Astute Subamarine unbeatable?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by crocodile

But if what they say it's true i.e. that this sub under normal circumstances is as noisy as a baby dolphin or just a bit more, and that at the moment the other navies (especially the ones who potentially can be hostile to the United Kingdom) at the moment and in the near future don't have sensor that can detect it, the what you can do attack him or to prevent being engaged by him?

Couple methods.

Area Denial. Mine the sealanes they are likely to use with CAPTOR type mines and nail her before she becomes a threat, or it denys her transit. The Russian PKM-2 or Chinese EM-52 mines would be suitable for this.

Torpedo bait. Send a bunch of old diesel clunkers (like Foxtrots or Mings) out followed by some AIP hunter killers (like Amurs) and wait for the Astute to strike and use the TIW bearings as an aim point. Don't think that this is a gamey tactic from DW or SC, its been hinted that the PLAN plans to do that with their old subs.

Gangbang. Send three or four nuc boats out and just overwhelm the Astute and accept the loss of one or two of your subs.

[MaddogK]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

For SSNs..

Well it would be a heck of a fight between an Astute and a Virgina. But I would say the Virgina has the edge because its more versatile and more mature (the Virginas are up to Block II with Block III being designed).

The Russian Yasen class while "new" is a quite old design (1993) and I would say the Astute has an edge over her.

The French Amethyste is quite old and lightly armed anyways except as an ambush weapon (the French boats are quiet due to their natural circulation reactor) the Astute has the edge easily.

The PLAN's Type 093, no chance against an Astute.

For SSKs there are a few there that would be a challenge. The Japanese Soryu, the German Type 212 and 214s, the French/Spanish Scorpene/S-80 class. The Swedish Gotland, maybe the Russian Lada and Chinese Yuan.

The Japanese and German subs would be the closest match I think since they are very new and AIP equipped.

Would still take a Seawolf over anything in the water.

[ETR3(SS)]

Why is that if I may ask?

[MaddogK]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

Why is that if I may ask?

What ? You mean this :
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...hip/ssn-21.htm

[ETR3(SS)]

Yes that. Why out of curiosity?

[MaddogK]

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

Yes that. Why out of curiosity?

Sorry, thought it would be self explanatory:

The Seawolf has the highest tactical speed of any US submarine. Much much of the design effort was focused on noise reduction, and it is expected that the fully coated boat will restore the level of acoustic advantage which the US Navy enjoyed for the last three decades. The Seawolf's propulsion system makes it ten times more quiet over its full range of operating speeds than the Improved-688 class and 70 times more quiet than the initial generation of Los Angeles 688-class submarines. The Seawolf's quieter propulsion system will also enable it to have twice the tactical speed as the I-688. Tactical speed is the speed at which a submarine is still quiet enough to remain undetected while tracking enemy submarines effectively. Overall, the Seawolf's propulsion system represents a 75-percent improvement over the I-688's -- the Seawolf can operate 75 percent faster before being detected. It is said that SEAWOLF is quieter at its tactical speed of 25 knots than a LOS ANGELES-class submarine at pierside.

This is ONLY whats allowed to be published, and my guess 50% (or less) of it's true capability. As I personally have RW experience tracking a 688 (at least we think it was) I can only imagine the capabilities of a Seawolf in the right hands, and how hard it would be to find.

[ETR3(SS)]

Originally Posted by MaddogK

...and how hard it would be to find.

Not that hard, look at the pier in Groton. The Seawolf was referred to as the Pierwolf and Building 21 a lot when I was in Groton at Sub School.

[Axeman3d]

It looks like the lead boats of any new class these days need a helluva lot of work to get the kinks worked out. They all hailed the coming of 3D design tools which would speed things up tremendously, yet it still takes years for them to get a hull in the water and when they do it doesn't work right. Could be worse I suppose, could be the Thresher.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Axeman3d

It looks like the lead boats of any new class these days need a helluva lot of work to get the kinks worked out.

Then again look how many classes of boat the Chinese have put in to service since Seawolf hit the water. Something like 4, soon to be 5...

[MaddogK]

The soviet Yasen took 20 years to get the first one in the water, how many more years is it going to take to work the bugs out of her ?

LOL Pierwolf

[Axeman3d]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Then again look how many classes of boat the Chinese have put in to service since Seawolf hit the water. Something like 4, soon to be 5...

I think there may be some real qualitative differences between the subs China has been knocking out over the past 10 years and subs like the Astute or Seawolf. China, like Russia before it, may well be putting quantity and not quality at the fore.

Also, like the good old days of the USSR, I doubt we will get to hear about half the disasters and compromises on the Chinese boats. Russia was in a hurry and had people to burn, so didn't worry too much about radiation shielding and other unimportant factors. No one has more people to burn than the Chinese, and they are clearly in a hurry to catch up with the west again.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Axeman3d

I think there may be some real qualitative differences between the subs China has been knocking out over the past 10 years and subs like the Astute or Seawolf. China, like Russia before it, may well be putting quantity and not quality at the fore.

Also, like the good old days of the USSR, I doubt we will get to hear about half the disasters and compromises on the Chinese boats. Russia was in a hurry and had people to burn, so didn't worry too much about radiation shielding and other unimportant factors. No one has more people to burn than the Chinese, and they are clearly in a hurry to catch up with the west again.

I have to disagree to some extent. If you look at the PLAAF you will see a distinct trend to Quality over Quantity. The J-10 and JF-17 are most certinly quality front line fighters equivalent to the middle of the road F-16 blocks. Large numbers of their old MiG-19s and 21s have been retired.

In the last five years or so we have seen their navy receive their first ships equipped with VLS SAMs, Towed Arrays, LACMs, and Phased Array Radars. Also Long range ASMs and ASROCs for some ships too.

Also I think that China is turning away from Nuclear powered submarines to some extent and pursuing open ocean AIP boats with their new "Yuan C" (Preliminary Designation). I'm betting they will cap their SSNs at 5 and SSBNs at 3-4 and instead build large numbers of long range conventional boats.

[Axeman3d]

Yeah, pretty much what I said. They are now building aircraft equivalent to 70's and 80's era western tech like the F16, and trying to buy in modern electronics for them. Building diesels and AIP stuff is not the same as building quiet nuclear boats. They are striving to become a global player, but are still lacking advanced tech in many areas.

Non nuke subs are little mobile minefields, no good for projecting power globally at all, which is why the US (and more recently the UK) stopped using them. Fine if you just want a local defence, or don't have the resources for nuclear, but you can bet the PLAN would be building lots of them if they could make them work well. Long range diesels or AIP are not in the same league. Given time and their constant growth in all arenas, they will get there someday soon.

[TLAM Strike]

Well China doesn't need global reach like the US (where all our enemies are on the other side of the ocean). If you look at the recent history of armed conflicts involving the PRC all their conflicts have been with their neighbors (India, Vietnam, USSR, Taiwan) except for the Korean war (which was still fought on the Asian mainland).

China's naval strategy appears to be focused on two types of conflict; overwhelm and destroy a neighbors navy or deny US forces access to Asia without stating another world war.

The first strategy is strait forward conventional tactics. While the second strategy focus more on deterrence using land based bombers, subs and massive numbers of open ocean mines.