 6.6MW electric motor and 500t of batteries, it could reach 24kts underwater making it the fastest conventional sub to reach operational status. A few experimental submarines built both by the US and USSR reached even higher speeds but they were experimental and unarmed, mere test beds.
__________________
...Sinking deeper into the cold, dark oceans of life ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Navy Seal
![]() |
![]() Quote:
The Sarov is really blurring the line between the two, much as the 212, Scorpene' and the other AIP boats are with their fuel cells or closed cycle diesels. Unless the Sarov is charging her batteries she is purely conventional. On the flip side of that is a sub with a Closed Cycle Diesel a conventional boat? It functions almost exactly like any other Diesel Electric sub except it doesn't have to snort or surface to charge her batteries. I think a few new terms are going to be added to our lexicon soon. AIP boats are going to be a diverse group of boats when it comes to propulsion, perhaps even more than the SSNs with their two or three types of nuc plants. But I think until these boats are more common "Conventional" is going to be the term used on any sub without a proper nuclear reactor and steam turbines. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|