Seawolf Real Life Question

Henson · 09-22-06, 03:07 PM

The Harpoon has been deemed less useful for subsurface platforms than the ADCAP torpedo. Likewise the TASM. The sublaunched harpoon has been out of service longer than I have been IN the service. The TASMs have all been converted to TLAMs nd shot at Iraq by now.

As for the tube question, our tubes are fitted to carry any weapon we have on board. They basically fit the weapon to the tube, not the other way around. VLS is significantly different from CLS (torpedo tube launched) weapons; it is, in effect, a completely different weapons system.

I hope this answers your questions.

SeaQueen · 09-22-06, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henson

The Harpoon has been deemed less useful for subsurface platforms than the ADCAP torpedo. Likewise the TASM. The sublaunched harpoon has been out of service longer than I have been IN the service. The TASMs have all been converted to TLAMs nd shot at Iraq by now.

I think it's interesting because even though they don't deploy Harpoons anymore, they still fund R&D on "the next Harpoon." I think they want to maintain the capability of deploying a sub launched ASCM, even though they don't anticipate them being useful against their estimated future threats.

Henson · 09-22-06, 08:56 PM

The technology hasn't caught up with the intent of the missile yet. Until things advance a little further, it's in the realm of pointlessness to have an over-the-horizon weapon deployed from submarines. It's the equivalent of bringing a cannon to a kinfe fight...unwieldy and impractical.

Kirk · 09-23-06, 08:13 AM

Thanks all. That does clear things up. Never served in the Navy but very interested in the boats & weapons.

SeaQueen · 09-23-06, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Henson

The technology hasn't caught up with the intent of the missile yet. Until things advance a little further, it's in the realm of pointlessness to have an over-the-horizon weapon deployed from submarines. It's the equivalent of bringing a cannon to a kinfe fight...unwieldy and impractical.

It also raises the question, why didn't you just target the ship for a strike by aircraft? I guess ASCMs from subs, from are US perspective, a really very Kola Penninsula/Norwegian Sea.

Nexus7 · 09-24-06, 03:50 AM

Not directly regarding the armament but still a RL question:

Like the stealth bombers can adsorb RADAR radiation, is it not thinkable to have a sub with a surface able to adsorb active pings? This would make active torps useless as well as active intercept... Is this theorically possible?

SeaQueen · 09-24-06, 07:34 AM

They DO have a surface for absorbing sonar energy. It's called an anechoic coating. It reduces a submarine's target strength.

It doesn't make active torpedoes useless, nor does it make active intercept useless (not sure why it would?) but it does offer some help against active homing torpedoes.

The technology is actually quite old, the Germans in WWII covered their boats in an anechoic coating. The had a code name for it, Alberich. When I was taking a course in acoustics at Penn State, there was actually an interesting discussion of what materials make the best coatings. Apparently, there's a lot of voodoo to it, with no real general theory on how to make the best possible coating. They just experiment and see what works.

I found this article on them:

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/arc...hp/t-3638.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nexus7

Not directly regarding the armament but still a RL question:

Like the stealth bombers can adsorb RADAR radiation, is it not thinkable to have a sub with a surface able to adsorb active pings? This would make active torps useless as well as active intercept... Is this theorically possible?

ASWnut101 · 09-26-06, 07:47 PM

couldn't you just put rubber all over the hull (impractical I know, but will it work?)

09-23-06, 08:13 AM	#4
Kirk Helmsman Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 102 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Thanks all. That does clear things up. Never served in the Navy but very interested in the boats & weapons. __________________ -Kirk

09-24-06, 03:50 AM	#6
Nexus7 Commander Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Switzerland Posts: 469 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	Not directly regarding the armament but still a RL question: Like the stealth bombers can adsorb RADAR radiation, is it not thinkable to have a sub with a surface able to adsorb active pings? This would make active torps useless as well as active intercept... Is this theorically possible? __________________ If you are going through hell... keep going (Winston Churchill)

09-22-06, 03:07 PM	#1
Henson Planesman Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 185 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	The Harpoon has been deemed less useful for subsurface platforms than the ADCAP torpedo. Likewise the TASM. The sublaunched harpoon has been out of service longer than I have been IN the service. The TASMs have all been converted to TLAMs nd shot at Iraq by now. As for the tube question, our tubes are fitted to carry any weapon we have on board. They basically fit the weapon to the tube, not the other way around. VLS is significantly different from CLS (torpedo tube launched) weapons; it is, in effect, a completely different weapons system. I hope this answers your questions.

09-22-06, 08:56 PM	#3
Henson Planesman Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 185 Downloads: 13 Uploads: 0	The technology hasn't caught up with the intent of the missile yet. Until things advance a little further, it's in the realm of pointlessness to have an over-the-horizon weapon deployed from submarines. It's the equivalent of bringing a cannon to a kinfe fight...unwieldy and impractical.

09-26-06, 07:47 PM	#8
ASWnut101 Admiral Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: USA Posts: 2,021 Downloads: 9 Uploads: 0	couldn't you just put rubber all over the hull (impractical I know, but will it work?)